Because his points are GREAT for dealers and not good for GM corprate. I have read his points and most of his posts on C&G and here. I have made my judgment on him and don't think his plan is in GM coprate's best intrest. It does serve Dealerships and Salespeople great, but it doesn't help the consumer OR GM so I decided I would post my opinions of him.

He may know how to sell cars but hey I know how to sell consumer electronics does that mean I can tell Sony how to sell thier stuff better? No it doesn't. Being in sales doesn't mean squat! You need to have an understanding beyond that. I personally don't feel that Buickman has and understanding of the systemic problems GM has been facing since the 80s. That is MY opinion I may be wrong but I do not feel so. If he demonstrates an understanding that is as good or GREATER than I have recieved from reading boards like these for the past few years then I MAY listen to him, but I do not have to agree.

 

Those were actual quotes of Wags. Agree "messed up". Also, please let me clarify. The Plan, as you know it from the release, only contained twenty of the steps. There are many more. I simply announced the first ones in order to begin the process of establishing validity, and encouraging participation beyond the combined efforts of GM dealers across the country. GM refused to recognize the value of this proven effective set of ideas, even to the point of simply trying ONE IDEA. Ask yourself WHY? There must be a reason.

There are Rats in the Glovebox.

 

yea but do you know if the current regime at GM can lead them out of this?

It seams like this GM is tending business like it did back in the early 80's not the early 21's century..

They cant take a hit like this anymore. The market has been spread out so much. Its crazy.

Yes, Buickman MIGHT not know the whole thing..but I remember the first thing he types this was 20 of many more to come around..this I remember if you go back..there are more points.
and if the other points dont do it, then get someone in there that can.

At the rate there going the largest auto maker in the world will be playing catch-up and also ran to everyone in the world till what? They go bankrupt?

 

They were probably worried about what they would owe you after they tried it. What if they did one point and decided that they didn't want to do the rest? What would they need to pay you? Situations like this in the past have ended up in court, and that's not really what GM needs right now.

Also, isn't one of the principles of sales that the customer is always right? You were unable to sell your plan to GM and have since assumed that it's entirely a result of their stupidity or even a conspiracy to drive the company to the ground. Couldn't it also be something about the plan or more likely your approach that has been behind GM's rejection of the plan? It sounds to me like you were doing a hard sell. That doesn't work all of the time.

 

Well, we'll see how wise they are. Paying millions to Boomer Esiason and Suze Orman, for what? Lock and Roll? Red Tag? GM has one foot nailed to the ground and is running in circles. Even worse, the circle is closing in on the drain.
Again I say it's in the marketing. Yesterday, in Flint, Patsy Lou offered a free dozen Krispy Creme donuts and a free sleeve of golf ***** to the first 500 registered visitors who also were welcomed with free hots and pop. On a holiday weekend when most dealers were closed and many customers had other things going on, 169 people registered and 18 new vehicles were sold. A local Chevy store only has 28 out total for the month. Successful marketers know how to have their ads cost less than the profit generated. GM has no clue. Mark LaNeve isn't bringing anything new to the table. Naturally we all want to see him win, but don't hold your breath. Until GM listens to someone who KNOWS how to SELL, they are doomed to decline.

 

Also, I don't know if it's been said, but I'm going to say it and get it off my chest. From what I hear about the plan, it's primary focus is on sales (have not read it). That's what got us in this mess in the first place. GM focused on selling cars competitively and not building cars competitively. We need people at the top who understand that the cars have to be well-built.

 

No. Enough of that nonsense.

The keys to a successful future for GM are...

1) PRODUCT that people desire.

2) Improved PRODUCT quality.

3) A stronger, statement making warranty to back that PRODUCT.

Marketing is considerably down the problem list for GM. Look at GM today. Putting marketing before product got them there.

 

I've told you this privately, I will now do so publicly.

You have a package of ideas you should be selling to dealers, not GM. GM can stand on their heads with marketing programs, but if dealerships continue to act as if they are doing the customer a favour just by being there, the customer will continue to go where they feel their business is appreciated.

As far as GM goes, I believe it is being realistic on their part, considering the competitive climate and range of manufacturers, domestic, European, Japanese and Korean with the Chinese on the horizon, to restructure their cost base and production capacity to be profitable at a 22 to 25 per cent market share. Then, if they are successful in actually bringing some true "gotta have" product to market, they can look to increasing their return per unit.

 

It is the responsibilty of GM to provide leadership, not confusion. Their constant interference in the marketplace is self-destructive. GM would be much farther ahead if they simply did nothing. It's not that they make mistakes, it's that they make so many of them.
A Return To Greatness is the answer to GM's problems. If you break a tooth, do you go to a chiropractor? Want to sell some cars? Try listening to someone with the knowledge and experience, who knows how to get the job done.

 

[QUOTE=Caps94ZODG]yea but do you know if the current regime at GM can lead them out of this?

It seams like this GM is tending business like it did back in the early 80's not the early 21's century..
AND..

the funny thing..right now the perceived quality of the competition makes there cars better in trade in time..

so when the word does finally come down that GM makes as good or better cars as the cometition again..all the rebates and stuff will make them cheap on paper still..
so they will still be in the same hole. people wont buy them when it comes to trade time since they can get more for the other companies cars than GM's..
QUOTE]

need I say again ^^^^

..someones got to sell the cars..

 

They give stuff away like that to people around here too. The people show up, take the food and free items, and leave.

It's not the marketing, it's the product!

 

While GM should not go to a "chiropractor" for its broken tooth, I'm not sure you're a dentist either. You're clearly a great salesman. Your experience indicates that you can fix the sales process at dealers to attract more sales. However, the people in your area need no convincing of the basic attributes of the cars you're selling - they are already GM people.

Now, try selling GM vehicles down here in my part of S. Florida. Around here, GM's are considered low class, low quality, and generally cheap. When I count imports vs. domestics in parking lots around here, it generally comes to about a 7/3 ratio. Usually 2 of the 3 domestics are either SUV's and Corvettes, or a really cheap old POS. I drive a Pontiac, and people at my high school would snootily imply, and sometimes say directly, that "only poor people drive Pontiacs." The worst part is that my Grand Prix most often cost as much or more when new than their Civics, Accords, RSX's and Corolla's. That is the attitude that LaNeve and GM marketing has to deal with. It's the attitude of marketplace that has been turned off by twenty years of inferior PRODUCT.

How would you convince these people that GM sells quality, upscale cars? Would you really be able to convince a Honda devotee that your Rendevous is better than their Pilot? What would you do to get people to give GM cars a chance again? I guarentee you, giving away free donuts will not do the trick.

 

It's perception. The Plan will turn that around quickly. GM shoots itself in the foot with every distress ad placed. We must reassume a position of leadership by losing the gimmicks and changing the presentation. Following the specific steps will accomplish just that. The beautiful part of A Return To Greatness is that there is no cost involved. In fact actual expenses will drop.

 

But you still aren't answering the question. If you must then do it by e-mail. The question is, how do you convince an extremely biased perosn with a Honda Pilot to try out a Buick Rendevous? I think that would start with making sure that a Buick Rendevous actually is as good if not better than a Pilot, and an Acura RDX (the truck - not sure if that's the name). I don't think any amount of marketing will do that alone. Once the product is there, marketing becomes easy. For example, LaNeve didn't have a problem making Cadillac advertising catchy pnce he had a ton of nice cars to advertise.

 

Rendezvous FWD CX over Pilot LX AT
$800 less base price
19 vs 17 city
26 vs 22 hwy
wheelbase 112.2 vs 106.3
curb weight 4096 vs 4414
cargo vol 54.5 vs 16.3
traction opt vs N/A
daytime running lights std vs N/A
foglamps std vs opt
auto level opt vs N/A
twilight sentinel std vs. N/A
multi adj power seats opt vs N/A
mem seat opt vs N/A
heated seats opt vs N/A
leather opt vs N/A
leather steering std vs N/A
mem mirrors opt vs N/A
power sunroof opt vs N/A
rust warranty 72 vs 60

Most importantly, the Buick is a much better looking vehicle.