I've read at least 3 threads today where the Volt is hearled as the salvation of GM.

Yet, even according to GM themselves, the Volt will cost as much as $40,000, and GM will be lucky to break even on them, let alone make a profit.

Yet on one thread, some one says GM better hurry and get the Volt to market. Another uses the Volt to rank GM over Chrysler as the company in 2nd most fiscal straits.

Going back to Business 101, the purpose of a company or corperation is to make money. Profit's-Good, Losses-bad, Break Even-no help. For a company to succeed, it has to make money.

Continuing with Business 101, you look at the Toyota Prius, and it doesn't make money for Toyota. Yet the positive press and image Toyota gets from Prius far outweighs what they would get spending the same amount on advertizements, so the Prius is good for Toyota in that way and now Honds's getting into the act. Even Bob Lutz made this exact observation about the Prius before the Volt concept came out.

Finally, the economically aware buyer (which is just about every buyer using their own money and/or credit to buy a car.... or pretty much everyone who isn't buying a car simply to send a message) is going to look at the $40,000 price tage of the Volt and look at the $15,000 price tag of a Cobalt, and buy the Cobalt. Or the $20,000 Malibu. Or the $12,000 Aveo. A few might even note that a Cadillac CTS is cheaper.

All this tells me (as it should any Business 101 student or wannabe, that the Volt isn't GM's Holy Grail.

The Volt is not going to make GM any profit. There's a better than even chance, GM will lose money on each one they build. The Volt is nothing more than a feel good vehicle that has quite a few technological innovations. It's GM's other cars that's going to make the money. And these cars are going to have to sell.

So while we're getting warm and fuzzy on the Volt, if GM doesn't get the rest of the ship in order...and fast.... the Volt will be just like that Renault that went down on the Titanic. It's great, a marvel, and advanced. But it didn't stip the Titanic from winding up in the history books while sinking to the bottom and taking that car with it.

The Volt isn't going to save GM. GM lost 15 B-I-L-L-O-N dollars the past 3 months.

GM needs to get the rest of their line fixed.

So in short, GM is using the Volt as a PR effort.

 

GM is lightyears away from Toyota, Honda and Subara in the engine department. the Volt is all they have since trucks aren't econimcally viable products.

 

I don't think GM will have a "savior". It will take lots of work, some time, and a little luck.

The volt will help with improving its image, but it definitley won't be its savior.

A "savior" would be like Chrysler's k-cars and minivans in the 80s. Something that sells well with good profit.

 

And remarkably successfully too. Volt is most significant positive buzz coming out of GM nowdays. And certainly that is keeping some investor/wall street confidence in the company.

 

No one product is going to save a company as big and as troubled as General Motors. This isn't Apple and the iPod.

That said, the Volt is critical, and can do a lot to bring the company back from the dead. It is being cast as the pinnacle of American ingenuity, a hail mary, and even a solution to our national oil problems.

In short, the Volt is already an immense success story for a company desperate for wins. If it really delivers on its promise, the Volt could become a national icon, and it's hard to overestimate how that would impact the company.

 

If GM turns itself around, I vote to consider Bob Lutz their savior.

 

I thought this was pretty much understood from the beginning. Just as you said the Prius is to Toyota. How many felt it necessary to at least check out a Prius and/or walk out with a Corolla because, well, that Toyota is just so darn caring about our environment?

No $40,000 car will "save" ANY company, at least not a company the size of GM. The next round of small cars better absolutely hit it out of the park. Cruze looks promising in the details -- it better offer 40+ mpg though.

 

Perhaps Business 101 needs to teach about long term investments. The first gen Volt probably won't make money. But, it will lay the ground work for new technology that will be making profits. In the mean time, it is very good marketing for the company. It needs to come out so that people can see that GM is dedicated to green cars. That will help GM get over some of the obstacles of its gas guzzling image from Hummer, lots of Tahoe, Suburbans etc, even though most main stream manufactures also have these same size vehicles.

I wouldn't call Ford far behind on $$ issues. It did lose 8.7 Billion last quarter as well.

 

Volt will draw people in and the Cruze will get the sales.

 

Thank you, Guy. Too many people think that the Volt is meaningful in the short term. It isn't; I seriously doubt that the first few years of sales will break into the five-digit range. Given enough time, a lot of work, and some luck, it'll turn into a meaningful product.

BTW, rumor has it that Toyota is seeing "peak liquids" in 2018. If that's the case, then the Volt will shine. Whether GM is around to see that day will depend on many other factors.

If GM turns itself around, I wonder if it won't be in spite of Lutz and Wagoner.

Yeah, I know that Maximum Bob says a lot of the right things, but the two have been paired together for damn near seven years now, and their main accomplishment has been the loss of, oh, more than fifty billion dollars of shareholder value.

 

At least explain peak liquids.... what the hell is that??

 

$50 Billion and some exceptional cars (CTS-V/ZR1).

 

Take every liquid fuel possible (oil, natural gas, NG condensates, propane, shale, etc.), add 'em up, and determine when the peak rate of output occurs. That's "peak liquids" ("liquid" being the key term, as transportation requires something that can be pumped). How much is in the ground ("reserves") isn't important here; it's the rate at which it can be extracted.

If this 2018 date is true, then having a vehicle that can run for some distance without using any fuel at all would be highly desirable - and thus a plug-in hybrid will be far more useful than a conventional hybrid. The question then becomes one of range; if you only drive 10 miles to work but you buy a car with a 40-mile range, then you've dramatically overpaid for the battery pack. Toyota and the DOE seem to think that sizing the pack towards the lower end of the average commute (5-8 miles) makes the most sense, while GM is looking at sizing the pack towards the upper end (Honda and Mitsubishi seem to be looking at pure EVs, which is taking GM's position to the extreme).

Let's put this in real simple and brutal terms - using current market pricing for lithium-ion batteries (which are already in mega-high-production in laptops) and the additional cost of putting them into a usable pack, a vehicle like the Volt only makes sense if gasoline simply isn't available. Your business case for a hybrid plug-in needs to make the pack look attractive compared to the price of fuel, and to justify a $20,000 battery pack requires incredibly expensive (or non-existant) fuel.

Either GM sees fuel availability problems within the next decade, or the Volt is little more than a very expensive and cynical PR stunt. The former is downright scary, where as the latter would only be mildly irritating.

 

OK - since I was probably ( ) one of the guilty parties referred-to above, I will spend a few seconds elaborating.

Plague was spot-on with my sentiments regarding the Volt.
I did not praise the car much at all - maybe mentioned it twice in a long post.
The reference is more towards GM's committment to persue the technology.
Didn't intend for it to come across as their "salvation" at all, but it certainly bodes well for them as a demonstration that they are committed to make a vehicle that does not burn traditional fuel. They have "put their money where their mouth is", and dispelled a myth that car companies and oil companies are in cohoots, etc.

GM knew up-front this was not the end-all best solution for electric transport, but it is a huge step in the right direction, and certainly will (if not already) lead to more breakthroughs and new technology that may embed itself in future electric cars, battery technology for phones or laptops, or even electrical power for travel into space - who knows?

Another good point is that even you yourself have been victimized by it.
It has generated publicity for GM in a positive way that has crossed the internet, TV, documentaries, industrial journals, rags, mags, and even nerdy-books. It has generated "buzz" that gives the general public a positive spin on GM. If that is a bait and switch that gets a buyer into another car in the showroom - so be it. It still worked.

Take my personal Volt comments with no more emphasis than that it demonstrates GM's committment to "breaking the mold" and trying something different. If I came across as stronger than that, it was not intended. I simply view that as one tick mark that should go in their "Pros" column - not the "Cons". That's all.

 

I think it's purely a savior in the PR sense, initially. But by the time they start to make a few bucks, the prices should have gone down -- like any new tech, and they should be selling like hotcakes. (assuming gas stays high, of course)

Not to mention a leapfrog in tech over the prius.