By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Our local Toyota dealer is pretty bad too. Last time I walked in there, I felt like I was hopping into shark-infested waters with an open wound. Nissan dealer's not bad, though. Off the top of my head, I don't even know where I'd go to look at a Chevy, as the three closest dealers to me closed, and the fourth, I can't stand (although my '85 Silverado originally came from there, when they were under different ownership)
I've had that experience as well.
My daughter purchased a Nissan Altima last year, after comparing several models. In the end, I think she may have liked the Malibu slightly more, but the dealer near her has a reputation (and I DON'T mean that in a positive way- she has a theory that many in the service dept. were former carnival workers). It was enough for her to have no problems deciding on the Altima.
So far, she really likes the Altima with the CVT, although she has said she finds the brakes extremely sensitive compared to other cars she has driven, but certainly no problem.
When I was younger (back in the 1970-80's) it was the foreign makes (at least, where I lived) that had "perceived" horrible reputations. US model dealers were pretty reputable, but no longer. I think that perception has, to a large extent, reversed itself. Of couse, it depends on the dealer, though.
I think GM may have done much better with its dealer's image if it had taken the money it threw out for the Hummer dealerships and focused it more on upgrading the Chevrolet and Buick dealerships.
Just a thought...
Yeah, I don't like them either. The Traverse is definitely the homely version of the Lambdas.
There is nothing wrong with the Altima, but it is definitely getting old. I used to like it a lot too. But as newer sedans have been on introduced, the Altima has definitely fallen back some.
I don't know why but the Traverse doesn't grab me either. I thin given the choice in those I'd take an Acadia.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
I wouldn't kick an Enclave out of my driveway if that's any consolation....
I wonder (but am too lazy to look up) how much more a similarly equipped Enclave would be vs. an Acadia.
link title
It's the CX-9 for me!
Regards,
OW
That is.......until.......you lose your steering and hit a pole. Then those "fewer" Malibu's can go by and beep. Maybe even call 911 for them w/ their OnStar.
Sonata is gonna ====== :lemon: :lemon: :lemon:
Same as it ever was.
http://www.gaskinsco.com/linkto-gm3.shtml
Rots 'o Ruck :lemon:
Regards,
OW
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/09/05/u-s-to-limit-foreign-investors-in-gm-ipo/
LOL!
I suggest to everyone who has had financial problems in the last few years, to file for an LLC, and your lack of creditworthiness will create a huge swell in wealth - our Goodwill assets will expand, and we can trick investors around the world into investing in our corporations ... tada ... end of U.S. recession. I think I'm going to take that idea onto a TV infomercial; send me $99.95 for the DVD and book on how to become a Goodwill millionaire!
Government Motors' new CEO Dan Akerson told GM employees today that the automaker will go into "attack mentality" and made a small attack of his own against the Obama administration's economic policies, noting "I vote Republican."
So GM is valuing it's names like Buick, Chevrolet, Cadillac, Corvette, GMC, its patents, and other intelligence at a lofty $30B. It sounds extremely high, given the combined value of what Saab, Hummer, and Saturn were worth last year. I guess GM justifies that value as they figure those nameplates are worth their customers loyalty to buy so many vehicles out into the future. It is a legit Accounting method, but it is a devil to an investor if they don't understand that.
The word intelligence and GM should never be used in the same sentence;)
It is a legit Accounting method, but it is a devil to an investor if they don't understand that.
True, and that is why anyone wanting to keep their investments must study both the income and balance sheet statements to investigate further to determine if a company is legitimately earning money.
The fact that GM admits it has issues with internal controls automatically tells me to stay away for now.
Not a very positive review of the 2.4 4cyl model. I can't say I'm not surprised.
Oh wait, it's German... :P
Yawner otherwise. :shades:
Damn!!!
The accountants just do as they are told so they can work 40 years at a middling salary.
But then you get back to GM, and you look at their internal organization, and wonder who caused them to fail - and you just come to the conclusion that it was everybody in GM - executives and union.
I still don't see much different in the vehicles, marketing, structure, or operating philosophy that leads me to believe GM will be successful. Odds are they will slowly drift down to Chrysler's status and marketshare. Maybe next decade, they won't be considered "too big to fail".
Well, I probably wouldn't use that strong of words, but he certainly was a terrible CEO for GM. We need accountants, Lawyers, and marketing people, but I don't like seeing them at the helm of our leading manufacturing companies.
Whitacre seems to have done ok and he was a big ad guy for a while there.
I don't know enough about here to comment, but I do remember the Compaq acquisition no being well received.
Whitacre seems to have done ok and he was a big ad guy for a while there.
Well I would have to with the backing of the government;) He doesn't hold a candle to what Mulally has accomplished at Ford.
Granted their are always exceptions.
She did such a good job she's now running for the US Senate in California!
And, another ex-CEO - Meg Whitman of eBay - is running for governor in CA.
Nah, his real problem was that he drank the Cool-Aid given out by the various schools of economics that everyone appears to love in the Western World.
So why don't any of them really work when you compare it to plain common sense? Why do they always make the problem worse?
1 - Every situation in life is a non-repeatable and unique situation. Solutions must be custom-tailored to be truly effective. This is problem #1 with schools of thought and theories, be it Psychology or Accounting. If it doesn't fit in the box neatly, you're screwed. When billions are at stake, hammering it into the box by brute force simply doesn't work.(seethe following link for a car-based visual reference of this technique at solving problems in action) :P
http://jalopnik.com/5176055/30-epic-do+it+yourself-automotive-fabrication-failur- - - es
2 - Not one of the current economic theories/schools of thought take into one simple factor. Human nature. They assume a nice and clean model based upon math and statistics. But common sense(by comparison) knows that some people will actively strive to break and destroy the system in order to profit from it. The theories don't assume this at all as part of the original scenario, and a fun way to make steam come out of your professor's ears in such a class is to ask "so how resistant to abuse and crime is this theory?"
It sounds good, it looks like it should work, but it's like having a store in a bad neighborhood without any locks on the doors. A 9 year old will tell you that you shouldn't leave your doors unlocked. But these guys just don't get it.
So if anything, I really just feel sorry for the poor guy. Because he spent his life following a rose-tinted view of economics (and management by extension) instead of one based upon reality.
Oh - and (3) - Obviously managing skills don't come from studying theories and so on. That's the other problem with people like him in general when it comes to running things. They always assume that if you try hard enough you can make it work out nice and clean(like their theories). Real management, as even a basic MBA holder will tell you automatically assumes that the situation is screwed up and your job is to merely make it less so. One guy will try to make everything "correct"(and waste tons of time NOT innovating or fixing things in the proces) and the other is happy if nothing blew up or caught on fire at the end of the day.
It's hard to do poorly when you are already at the bottom. :P
Take IBM in the early 90's. They were getting their lunch handed to them (or stolen from them, depending upon your perspective) by their competition. They had an outdated product set that was relied upon too heavily, and needed fresh thinking.
Enter Lou Gertsner. He turned IBM almost upside down in his attempt to bring back the glory (sorta like Mullaly is doing now with Ford). It took a lot of hard work, layoffs and an overhaul of the corporate culture (services? what are they and how do I sell them instead of mainframes?) but he was successful.
GM needs that out-of-the-box thinking as well from its upper management.
As for Roger Smith, I certainly don't consider him one of GM's best CEO's. However, his timing in the 80's also played into it. This was during the nadir of Detroit as the Japanese were coming on strong. Smith faced tightening finances, increased competition, an out of whack UAW payroll, soaring interest rates, etc. Back then GM stock wasn't much unlike an Utility; the stockholders wanted steady or growing dividends sucking up precious cash. I think Smith tried to do some new things to gain efficiencies to offset being hamstrung by the UAW and a poor economy. Not just Saturn, but he moved into Asian joint ventures and more automation (although Fanuc robotics would turn out to have a lot of issues). However, his cost structure also brought on cheapness and quality issues, and I think he was unable to turn the GM culture around (maybe he was too much a product of it?).
My picks for worst auto CEO of the past several decades would include Jacques Nasser (and I don't think his predecessor, Sir Whatever his name was did too well either). He took a flush and improving Ford, and IMO flushed the liquidity down the drain on a lot of foolish ventures and acquisitions. This also took leadership eyes off of the primary automotive line focus hurting quality and product development. I think those sucking noises had some impact on the desperate financial gamble that Mulally ended up having to take.
But my pick for absolute worst would be Dr Z and the Daimler Benz crew at Chrysler. Outside of the 300, they seemed to have basically destroyed product innovation and excitement while letting quality continue to fall behind the competition. I think Chrysler is struggling because of "ugly and poorly built" really hurting the company then and they are fighting with few remaining resources to turn it around today.
The guys from Hyundai will shake things up, that's for sure...check out their Sept. sales rate. Those guys at GM helped build that foundation at the High Undergarment Co.
Regards,
OW
He typically fawns over imports and yawns over anything with a Big Three nameplate.
I emailed him once and told him the "Mr. Cupholder" line. He did have enough of a sense of humor to respond that he "...liked that!".
As a 52-year old guy, I like the looks of the Cruze and detest what I think is the "boy racer" look of the Sonata (although I think the previous Sonata was handsome). Sort of like taking the girl in a black dress and pearls over the trashy-looking one with too much makeup and gaudy colors!
The Cruze is built about 35 miles from here and as GM goes here, so does the rest of the economy so I am hoping it does well. There's not much else in the economy here to be hopeful about--worst I've seen since graduating college in '80, for certain. But not being a 'sheeple', I'll still prefer living in the general area than giving it up and moving someplace else more 'popular'.
I remember in Germany and Switzerland, Toyota vastly outnumbered Honda ...I probably saw more Subarus than Honda too, especially in Switzerland. Of course Germany is very proud, so there are lots of Opels too.
I'll be back there in a couple months. Next year I hope to be able to take a trip around this time of the year, and I might spend a day or two driving through Italy.