Well, I would have rather have seen it my way. IMO, the image of sleazy CEO's begging for money looks sad.
At least Lutz would have taken his own private fighter jet, that isnt funded by GM.

 

First off...I would love to see how the AIG execs got to Washington. Keep in mind, they got $150 Billion dollars..not the $10 Billion that GM asked for. Also, the the reasons for the collapse of AIG make GM management look like saints. Were they even asked to come beg for a loan....or explain it after the fact?

Secondly, it is easy for everyone to be an armchair QB in all this...and not put yourself in a business owners shoes. If you are GM 10 years ago, would you invest in making great SUV's that make up to $10K in profit a vehicle, or in making small cars that you cannot sell profitably. If GM missed the SUV boom, and the profits it made with it...that would have been a disservice to shareholders. That being said, even today, GM HAS a world class car lineup. They may not have a feel good car like the Prius (though the Volt kinda fits here), but in general all of their cars are competitive and compelling, if a buyer is really going to consider an American brand.

The fact everyone overlooks, is that GM has successfuly turned around it product lineup, and IS one of the most efficiant car makers in the business. I really don't know what else GM can just chop off or sell to make itself more profitable or better run. The real problem is, the automarket has dropped from almost 18 million units, to maybe 13 million units. 5 million cars is a TON of volume to just disappear out of nowhere. Sure other import automakers are weathering it...but what you are seeing is their cost advantage covering the difference between loss and profitability. GM does not have that wiggle room untill the labor contract they negotiated comes into effect in in 2010. When they say they need a loan as a bridge this is what I think they are referring to. Also, GM's situation has crippled GMAC's ability to get money to loan. What bank wants to loan money to give a company (GMAC) to finance vehicles made by a possibly bankrupt company (GM)? So..even if you want a GM car..now getting a loan is harder. Plus all this negative press just scares away customers anyway. If you listened to our own lawmakers, GM basically makes unefficant peices of crap. What is that gonna do to motivate people to buy American?


Again..If your gonna make the argument that GM does not deserve a $10 million loan because of mismanagment...then you really need to look at the mismanagement in the banking industry that just received $700 million in loans with pretty much no strings attached but CEO compensation.

 

*All* their cars are competitive? Aveo is competitive? LaCrosse is competitive? Really? Because I see a few good cars surrounded by dozens of mediocre and obsolete products.

Furthermore, I've never seen an inkling out of GM that they are willing to fix that problem -- to actually get their new model introduction timelines in line with the number of models they have. This problem goes back 20 years, and they if anything have just added more models, and let the other half of their fleet lot-rot at any given moment.

Anyway, I can understand why many consumers aren't going the GM dealer to fish the kernel of corn out of the pile of poo. It's not entirely irrational bias.

GM is not getting the government grant/loan because they've made no positive case for it. "They got one, so we should get one too", and "We're going fire everyone" went over like a lead baloon with the general public.

Unfortuantely for a lot of people, it seems the current DC plan might be to let GM go bust, and then save Ford.

 

I feel that the mediocre products do more harm than the great products help. When GM is worst in class they just need to end it and now offer a vehicle in that segment until they can put something good out. Caviler comes to mind, so does the Ford Ranger but part of the reason they stay around id because of CAFE.