If Saab is sold, I'd guess all of their manufacturing would go back to Trollhattan - where most of it is already. All you'd lose out of the deal would be the unloved Cadillac BLS for Europe.

If Hummer is actually sold (vs. just shuttered), I'd assume GM will contract with the new owner to continue to produce the H3 for some time at Shreveport. The H2 is built by AM General so I assume they'd have to make their own deal with the new owner.

On the Pontiac and Saturn front, we know Kappa (Solstice, Sky) is a one and done platform. So, I'd assume if Wilmington doesn't get a new product when GM decides Kappa is EOL, it will be closed.

The G6 is made at Orion Township alongside the Malibu and the Aura is made at Fairfax alongside the Malibu and upcoming LaCrosse. If the Aura and G6 were phased out, I assume they'd close Orion and use the production capacity made available at Fairfax by a phaseout of Aura to make up for the Malibu production that would be lost at Orion.

The G3 is made in Korea and is likely a 1 or 2 year model, anyway.

The G5 is low volume compared to the Cobalt and is probably already headed for a phaseout when the Cruze is introduced.

Vibe is made at NUMMI - a plant which GM could theoretically hand over completely to Toyota at some point.

G8 is gravy for the VE Commodore. I'm sure it helps make up capacity, especially with Holden sales slow lately, but probably wouldn't be a deathblow for the plant if it were phased out after the current generation.

Torrent is already being phased out in favor of GMC Terrain.

As far as the other Saturns, Outlook is made at Lansing Delta Township with the Enclave and Acadia. GM could close Spring Hill, which only makes the Traverse right now, and move Traverse production to Delta Township.

Vue is made in Ramos Arizpe. I'd assume they can make up the capacity with the new Cadillac SRX and new small cars for both Mexico and South and North America as they're introduced.

Astra is made in Antwerp, Belgium. Astra is one of the best selling cars in Europe, so I don't think the loss of 20,000 a year off the line will be damaging.

So, there are actually very few models in the divisions you mentioned that would be hard to extricate from existing production facilities. There are logical consolidations that exist. I just feel badly for the workers.

 

Hence the "I'm not betting on it"


I understand it perfectly. However, I don't understand why GM has to go from roughly 20% of the market (before everything blew up) to a plan where they hold around 10% of the market. That's too much IMO.

The government should introduce some sort of incentive. Every other country helps its industry (just my 0.02)

Sure it does... In a textbook.

 

If GM can hold 10% of the market -- AND DO IT PROFITABLY ---- they will be in much better shape than they've been in a long time.

In the long run though, that's probably not enough market share to insure GM's longterm survival.

 

I would think that the goal is not to have 10% market share, but to be profitable if they only had 10%, worse case scenerio. If GM is supposed to be competitive, they should be able to increase in percentage as apposed to their steady decline the last few years. A profitable GM increasing to 13-16% of the market and even chipping their way upwards is a lot better than a 25% of the market and declining, bleeding $10billion a year GM.

 

I know we're just throwing around numbers here, but based on March's sales:

Chevrolet 11% marketshare
Cadillac 1%
Buick .9%
GMC 2.1%

So that's 15% marketshare, assuming they keep GMC and lose all customers from shuttered divisions. 15% might be a good base to start from, stabilize for a while, and see if they can start to grow again.

(For reference, Pontiac had 2%, Saturn .9%, Hummer .1%, Saab .15%)

 

I've not seen it anywhere stated that the plan is only 10% of the market. Did I miss something?


There's already the sales tax deduction. A "cash for clunkers" plan has been mooted. With everything else, I'd say that the U.S. is doing a lot to help its industry.

 

That is the funniest thing I have read all day.

 

Its not just stockton, but the whole state of California is going down the tubes. Most of the politicians here dont like the auto business unless you are building electric cars.

 

My wife has family in Stockton, so I won't say what I'm thinking.

 

Probably not a good idea since your in Oakland. LOL

 

So, pre-bankruptcy, they have 12% with Chevy and Cadillac... That'll likely fall after Ch. 11 (with the stigma) to +/- 10%

Why should GM be forced to give up 5 point of share to appease politicians? Is that really the road to recovery?

 

The premise makes no sense to me. Who's forcing GM to give up 5 points of share?

The road to recovery is through building vehicles that can be sold profitably. A proper treatment of that subject is way too detailed for this forum, and would require much more study than probably any of us have given the subject.

 

Why does everyone think you a can shrink yourself better? This idea is what got GM here in the first place. The "Oh we will just cut out the Grand Prix to save development money and hope those people buy Impala's and G6's instead" mentality DOES NOT work. Grand prix buyers are now buying Nissans and Mazdas's.

In reality, when you sell less cars..your cost per unit actually goes up because of underutilization, and the loss of economies of scale. For instance, GM will pay a lot less for steel if it is moving 300,000 cars a month than it will moving 100,000. If a new car platform runs $1 billion dollars.....what makes more sense..engineering 3 models off it and selling 300,000 units or engineering 4 models and selling 400,000 plus. Once the platform is built the money to badge engineer is a drop in the bucket (why the Camaro was done so cheap).

 

Yeah, but the reverse didn't work either. So what do you do?

GM's now trying to figure out a path, any path, that will work. They've tried multiple variations, keeping volume up, even though it meant selling cars at a loss. That didn't work. And that sounds a lot like your plan above.

 

You have that 100% backwards. Grand Prix buyers moved to Nissan and Mazda, and years later GM killed the Grand Prix.

I see a lot of whining here that the government isn't handing GM a blank check so that they can keep producing losers for all eternity. But it just ain't going to happen.