No, this certainly isn't another "Red-Ink" Rick diatribe. Buickman has done enough of those. Instead, some praise of Rick Wagoner from Peter DeLorenzo, for things Wagoner is doing right. Let's make sure that, in the midst of daily challenges to GM and the American auto industry, including the latest proposal from Jerry York, we don't forget the things which are right about GM. It is excerpted from the autoextremist.com website:

" . . . I have to give Rick his due, he is focused on engineering a turnaround in the 'right' way - and I see real, demonstrative progress. When I say the 'right' way, I mean that Rick Wagoner has always tried to take into account the constituencies involved and those who are inexorably invested in the future of GM. There are literally hundreds of thousands of people - generations of families - who have made their livelihoods working for General Motors. And the challenges facing GM in health care costs, pensions and global competitiveness are challenges facing corporate America and our nation as a whole. Rick and his team are trying to do what's right for everyone involved the right way. There are no shortcuts or instant fixes available. It's a gradual and more often than not an excruciatingly painful progress."

Another two step drop in credit and market share at 22% and falling, you can't possibly be serious!

Buickman: I'm quite serious because there are two sides to every story, and we've heard about your plan over and over, ad nauseum. People have questioned you or challenged your statements, but you typically ignore their questions or don't fully respond. Just since June 27th, you've started no fewer than six threads in "General Motors News" alone, and they're all negative. To balance those, I think it's about time for some praise of Rick Wagoner and an appreciation for what he has done right. Mr. Wagoner remains in a very tough spot, and I hope that this present assault by Jerry York won't derail the progress GM is making under Mr. Wagoner's leadership. Mr. DeLorenzo's words, expressed in light of York's proposal, no doubt carry some weight (much more than my individual opinion would), so I quoted him.

No one is completely in the wrong, so let's see exactly what we can come up with that he's done right, should be interesting.

Delorenzo is completely correct in that while it's taking some time, Wagoner seems to be doing it the right way. Sure, GM is still in trouble, but not nearly as much trouble as it was 18 months ago. No one is going to come into GM and magically turn the whole corporation around at the snap of their fingers. Sure, Ghosn turned Nissan around in a short time, but Nissan is no where near as big as GM. I'd say GM is probably 4 times bigger than Nissan, so Wagoner should get more time to turn it around.

Buickman: You have plenty of your own threads to rant about Wagoner's "wrong doings," do not hijack this thread and make it into another long rant. If you want to contribute, you must do so rationally like everyone else. If you do intend to hijack this thread, don't be disappointed when you find that your posts have been removed.

I believe that Wagoner is trying to do right for the workers of GM to the best of his ability, and I believe he deserves credit for that. Also, he knows his weakness when it comes to product development, which is why he brought in Lutz, and hopefully we will be delighted when Lutz vehicles debut for the 2008 model years.

Well, I see product, the public's perception of GM, and the UAW contract as the three major problems. I'll take a brief stab at the former. Mr. Wagoner has given Bob Lutz, a so-called "car guy," the responsibility and authority to strengthen their product portfolio on a global basis. In the U.S., they know that it takes more money than they have to keep eight brands thriving, so GM identified Chevrolet and Cadillac as full-line bookends. For the others, they used Opel and Holden to help create new line-ups. No makes were cut, but overlap is being eliminated. Mr. Wagoner said they had to put the money where they had momentum. Given the extreme competition in the marketplace, how could that be better? In the last year, GM has resisted slapping huge incentives on cars, looking at sales and residual values in the long-term. Also, GM has cadenced various new, strong products throughout all their brands, including the Escalade et al., the 900 trucks, new Saturns, and the Lambda crossovers, to then be followed by global RWD including Camaro and a new Impala and new Lucerne (Statesman) and Epsilon II. Meanwhile, GM is doing great in China, and I'm proud to say Buick is #1 there, and GM is presently attempting a stronger presence in Europe with the Cadillac BLS. Product is coming back in a big way, perhaps not fast enough for everyone, but, clearly, GM has people excited with the Camaro and other future vehicles.

The biggest positive I see is the promotion of Fritz Henderson, an accomplished, straight shooter who has recorded success. I distinctly recall him being questioned about GM's results a little over a year ago and he responded the "We probably didn't do everything we could have." No "spin" just frank remarks which was impressive considering the lack of honest assessment usually offered. The man made signifcant progress in Latin America and Europe. This is more than can be said of Lutz, who really hasn't done much. The Solstice looks good but is not available in any numbers to amount to anything. The new Buicks, while nice, are bland. I had much higher expectations from someone with his track record. I will however give Wagoner credit for bringing in talent bound to steal some thunder. In doing so, Rick put his ego behind what he perceived as being in the company's best interest.

Buickman

Edited July 2, 200619 yr by buickman

Remember that the first true Lutz products just started rolling out not long ago. The Lucerne, while reworked by Lutz, is not 100% Lutz. Products that are 100% Lutz are: Solstice, Sky, Aura, T900s, Lambdas, new CTS. I may be missing a couple, but that's most of them.

Buickman, staying with product, how about the improvements in GM's interiors?

AFTERTHOUGHT EDIT: And value pricing.

Edited July 2, 200619 yr by wildcat

I never gave serious thought to a brand new Malibu/G6 because the interiors, while not bad, aren't as good as the Fusion, the Fusion has more 4cyl HP and offers a stick. GM has made great strides in products the last few years, but they're still a generation of cars away from selling the best cars on the market.

That's true, but to call for Wagoner's ouster will not improve those interiors. Time will. (Mind you, GM better be on top of the game starting yesterday and from here on out!)

I'm not calling for Wagoner's ouster, GM has improved the product so much in the last 3 years its unbelievable. I've said it before, getting rid of Wagoner would slow GM's roll, someone else would come in and possibly re-evaluate all of the new programs, slowing their introductions and letting the competition improve.

Satty: No, I meant calling by you-know-who for Wagoner's ouster, indictment, hanging, etc. You and I are in agreement, to put anyone else in the top chair would delay GM's progress. As I stated, this thread was, hopefully, to somewhat balance the negative thinking on someone else's part and recognize the good things Mr. Wagoner has helped to accomplish.

Valiant effort, but you-know-who wont get into any debate in which he would be forced to say that Wagoner has made improvements or that The Plan doesn't address many of the biggest issues plaguing GM.

Buickman, staying with product, how about the improvements in GM's interiors?

AFTERTHOUGHT EDIT: And value pricing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The interiors are definitely improved, however the color offerings are still less than dynamic. The Lucerne is outstanding inside, if still lacking on the outside. The vehicle should have full width tail lamps to give that "Buick" look.

Value pricing is nothing more than a method of reducing dealer margin while proclaiming a lower price. In reality it is deception, part of the reason GM lacks credibility. Granted, taking some of the fat out of the structure was needed, but it should have been done properly, not under false pretenses.

Buickman

Another two step drop in credit and market share at 22% and falling, you can't possibly be serious!

would you rather some more firesales, or complicated incentive programs? or a short term loss in sales to improve brand perception...

would you rather some more firesales, or complicated incentive programs? or a short term loss in sales to improve brand perception...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually Tim we went through just such a slow period in June, consequently VSSM leadership came with Zero. It seems that each time we go through the stagnant time you mention, they zoom back in with another whiz bang program. I suffered financially, as you probably did as well, then proceeded to clean up at month end. I made a small fortune but would have preferred to let nature take it's course and gradually build momentum over the long haul by consistently doing the right things each day. Instead we will suffer tremendously as the program ends and buyers are non existent having been pulled early into the market as GM once again targets bottom feeders and continues our portrayal as merchandise only desired at fire sale prices. Again, I reiterate, GM has no clue about retail automotive and can only cut their way to temporary profits at the expense of the company's long term health.

Buickman

Edited July 3, 200619 yr by buickman