Conspiracy to kill the F-body? Not poor sales after all?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

09-03-2002, 12:34 PM

#31

guionM

Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2001

Location: The Golden State

Posts: 13,711

So far it seems like this theory of the Ste. Therese plant having some exclusive right to produce Camaro/Firebird, or anything with that name is pure "Urban Ledgend" unless someone can come up with something.

I never could, and no one else as far as I know could, even though it's been kicked around here before.

So....anyone???

09-03-2002, 12:39 PM

#32

guionM

Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2001

Location: The Golden State

Posts: 13,711

Quote:

Originally posted by redzed:
Let's face it, if the Z28 Camaro had ever been marketed for what it really was - a half priced Corvette substitute - it would have cannibalized the sales of the 'Vette. I think that guionM is forgetting that there has been no "Team Camaro" at GM for years. "Team Corvette" was responsible for the continued developement of the Corvette, and if they sacrificed the marketing, they sure didn't spare any effort on chassis engineering or vehicle content.

Any of us who own a late-model F-body should be happy that the corporate guys were putting effort into a dying carline, not just giving up.

Don't really think it would have canibalized Corvette sales, though it is possible.

"Team Camaro" & "Team Corvette" are one in the same (engineering anyway), though I should have called it something different or been more specific.

My mention of "Team Camaro" in this instance refers to the people directly responsible for Camaro (like executives & managers), as opposed to the performance car engineers responsible for both cars.

09-03-2002, 01:52 PM

#33

formula79

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2001

Location: USA

Posts: 3,698

Quote:

Originally posted by Darth Xed:

If that is the case... and no one cares... then why are so many companies readying new affordable performance?

It's particularly embarrassing for GM when you consider that they are the largest automaker in the world... and companies like Nissan , et al are bringing out cars that GM appartantly can't.

The whole notion of Camaro & Firebird needing time off is silliness. Put out a good car, and people will buy it.

You looks at Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, and Mitsu and all thier performance offerings will be low volume image cars. I saw the 350Z was only slated for like 30,000 copies. The Lancer EVO, WRX, RX8, and Supra are all image cars that won't sell more than 30,000 copies each and not at much of a profit. When you compare it to say an Impala or Accord that sells to the tune of 300,000 copies a year 30,000 cars is a drop in the bucket in terms of corperate bottom line. To GM's bean counters these cars are as important as you deciding wheather or not to scratch your *** when you wake up in the morning. No sports coupe comes near the Mustang in terms of sales.

Also like I said...it's all about image. Where the new cars coming out are percieved as cool...the Camaro has lost its coolness

------------------
Branden-Founder- GMInsidenews and NewAgeGTO
1995 Firebird White with Red Leather!- 2002 TA exhuast, JVC Head unit, 350 watt amp pushing two 10" subs..
Slow can be sexy

09-03-2002, 09:48 PM

#34

redzed

Banned

Join Date: Mar 2002

Posts: 1,954

Quote:

Originally posted by Chris 96 WS6:
I was just digging around on the CAW's website. I didn't find anything about a specific F-body contract, but I did find a couple of moderately interesting things:

http://www.caw.ca/news/videonews/archives/980130_1e.asp

This is the text of a speech in May ’02 by CAW president Buzz Hargrove. If you can cut through all the socialist dogma there are a couple of tidbits in there (bold emphasis added by me)

http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/bargainin...2speech.asp#gm

What are the problems facing the industry? We have record sales so the problem is not the market. No one can argue it is the market. Yet it is interesting to see how analysts can distort reality. I had an interview today with reporter from a Detroit publication, Wards Automotive Reports. The reporter maintained that the analysts are saying that because the UAW collective agreement does not expire until 2003 and the CAW's contract expires this year, the automakers are closing Canadian plants this year because the UAW contract doesn't allow plant closures until 2003. I invited the reporter to look more closely at our plants.

General Motors is closing a plant in Quebec which is the only plant that builds the Camaro and Firebird. It would not matter if it was a UAW plant or CAW plant or when the contract expired. If the company is not selling the cars the plant will close. You cannot convince me that because our agreement expires this year that is the reason General Motors is closing the Ste-Thérèse assembly plant.

---
Now its clear Hargrove belives St. Therese closing is due to sales only. Funny that a Union leader is so willing to tow the corporate line in a situation in which one of Canada's largest provinces is losing its only remaining major automotive facility. That seems counter intuitive to me.

But, the more interesting thing is that the CAW apparently holds one big contract with GM, which expires next year. Theory still makes sense from a standpoint of GM wanting out of St. Therese, but if there is no f-body specific contract then it makes no sense that GM would delay a new f-body and go so long with no plans for one. Perhaps we will hear some news about the 5th gen after the '03 CAW contract expiration?

I think you've hit the nail on the head. The sad fact is that GM isn't free to close any UAW facilities, but the CAW is still fair game. Considering that there is a shortage of RWD production capacity, any decision to permanently close Ste. Therese is ill advised, despite the low utilization rate in recent years.

Any scenario that involves the re-opening of Ste. Therese seems unlikely, but the eventual transfer of some elements of the production line tooling to another facility isn't out of the question. I think that we are looking at a timescale of less than two years, but a new, affordable RWD performance product is closer than many of us think.