Bluecon Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Jerome York Advices GM it is time to go into crisis mode and accelarate dividend, wage cuts, etc. http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/...406214>1=7620 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc-o Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 This is one more piece of bad news like we've been seeing for months about GM. The thing is, those heading the company don't really have much to say to counter what is being told in the media, which leads me to believe they really dont have any serious plan (I don't believe GM has an ace up its sleeve, they cant keep a secret...no news that comes out of the company is ever a surprise annoucement). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheri/ck Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 This is one more piece of bad news like we've been seeing for months about GM. The thing is, those heading the company don't really have much to say to counter what is being told in the media, which leads me to believe they really dont have any serious plan (I don't believe GM has an ace up its sleeve, they cant keep a secret...no news that comes out of the company is ever a surprise annoucement). I can't get a feel for any serious turn-around GM plan either. One thing seems obvious though - the company cannot afford a nearly 10% dividend yield on its stock. I've watched so many companies promise that the dividend will never be cut - Ford included - to only watch it happen and the stock tank another 20 or 30%. Seems like the feeling among analysts is the same - some recommend buying the stock, lots others think it will sink to $15 or so per share. And, of course, that is assuming the bankruptcy rumor doesn't catch fire again. And, this displacement on demand technology for their new SUV's and trucks - really their only new offerings coming to market soon - is not likely to play out. Once again, lots of extra stuff to go wrong for little gain in the real world in my opionion. There will not be that many times in a vehicle's life of usage that 4 cylinders or even 6 cylinders are likely to power a 5,000 pound plus or minus vehicle effectively with much mileage improvement and the tranny is likely to take a beating too. Sure glad that so far Ford has not bought into this stuff. It has not worked well for Daimler/Chrysler in their trucks although it seems to be somewhat effective in the V-8 hemi-powered lighter weight cars. Once again today - Ford stock traded up while GM stock traded down - at least the last time that I checked. There may be a much needed divergence starting to happen beween the two companies. They have different plans, different vehicles coming soon and should not be looked at like twins in the market. Ford has a shot at taking on the Japanese in the small and mid-size car market - the trucks need some help, but they are likely to get it. Not at all sure what GM has in mind that could turn such a big boat around anytime soon. Makes a person just how long all those billions of dollars will really last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 GM's pretty much is expecting the new '07 SUV's to 'save' them. But wait and see... Saab will get unloaded and Isuzu will quit the US market. Buick or Pontiac name will go, more likely Buick since the Solstice is a hit. "Pontiac Lucerne" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc-o Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 The main products GM seems to be counting on this year are its new SUVs, which by definition (SUVs!) simply won't set the market on fire. Pretty much all of its new vehicles over the last two years have fizzled out, yet these were the ones supposed to turn the company around. I don't care how much of a success the Solstice is (it's by no means a home run though), one low volume roadster isn't going to save a ship the size of GM. Like cheri said, cylinder deactivation isn't going to overcome 60$/barrel oil, hybrids certainly haven't. At least Ford is in a better position, even though it might not appear so to a casual observer... the thing with GM is they are running out of outs: if they sell GMAC they generate cash but lose the only consistently profitable part of the company; if they cut their deficit they will still be losing money but their stock will simply tank; if they do nothing they'll keep bleeding billions a year (a quarter?), if they make executive changes they'll further destabilize the company and still have to deal with the problems; if they do what Kerkorian wants he'll likely dismantle the company anyways. So where are the positives? A new Tahoe that can do 21mpg? GM is in so much trouble it's not even funny anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted January 11, 2006 Author Share Posted January 11, 2006 (edited) http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic...ION01/601110336 http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic...ION03/601110400 Detroit News editorials on GM Edited January 11, 2006 by Bluecon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bec5150 Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 (edited) The new SUV's are NOT going to save GM. I don't consider a 35-40K SUV a "bread and butter" money maker. It's a borderline nieche vehicle at best. One of the things that both Ford and Chrysler have done in the last 25 years is come out with groundbreaking products. Even AMC did this. Look at the list: Cherokee (AMC), Taurus, Caravan, Dodge Ram (remember Dodge's truck prior to the Ram?), Mustang, Neon, Focus, Explorer, F150 at every redesign, Dakota. In each case, these cars were in some small, or even big way, groundbreaking and, most importantly, HIGH VOLUME!!. GM? Their groundbreakers have been the "Dustbuster" van, Fiero, Aztek, Citation (the recall king!!). And on the off chance them do make a product that gets the job done, it's usually in a low volume line like Caddy or a Corvette. In each of these cases, either the product was a "me too" reaction to a product on my "Chrysler/Ford" list or an out the box effort that tanked big time. And when Aztek tanked, what did GM do? Oh, let's change the body shape a bit and take this Gen Y machine and turn it into a BUICK!! MORONS!! In addition, with the exception of it's 3800 V-6, the engines that GM make are not exactly bulletproof. A buddy of mine had the head gasket blow on his cobalt at 55K. The 60 degree 3400 has been notorious for intake gasket leaks TO THIS DAY. I hate hearing "Labor labor labor" is the problem. GM needs to be more efficient and does have overcapacity, but that's not the core issue here. At an equal price, GM would make less money that Toyota BUT they still would make MONEY. If GM was making money and argued that they have to cut expenses and legacy costs to get profit margins up and have more cash flow for design, etc; I could buy that. But labor is NOT the reason they are losing money, it's poor product, pure and simple. Ford comes out with the Fusion complete with a great drivetrain, and outstanding handling. The 500 is a great car. The mustang is a hit. And the new Buick Lucerne? Heated winshield washer fluid in a 1985 Park Avenue. What a joke. The core issue is that GM has to price their products substantially below everyone else in order to move the metal. During Employee Pricing, GM sold a lot of metal and lost money on every car. Yet, the alternative of idling plants would have cost them even MORE money. And while Ford has to do this with SOME products (I bought my ranger OTD in 2002 for under $9200) GM has to do it with EVERY product. F150, Mustang, Charger, and 300C sell with modest rebates and incentives OR even sticker. But name one high volume product from the last 25 years (except for the first Saturn) that GM made or currently makes that the buyer says "gotta have it." Edited January 11, 2006 by bec5150 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 In fairness to GM's history, the X-cars were segment busters, and sold like crazy. Even though they were ugly as sin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slider71 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 This article has a nice take on things..... http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/content/1...23087/index.php :blink: $24M/day :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 GM needs a sporty all wheel drive wagon with a peppy 4 banger and a strong V-6 option. Load the car with neat stuff, cool gauges, bucket seats that are actually comfortable, kickin stereo, nice wheel and tire package.....stuff like that . Make it a midsize and make it affordable. Perception is everything....people wont buy a dependable car if it looks like crap. Look at what people are buying from aftermarket companies....and then do that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.