Recommendations for Car Czar?
12-09-2008, 11:02 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
Recommendations for Car Czar?
Any suggestions on who would be the best person to play watchdog for the Big 3?
Here are my 3 (In no particular order):
1. Lee Iacocca (84) - He saved Chrysler, so he knows a little of what it takes to turn an auto manufacturer around.
2. Ross Perot (78) - The former "Reform" party leader may have the right chops when it comes to change, plus he comes from the supplier side of the industry.
3. Carroll Shelby (85) - Always the innovator and not afraid to take chances, does the man in the black hat have enough energy left to whip Detroit into shape?
Other suggestions?
Here are my 3 (In no particular order):
1. Lee Iacocca (84) - He saved Chrysler, so he knows a little of what it takes to turn an auto manufacturer around.
2. Ross Perot (78) - The former "Reform" party leader may have the right chops when it comes to change, plus he comes from the supplier side of the industry.
3. Carroll Shelby (85) - Always the innovator and not afraid to take chances, does the man in the black hat have enough energy left to whip Detroit into shape?
Other suggestions?
Last edited by jg95z28; 12-09-2008 at 11:06 AM.
12-09-2008, 12:19 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Mill Creek, WA
Posts: 511
Funny. After reading Lutz's comments this morning regarding a "Car Czar" being imposed on the US auto industry the first thing that came to mind was Lee Iacocca. I would actually trust him to help Detroit as opposed to getting in it's way.
I think the job needs to go to a car guy and/ or someone that really knows the industry so that would rule out Perot for me.
Shelby, not good choice imo but that's because I don't think very highly of Shelby himself. To egotistical, and I'd be afraid of him having a personal agenda.
My pick would actually be Lutz. He is largely responsible for the turn around at GM regarding the quality of cars being put out and he knows the industry inside and out, plus he seems to have more energy and enthusiasm than most people at his level of the business.
I think the job needs to go to a car guy and/ or someone that really knows the industry so that would rule out Perot for me.
Shelby, not good choice imo but that's because I don't think very highly of Shelby himself. To egotistical, and I'd be afraid of him having a personal agenda.
My pick would actually be Lutz. He is largely responsible for the turn around at GM regarding the quality of cars being put out and he knows the industry inside and out, plus he seems to have more energy and enthusiasm than most people at his level of the business.
12-09-2008, 12:30 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Van Nuys, Ca.
Posts: 284
I think we're all dreaming. Its likely to be some lawyer/accountant/polititian we've never heard of. See the description from the proposed bill-
There is nothing in there that says you have to know anything about the auto industy specifically.
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...t-updated.html
23 (a) DESIGNATION.--The President shall designate 1 or more officers from the Executive Branch having appropriate expertise in such areas as economic stabilization, financial aid to commerce and industry, financial restructuring, energy efficiency, and environmental protection (who shall hereinafter in this Act be collectively referred to as the ''President's designee'') to carry out the purposes of this Act, including the facilitation of restructuring to achieve the long-term financial viability of the domestic automobile manufacturing industry, who shall serve at the pleasure of the President.
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...t-updated.html
Last edited by Hoodshaker; 12-09-2008 at 12:52 PM. Reason: Spellin error LOL
12-09-2008, 12:33 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Iacocca, most certainly! 
I'd bet the farm that he'd be game for it as well. He's done exactly this type of thing before with Chrysler, right down to working under a Federal Loan Guarantee. Although he's 84, IMO it would be somewhat foolish not to include him on any potential "Car Czar" list. He has the respect & the trust, to make it work. That is a rare 100% perfect fit for the job.
Alot less so with Ross Perot. Save his brief stint as board member at GM, he really doesn't have any experience in automobiles. Plus, he strikes me as being far better at building things from the ground up than at taking an existing system and making changes that improve it. He also is a bit more of a self aggrandizing person than one would feel comfortable with in that position.
I don't feel Caroll Shelby would be a good choice either. I've met him on at least 2 occasions, and he's a great guy. He was a IMO a great race driver before he had to quit. He's the first and most successful aftermarket "Tuner". He's been consulted by 2 car companies on more than just a hand full of high performance vehicles, and he's been paid quite a bit by auto companies wanting to put his name on a car or his picture in an ad. But is he the person who could save the US auto industry? Not quite feeling that.
Instead of Shelby, I'd subsitute John Coletti, former CEO of Ford's SVT. He's risen through an automobile company & know the inner workings of it. He's extremely talented at taking next to nothing and making things work (saving the RWD Mustang and creating and sucessfully running... meaning making it very profitable... SVT). While Caroll Shelby is a celebrity in the auto world, Colletti actually worked his way up through a car company and arguably had a more successful history when you consider every Mustang Cobra, Ford Lightning, Contour, Focus, & Ford GTs SVT created and sold under him... not to mention spinoffs from SVT like the Maurader, the Mach1, Bullitt, and a lion's share of the Ford Performance Catalogue. He also has a good book out called "Iron Fist, Lead Foot" on the creation of the Terminator Mustang (good read!).
But the name I really think should be added.....
Wolfgang Bernhard (48):
Rose through the ranks at Mercedes Benz. Chief Operating officer at Chrysler. His no nonsense style caused him to be passed over for CEO of the Mercedes Group. Quit Daimler and was quickly hired to run Volkswagen. Left VW to "advise" Cerberus with newly aquired Chrysler. Walked away when he was offered a "non-executive chairman" position for "personal reasons"and hasn't been heard from since. He isn't busy today, helped turn Chrysler and VW around, seems to thrive in adversity, smart and ballsy as hell, and seems to be the type of person who'll want to bail for something else once the job's done and things get boring...... Perfect Choice (if there's no restrictions on a German national working in the US Government).
I'd bet the farm that he'd be game for it as well. He's done exactly this type of thing before with Chrysler, right down to working under a Federal Loan Guarantee. Although he's 84, IMO it would be somewhat foolish not to include him on any potential "Car Czar" list. He has the respect & the trust, to make it work. That is a rare 100% perfect fit for the job.
Alot less so with Ross Perot. Save his brief stint as board member at GM, he really doesn't have any experience in automobiles. Plus, he strikes me as being far better at building things from the ground up than at taking an existing system and making changes that improve it. He also is a bit more of a self aggrandizing person than one would feel comfortable with in that position.
I don't feel Caroll Shelby would be a good choice either. I've met him on at least 2 occasions, and he's a great guy. He was a IMO a great race driver before he had to quit. He's the first and most successful aftermarket "Tuner". He's been consulted by 2 car companies on more than just a hand full of high performance vehicles, and he's been paid quite a bit by auto companies wanting to put his name on a car or his picture in an ad. But is he the person who could save the US auto industry? Not quite feeling that.
Instead of Shelby, I'd subsitute John Coletti, former CEO of Ford's SVT. He's risen through an automobile company & know the inner workings of it. He's extremely talented at taking next to nothing and making things work (saving the RWD Mustang and creating and sucessfully running... meaning making it very profitable... SVT). While Caroll Shelby is a celebrity in the auto world, Colletti actually worked his way up through a car company and arguably had a more successful history when you consider every Mustang Cobra, Ford Lightning, Contour, Focus, & Ford GTs SVT created and sold under him... not to mention spinoffs from SVT like the Maurader, the Mach1, Bullitt, and a lion's share of the Ford Performance Catalogue. He also has a good book out called "Iron Fist, Lead Foot" on the creation of the Terminator Mustang (good read!).
But the name I really think should be added.....
Wolfgang Bernhard (48):
Rose through the ranks at Mercedes Benz. Chief Operating officer at Chrysler. His no nonsense style caused him to be passed over for CEO of the Mercedes Group. Quit Daimler and was quickly hired to run Volkswagen. Left VW to "advise" Cerberus with newly aquired Chrysler. Walked away when he was offered a "non-executive chairman" position for "personal reasons"and hasn't been heard from since. He isn't busy today, helped turn Chrysler and VW around, seems to thrive in adversity, smart and ballsy as hell, and seems to be the type of person who'll want to bail for something else once the job's done and things get boring...... Perfect Choice (if there's no restrictions on a German national working in the US Government).
Last edited by guionM; 12-09-2008 at 12:36 PM.
12-09-2008, 02:10 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SoCal
Posts: 3,463
Now you know that Washington won't hand that job over to someone from the auto industry. It would seem to them like putting one of the inmates in charge of the asylum.
They will pick someone who fits a political agenda and can impose what I perceive is a stern stance from Washington.
They will pick someone who fits a political agenda and can impose what I perceive is a stern stance from Washington.
12-09-2008, 02:23 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Land of Pleasant Living
Posts: 1,581
Now you know that Washington won't hand that job over to someone from the auto industry. It would seem to them like putting one of the inmates in charge of the asylum.
They will pick someone who fits a political agenda and can impose what I perceive is a stern stance from Washington.
They will pick someone who fits a political agenda and can impose what I perceive is a stern stance from Washington.
12-09-2008, 04:51 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SoCal
Posts: 3,463
The current Camaro should be ok as the money is spent but a 6th Gen as we would like to know it may be in serious trouble.
Ford and the Mustang should be ok too especially if Ford never has to tap into the $9B in secured loans they have asked for.
From a performance enthusiast standpoint I really cringe at what a Washington appointed car czar would think of the cars and programs that we like. But consumer demands and sales can drive anything especially if the car czar is truly interested in getting the loan paid back.
12-09-2008, 05:18 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 2,612
99SilverSS: bingo. He's gotta look at the CBA for the programs, even the performance ones. And with the amount of work he (or she, I should say) is going to have between GM, Chrysler, and potentially Ford in the future, they have to boil it down to something easy... A=potential amt of cars sold, B=cost of project, C=profit per car. If A*C>B, then do it but keep an eye on A that sales are meeting projections.
That's just one small aspect of the job.
My pick? Jack Welch. There's no one in the world who has more experience divesting divisions, esp. with his proven track record. And I'd be willing to bet he'd turn it around quick.
That's just one small aspect of the job.
My pick? Jack Welch. There's no one in the world who has more experience divesting divisions, esp. with his proven track record. And I'd be willing to bet he'd turn it around quick.
Last edited by Chuck!; 12-09-2008 at 05:24 PM.
12-09-2008, 05:38 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Michigan's left coast
Posts: 2,405
If you think that the Big 3 are capable of making good products...
... then you do not want to see a "car guy" as the "car czar"!
What Detroit needs is someone who knows how to run the back-office stuff - financials, purchasing, and so on. The existing car guys need to figure out how to design and build product, and each company needs to have its own marketing gurus to figure out what the public wants.
You do not want the "car czar" to have veto power over the Bob Lutzes of the industry. You want to give that guy veto power over the Wagoners and Nardellis.
I suspect that few people here are involved in a business at a high enough level to understand that it takes all types - gearheads and financial geeks - to make a successful company run properly.
... then you do not want to see a "car guy" as the "car czar"!
What Detroit needs is someone who knows how to run the back-office stuff - financials, purchasing, and so on. The existing car guys need to figure out how to design and build product, and each company needs to have its own marketing gurus to figure out what the public wants.
You do not want the "car czar" to have veto power over the Bob Lutzes of the industry. You want to give that guy veto power over the Wagoners and Nardellis.
I suspect that few people here are involved in a business at a high enough level to understand that it takes all types - gearheads and financial geeks - to make a successful company run properly.
12-09-2008, 06:05 PM
#12
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
Now you know that Washington won't hand that job over to someone from the auto industry. It would seem to them like putting one of the inmates in charge of the asylum.
They will pick someone who fits a political agenda and can impose what I perceive is a stern stance from Washington.
They will pick someone who fits a political agenda and can impose what I perceive is a stern stance from Washington.
If you think that the Big 3 are capable of making good products...
... then you do not want to see a "car guy" as the "car czar"!
What Detroit needs is someone who knows how to run the back-office stuff - financials, purchasing, and so on. The existing car guys need to figure out how to design and build product, and each company needs to have its own marketing gurus to figure out what the public wants.
You do not want the "car czar" to have veto power over the Bob Lutzes of the industry. You want to give that guy veto power over the Wagoners and Nardellis.
I suspect that few people here are involved in a business at a high enough level to understand that it takes all types - gearheads and financial geeks - to make a successful company run properly.
... then you do not want to see a "car guy" as the "car czar"!
What Detroit needs is someone who knows how to run the back-office stuff - financials, purchasing, and so on. The existing car guys need to figure out how to design and build product, and each company needs to have its own marketing gurus to figure out what the public wants.
You do not want the "car czar" to have veto power over the Bob Lutzes of the industry. You want to give that guy veto power over the Wagoners and Nardellis.
I suspect that few people here are involved in a business at a high enough level to understand that it takes all types - gearheads and financial geeks - to make a successful company run properly.
12-09-2008, 10:02 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 3,698
Well I think that there needs to be a determination how much this guy has his hand in product. I mean..I am down with someone playing cop and making the automakers playing by the rules like the banks have. However if your gonna give someone say so over product at all 3 car companies...you might as well nationalize the auto indusrty and call it a day. As long as there are imported cars who don't have to play by these rules, Detroit will be playing handicapped and never fully recover. Basically they will be stuck building cars the government wants vs. what the consumer wants. Toyota will finally be able to move Tundra's and Sequioa's.
12-10-2008, 01:16 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SeVa
Posts: 2,977
I read car czar and all I can think is unmitigated disaster, then I read about a provision to barring car companies from litigation in California and other states wanting to adopt stricter emmissions standards and thought "wow, this really wont end well 
" but at least the anti-litigation provision might be dropped (I know California wanted to adopt carbon limits). Still not feeling good about the deal since the car czar could demand the money back if the companies taking the loan money can't prove they will be by the time march rolls around. The article I read also mentioned reps in the senate are opposed to the bill thinking that bankruptcy is a better way forward.
" but at least the anti-litigation provision might be dropped (I know California wanted to adopt carbon limits). Still not feeling good about the deal since the car czar could demand the money back if the companies taking the loan money can't prove they will be by the time march rolls around. The article I read also mentioned reps in the senate are opposed to the bill thinking that bankruptcy is a better way forward.
12-10-2008, 03:56 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
More specifically, you want a "Systems Guy" with heavy emphasis on finance and/or manufacturing.
Businesses are all about money. The "Car people" are the ones in the trenches working with the products. Without money, everything comes to a grinding halt.
In it's final years, Studebaker was run almost exclusively by car guys.
What you really want is a beancounter with enough common sense to put the right people in key positions, enough respect to be able to streamline an organization against entrenched inside opposition, enough wisdom to know he or she doesn't know it all and will go to the right people for answers, and enough ***** to stand up for their people.
Rick Wagoner is a very smart guy by every account. He has also demonstrated a strong talent for attracting some amazing talent. He obviously has some unmatched persuasion powers (name anyone else who would have as much board and rank and file support (let alone a job) under the same situations GM is under right now. At the moment, he's the only CEO of a US automobile company who actually has experience in automobiles.
The only issue with Mr Wagoner is that he's taken a "go-slow" approach that hasn't served GM well, and he's been almost painfully timid in making the effort in changing GM's culture and bureaucracy (hopefully it's that and not a desire to stick to the self destructive status-quo).