GM release new ad: Says it "betrayed" and "disappointed" consumers

It doesn't address all of the issues some of us have, but it's a start.

DETROIT (Reuters) - General Motors Corp on Monday unveiled an unusually frank advertisement acknowledging it had "disappointed" and sometimes even "betrayed" American consumers as it lobbies to clinch the federal aid it needs to stay afloat into next month.

The print advertisement marked a sharp break from GM's public stance of just several weeks ago when it sought to justify its bid for a U.S. government on the grounds that the credit crisis had undermined its business in ways executives could never have foreseen.

It also came as Chief Executive Rick Wagoner, who has led the automaker since 2000, faces new pressure to step aside as GM seeks up to $18 billion in federal funding.

"While we're still the U.S. sales leader, we acknowledge we have disappointed you," the ad said. "At times we violated your trust by letting our quality fall below industry standards and our designs became lackluster."

The unsigned open letter, entitled "GM's Commitment to the American People" ran in the trade journal Automotive News, which is widely read by industry executives, lobbyists and other insiders.

In the ad, GM admits to other strategic missteps analysts and critics have said hastened its recent decline.

"We have proliferated our brands and dealer network to the point where we lost adequate focus on the core U.S. market," the ad said. "We also biased our product mix toward pick-up trucks and SUVs."

But GM also says in the ad that it was hit by forces beyond its control as it tried to complete a restructuring earlier this year.

"Despite moving quickly to reduce our planned spending by over $20 billion, GM finds itself precariously and frighteningly close to running out of cash," the ad says.

A failure of GM would deepen the current recession and put "millions of job at risk," according to the ad, which also highlights the automaker's pledged restructuring and intention to begin repaying taxpayers in 2011.

GM spokesman Greg Martin said the ad was an attempt by the automaker to present "a pledge directly to the public."

"We believe we need to deliver this commitment unfiltered since quite a bit of media commentary has not kept pace with our actual progress to transform the company," Martin said.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, a Democrat from Connecticut who is central to the effort to craft an auto bailout bill, on Sunday said GM should replace Wagoner.

GM says Wagoner has the support of the company's board.

(Reporting by Kevin Krolicki, editing by Dave Zimmerman)

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE4B738W20081208?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true

pics?

Taken a bit out of context that pretty much means the F-Body sucks. I mean this constructively, as they did not separate those designs that sucked and those that did not.

Those manufacturing plants that were competitive and those that were not.

I am glad they are acknowledging their issues. GM applied for federal aid under the premise that the "credit crunch" was going to put them under. They knew they couldn't go to the Feds and ask for cash because of their product quality and lineup, and past financial decisions. I'm fairly certain the Feds saw right through that, hence the big "NO -- Come back when you have a plan for viability." So, they scrambled for ideas and are working on it, and for that, it looks like there's some immediate money on the table for relief. Possibly more once the immediate trauma is dealt with.

I think this is a good start. As much as I've loved certain GM products over the whole 26 years of my life, I've always felt like quality was lacking. (You can't argue with how I feel, so let's leave it at that).

If GM is able to come up with a plan, and get their a-game back on in the CAR making business, this could be very very good.

I look at that with a mixed reaction. Public acknowledgment of poor management/decisions and an apology are good things.

But where is some tangible short-term change that indicates a true commitment? In other words, why the hell hasn't Chief Executive Rick Wagoner resigned already? It might be a token gesture (and might not), but THAT'S how you acknowledge you screwed up. You resign your post in the hopes of someone better picking up where you left off. If this were a Japanese company, you can bet your ass that the CEO would have resigned well before the point GM is at now. :irk:

They already did something fairly similar to this 4.5 years ago with their "Road to Redemption" campaign.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E3DF1F3AF93BA15757C0A9629C8B 63

They already did something fairly similar to this 4.5 years ago with their "Road to Redemption" campaign.

That's the first thing I thought of when I read this post.

I seem to recall that the Road to Redemption apparently is a journey that lasts only a few weeks :lol: In all seriousness, it's a campaign that could have become a bit of a rallying cry for the company and its consumers had GM stuck with it, but I guess more important things came up - like Red Tag sales.

They already did something fairly similar to this 4.5 years ago with their "Road to Redemption" campaign.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E3DF1F3AF93BA15757C0A9629C8B 63

I think out of that we got the new Malibu, work on the Volt, the upcoming Camaro, the Astra, the new GMT Tahoe, and Solstice/Sky. The company certainly didn't transform itself though.

They already did something fairly similar to this 4.5 years ago with their "Road to Redemption" campaign.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E3DF1F3AF93BA15757C0A9629C8B 63

First thing I thought of too, and they stopped it quickly too when they figured out it wasn't doing them any good.
So in reality the letter about them trying to change their ways is pretty ironic since they didn't even learn from their recent mistake on these types of campaigns.

How about an ad that says if you're a whiney little hippy go hump a prius but if you got a set between your legs get in to something with some HP.

"How about an ad that says if you're a whiney little hippy go hump a prius but if you got a set between your legs get in to something with some HP." <<< Now there's an ad I could go along with. NOT sure it would do them much good, but I love it!

...How about an ad that says if you're a whiney little hippy go hump a prius but if you got a set between your legs get in to something with some HP.

This sounds exactly like what they've been doing the last 30 years. Doesn't appear to have worked very well...

How about an ad that says if you're a whiney little hippy go hump a prius but if you got a set between your legs get in to something with some HP.

Have you not been paying attention to the G8 campaign?

First thing I thought of too, and they stopped it quickly too when they figured out it wasn't doing them any good.
So in reality the letter about them trying to change their ways is pretty ironic since they didn't even learn from their recent mistake on these types of campaigns.

How about an ad that says if you're a whiney little hippy go hump a prius but if you got a set between your legs get in to something with some HP.

"Most powerful in it's class" is only part of the picture. And for the non-performance enthusiasts out there (which outnumber "us") it's even less important. The entire car needs to follow suit, and that hasn't always been the case for GM. The Camaro being the example that is best known to us. I think it's that for which GM is apologizing.

the ad said. "At times we violated your trust by letting our quality fall below industry standards and our designs became lackluster."

So are they going to offer free extended warranties to make up for their admitted poor quality?

The only difference between this and the Road to Redemption campaign is that they have some vehicles that are worth buying... now hopefully they can figure out how to make a compact car worth buying (LNF cars aside).

According to most of the folks on this site, there's nothing wrong with GM vehicles. The only problem is unamerican car buyers and corrupt executives :lol: :rolleyes: They'll often claim that you shouldn't base your opinion of GM vehicles on their long history but rather their last 2 years :lol: :lol: :lol:.

Why wouldnt you look at GM's long history? Are you glad you're not cranking your car by hand to start it? Or that the V8 exists? How about the fact that you can buy a new starter from six thousand autostores because Cadillac created interchangeable parts?

Or are you talking about selective long term history?

I look at that with a mixed reaction. Public acknowledgment of poor management/decisions and an apology are good things.

But where is some tangible short-term change that indicates a true commitment? In other words, why the hell hasn't Chief Executive Rick Wagoner resigned already? It might be a token gesture (and might not), but THAT'S how you acknowledge you screwed up. You resign your post in the hopes of someone better picking up where you left off. If this were a Japanese company, you can bet your ass that the CEO would have resigned well before the point GM is at now. :irk:

Are you kidding? If GM was a Japanese company, someone would be gut sticking themselves with a razor sharp tanto.

Are you kidding? If GM was a Japanese company, someone would be gut sticking themselves with a razor sharp tanto.

A tonto????????

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/3707/1c8vs.jpg

That road to redemption article made me laugh my balls off. Seriously, they printed that crap, then ran and hid months later when they knew damn well there was serious issues with their product.

The GTO is a great example of GM saying one thing and doing another. Strut rub? Ignition cylinder freezing? The fuel rail covers cutting fuel lines and causing cars to burn to the ground? Rear end whine?

I would say they are a better company today. However, that article was a shame, especially for the time it was printed.

GM would accomplish more if they just came out and said that our cars are so great, we'll give you a 100k mile warranty. It did wonders for Hyundai...both in fixing perception, and forcing Hyundai to improve their cars or pay out the *** in warranty costs.

These types of campaigns seem like they just give the 'haters' more ammunition. "See, even GM admits it made crap..."

GM is just jumping through hoops. They'll say whatever it takes for them to get their bailout/loan/whatever.

This begging for money crap is assenine. I mean simple fact is GM collapsing will cost the goverment north of $100 Billion dollars. With the money that we have been throwing around to poorly run financial services companies...and like...GM needing a $10 Billion loan should not bring this much drama.

According to most of the folks on this site, there's nothing wrong with GM vehicles. The only problem is unamerican car buyers and corrupt executives :lol: :rolleyes: They'll often claim that you shouldn't base your opinion of GM vehicles on their long history but rather their last 2 years :lol: :lol: :lol:.


um.................... what? :no:

This begging for money crap is assenine. I mean simple fact is GM collapsing will cost the goverment north of $100 Billion dollars. With the money that we have been throwing around to poorly run financial services companies...and like...GM needing a $10 Billion loan should not bring this much drama.

a bank that did shady business is more important to the gov then a biz the employees many 1,000s of americans.

the choice is clear! bank bailout!

america fail!

a bank that did shady business is more important to the gov then a biz the employees many 1,000s of americans.

the choice is clear! bank bailout!

america fail!

I think we've been down this road in quite a few threads here. Not only were most (around 80%) people against the financial industry bailout, the bailouts haven't worked and have set a really bad precedent. All of the sudden we're supposed to think that the bailout of another entity is supposed to work?

Insanity: Doing the same things the same way and expecting different results.

No matter how many hoops the auto industry is jumping through right now, they'll get their bailout/loan/whatever. The questions now are: will those bailouts/loans/whatever do any good? Also, what "entity" will ask for a bailout/loan/whatever next?.....I mean, since we're bailing out everyone now.....

Nevermind that many of those banks were forced to merge or are being dissolved by the government. And the remaining ones are under the government's thumb facing massively increased regulatory oversight.

I mean, if GM really wanted the bank treatment, they could ask for it. In five years the company wouldn't exist, with all the pieces sold off to competitors. At least they could keep the lights on until then though.

Of course, GM didn't want that. They just wanted the money no-questions-asked so they could keep on 'doing same things the same way and expecting different results'.

Even the plan they got around to submitting isn't any change -- cut a couple models, "de-emphasize" a few brands (they will change their mind in 2 years, they always do), "cost-cutting". Nothing any different.

This begging for money crap is assenine. I mean simple fact is GM collapsing will cost the goverment north of $100 Billion dollars. With the money that we have been throwing around to poorly run financial services companies...and like...GM needing a $10 Billion loan should not bring this much drama.
Even assuming your $100M figure is correct; your comparison only makes sense if the $10M is all they ask for and receive...whatever they get this time around; it's unlikely it will be all they ask for.

I keep waiting for someone to explain to me how loaning money to GM is going to make people start buying cars again??? Until that happens, there is no amount of money and no plan of action Detroit can take that will save the industry.

I think we've been down this road in quite a few threads here. Not only were most (around 80%) people against the financial industry bailout, the bailouts haven't worked and have set a really bad precedent. All of the sudden we're supposed to think that the bailout of another entity is supposed to work?

Insanity: Doing the same things the same way and expecting different results.

No matter how many hoops the auto industry is jumping through right now, they'll get their bailout/loan/whatever. The questions now are: will those bailouts/loans/whatever do any good? Also, what "entity" will ask for a bailout/loan/whatever next?.....I mean, since we're bailing out everyone now.....
The line is going to be almost endless...mayors of major cities, governors of states, the airline industry, travel/tourism industry, and on and on and on.

Why wouldnt you look at GM's long history? Are you glad you're not cranking your car by hand to start it? Or that the V8 exists? How about the fact that you can buy a new starter from six thousand autostores because Cadillac created interchangeable parts?

Or are you talking about selective long term history?

EXACTLY.

Amazing how short-term that long-term history really is.

That road to redemption article made me laugh my balls off. Seriously, they printed that crap, then ran and hid months later when they knew damn well there was serious issues with their product.

The GTO is a great example of GM saying one thing and doing another. Strut rub? Ignition cylinder freezing? The fuel rail covers cutting fuel lines and causing cars to burn to the ground? Rear end whine?

I would say they are a better company today. However, that article was a shame, especially for the time it was printed.

I had no idea that the GTO had that many problems.

I had no idea that the GTO had that many problems.

Strut rub is really only on cars that were built in about a 6 month period, fuel rail covers cutting fuel lines was only on 04 models, and I have no idea about the rear end whine since that's the first I've heard about it.

Nevermind that many of those banks were forced to merge or are being dissolved by the government. And the remaining ones are under the government's thumb facing massively increased regulatory oversight.

I mean, if GM really wanted the bank treatment, they could ask for it. In five years the company wouldn't exist, with all the pieces sold off to competitors. At least they could keep the lights on until then though.

Of course, GM didn't want that. They just wanted the money no-questions-asked so they could keep on 'doing same things the same way and expecting different results'.

Even the plan they got around to submitting isn't any change -- cut a couple models, "de-emphasize" a few brands (they will change their mind in 2 years, they always do), "cost-cutting". Nothing any different.

This right here is my biggest fear. They will say what they think needs heard to get a check and run back to Detroit and continue on with business as normal. GM needs to stop "considering" killing overlapping brands and start doing it.

They already did something fairly similar to this 4.5 years ago with their "Road to Redemption" campaign.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E3DF1F3AF93BA15757C0A9629C8B 63

In addition to GM's bureacracy that makes a simple product decision a long, painful, torturous journey is GM's bureacracy that often doesn't stick to a good decision when it makes one. The RWD Impala & Roadmaster, the revolutionary Kappa that was supposed to span a wide range of models, the moves away from badge engineering, the focus on getting away from incentives even if it meant less sales, and the "Road to Redemption" campaign.

Then there's the notion that the collasping economy is strictly to blame for GM being at the edge of extinction. Let me point out that the stock market and the economy began imploding dramatically the 1st week of October. GM would likely be in the same position (though a few months later). GM attenpted to merge with Ford last summer, and when they were trying to merge with Chrysler, they said if it didn't happen they and Chrysler wouldn't make it past the winter. This was back when the economic meltdown was just starting. Also, GM's stocks still lost over 70% of it's value independent of the meltdown in less than a 12 month period.

The lack of credit is the reson for GM's current prediciment? Yea, right.

I think the bdemands the government is likely to place on GM will be a good thing. It will cut through the disasterous decision making route they currently have and seem unable to shake. It will also not just focus, but keep focused changes GM makes and needs to make.

Another member IMHO nailed a issue that GM has. Someone initiates a change at GM or starts a project, and he or she's moved to another position and the next person who takes their place changes everything and puts their own agenda in place. As a result, GM has had countless reorganizations and very little to show for it.

Strut rub is really only on cars that were built in about a 6 month period, fuel rail covers cutting fuel lines was only on 04 models, and I have no idea about the rear end whine since that's the first I've heard about it.

Strut rub is a potential issue for any GTO with 17" wheels. Also, I do recall seing people on LS1GTO.com mention the fuel rail cover issue with their 2005s. Even if you look at it as only a 2004 issue, then you're conceeding that 39% of All GTOs have this serious design flaw that GM never contacted me about.

Corporate GM had some real issues about listening to customers, or treating them correctly- even their recalls were selective- the dealer would check your vehicle and see if it qualified for the fixed parts-

My local dealer has been great, though- really treated me well, acted like he appreciated my business- would do whatever he could to make things right, loaner cars, warranty work- I have no issues with the local company, but the big juggernaut that the company is never responded to emails, never contacted me directly except through mass mailing of recall notices- treated me like I was absolutely insignificant to their business- I suspect they have offended millions over the years, and you really can't do that if you want to stay in business-

I am a GM fan, and come from a family that bought GM for decades- they have pretty much worked themselves out of the market for me- I want RWD, V8 power and reliability, and enough capacity for kids, dogs, the occaissional canoe or backpack- maybe even to be able to pull a small trailer- the only thing they build close to that now is a truck, and I don't like the handling, the mileage or the weight- The GTO was close, but didn't last long, in part because of the half-baked job they did on it-

They built decades of cars I loved, bought, hot-rodded- Cutlass, Buick Century (RWD!) decades of Impala/Caprice/Bel Air- Olds 98, Malibu- even the old Nova could be bought in SS trim for a sporty 4-dr sedan with a V8 driving the 'correct' wheels- My LT1 powered Caprice was the acme of cars, highway mileage in the 20's, faster than most of what else is one the road- GM has a guaranteed 60,000 units a year for police and municipal sales, but they dropped it to sell higher-profit trucks- and today we see where that decision took them-

We need them to succeed, and we need the manufacturing ability in this country, but they have to wake up to the fact that they are a customer-driven company- and, if you keep alienating their customers, their jobs will be out-sourced to someone else that will build what America wants- I can buy that RWD V-8 from Infinity, from Lexus, and any number of european manufacturers- I would prefer to buy American, but only the Ford/Mercury dealer sells what I want- is it any wonder that Ford is weathering the economic downturn so much better than GM?- Heck, I can still but a V-8, RWD pony car from Ford, if I want- thanks for nothing, GM corporate-

Strut rub is a potential issue for any GTO with 17" wheels. Also, I do recall seing people on LS1GTO.com mention the fuel rail cover issue with their 2005s. Even if you look at it as only a 2004 issue, then you're conceeding that 39% of All GTOs have this serious design flaw that GM never contacted me about.

Strut rub was caused by the 245 series tires on the stock 17" wheels which GM did not use on the Monaro down under. In an effort to speed up bringing it over here since the 18's weren't certified they took the sedan wheels and slapped them on with larger tires. If the alignment had 0 toe and 0 camber it was fine and didn't rub or wear unevenly, unfortunately that was not the case in most instances. I had the problem (slight rub, def too much negative camber). I even fought with them to cover the tires but the dealership refused to help (and even told GM that it was an alignment issue out of warranty so GM shouldn't cover it).

Fuel rail cover issue was mainly with 2004's (although a few 05's and 06's reported it as well) and it didn't burn cars to the ground as the other poster stated. The car that caught fire and initially blamed the fuel rail covers I believe turned out to be a nitrous issue (I was watching that post very carefully). It still was a cause for concern with most people since it did actually rub the one fuel line (mine had marks but was ok and the dealer fixed the line so it wouldn't rub).