Bob Lutz - Is he making the grade?

wale_bate1 · March 2005

God love ya, Lemko, and they may be a couple others out there, but fact is GM isn't grabbing 'em.

Merc: I just beg to differ somewhat on Buick/Lexus. I'm in ES330s from time to time, as, along with the RX, it's the favored loaner from a Lexus dealer. I'm also in a variety of Buicks from time to time as it's the typical Emerald Aisle offering from (ugh) National. I can, and do, draw the parallel with ease between any number of outgoing Buick models and the ES.

I'm not saying they're there, but they are most certainly within striking distance, and if the LaCrosse is the improvement everyone seem to insist it is, they're very close indeed. But that's one model.

lemko · March 2005

...is at least a far more likeable guy than Roger Smith. Roger Smith personifies all that is wrong with GM.

imidazol97 · March 2005

Are the Buick rentals the base models, special models, highly equpped? Which Buicks? Century? LeSabre? Park AVe?

varmint · March 2005

...produced a success non-sporting vehicle?

I mean, he certainly has a strong reputation for developing cars for the driving enthusiast. That's good. But GM isn't getting handed their arses for not building a decent Corvette. They're getting trounced in the boring, family car segments. The minivans are wretched, small cars are sub-par, sedans are uninspired... Has Lutz ever succeeded with a basic, non-sporting vehicle?

Grbeck - Very true. It seems the whole company needs an enema. That's a lot to ask of one man.

mariner7 · March 2005

The common thought is big 3 are at disadvantage because they have to pay for healthcare benefits of retirees. Well, I assume MB/VW/Toy/Honda also have retirees who also need health care. The European system is the government pays for it. But ultimately it's those companies and employees who finance that system by paying higher taxes. That health care the German government provides doesn't come free. You can say the German companies are at a disadvantage compared to Detroit because their companies and workers are taxed more heavily.

I'm not sure about the Japanese system, but their personal savings rate is sky hi and their government spending is much lower than Europe. So my guess is their retirees are expected to pick up much more of the health care costs.

Any way the retiree health care costs have to be paid, Europeans pay thru the government, Americans thru employers, Asians thru individuals!

I think the whole problem comes down to GM/Ford can't seem to come up with a hit anymore, even if their lives depend on it. Let's count all the new cars coming out during last year:

Chevy: Malibu, Equinox, SSR
Pontiac: GP, G6, GTO
Buick: LaCrosse
Ford: 500/Freestyle
Mercury: Montigo

If half of these models are hits on the order of 300, we'd talking about record profits for GM/Ford on these boards!

logic1 · March 2005

Some of your assumptions are incorrect.

First, Europe and Japan have national health care.

Second, Japanese government spending - and particularly Japanese spending on health care - is among the highest in the world. The Japanese government had higher deficit spending per GDP than the US at least as late as '01. Bush may have upped the anti lately.

Europe and Japan do not have significantly higher corporate tax rates than in the US. They do tax capital gains higher than in the US. In Europe, the primary tax is the Value Added, which passes through mainly to the consumer. In Japan, the primary tax is income tax on the wage earner. Japan does not tax interest earned on savings, which is why the Japanese savings rates are so high.

In both cases, the government tax policies mean fewer domestic sales. As we can see, the Japanese especially have been able to work through this by selling many cars in North America.

sls002 · March 2005

I am retired, but I have pay for my health care. I do get to stay in the group plan which means that I get a good price, but I still have to pay. When I was working, they paid the full cost of the plan, but there were deductibles that I had to pay first, so health care was not free.

You did miss the Cadillac - STS, which is not selling as fast as they have been building them.

wale_bate1 · March 2005

Well, National still runs Regals, as well as LeSabres and Park Aves. And in a variety of trims, depending on location. Out of LAX higher trims are common. I haven't flown in about five months, but prior, I was in the air about twice a month.

In many ways, the experience is very like an ES330. It's not quite as plush or as well turned, obviously, with regard to materials, but it's darn close in image, feel, driving dynamics and overall experience. Darn close.

If the LaCrosse is half the improvement I hear it is, then the gap is getting pretty small, IMO.

sls002 · March 2005

had a "buy it back" notice from the Buick/Pontiac/GMC dealer. Supposedly, all Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles are in "high demand" and they will buy mine back. I will be able to trade it for a new buick/pontiac/gmc/ford/lincoln/mercury. I should go in and give them a bad time, but still look at the left over GTO's. Perhaps they would pay me to take one.....

sls002 · March 2005

The Lexus ES is basically a Camry. How does the ES compare with a real Lexus, say the LS or even the GS?

davem2001 · March 2005

Yeah, I said up in 220, maybe "American Muscle", sort of where Dodge is trying to go with the Magnum, Charger, etc...

Not necessarily the "ribs and wings" (LOL!) but an "American" look instead of the sorta "generic" look of the G6, GTO.

I don't see any difference between Pontiac's new look and Saturn's new look. (well, OK, they have a different grille)

Which then leads us back to, GM has too many divisions...

lemko · March 2005

"Supposedly, all Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles are in "high demand" and they will buy mine back."

Really? No wonder my girlfriend got such a great trade for her wretched 1999 Olds Cutlass sedan. I wonder what we'd get for our Sevilles? Maybe I could get a hot STS-V at a discount!

mariner7 · March 2005

Remember last year when big 3 were about to launch a big car offensive to take back market share. They all told us, "It's all about products."

They were only partly right. It's all about hit products!

Dieter Zetsche of Chrysler is still saying, "It's all about products." Unfortunately, he's the only one among the big 3.

strager · March 2005

If I were on the GM BOD, I'd recruit Carlos Ghosn and let him fire all the old guard. Something drastic needs to be done to save this American icon from eventual bankruptcy.

stickguy · March 2005

It's a bit misleading to say that imports don't pay for healthcare. They do, indirectly, through taxes. THe government has to get the money somewhere to pay for it.

stickguy · March 2005

to me, is a failure, if they products aren't good. I think you need a car guy to concentrate on the product, and business people to worry about selling them. It's hard to work both sides of the street (like being a GM and head coach in the NFL).

Chrysler proves that if you can make the product, people will come. Hopefully he will have some big ones soon, but if the HHR is any indication, I'm not holding my breath.

wale_bate1 · March 2005

How do you mean?

Inside, IMO, they're all very similar in materials and overall styling, with the LS simply being moreso. I can't claim much seat time in any LS (it appeals to me very little), but a friend down the block owns one in black, so I've rideen in it. I've been out wheeling in a few GS's, and my ES experience is broader than I'd ever like. Plush and isolating are those three offerings. Attention to comfort.

The GS has some handling capability, but without the 430 is underpowered, and feels it. I recuse myself from judging the LS. It's not something I would want to drive, personally, and indeed I haven't.

BTW, though the Camry soul is very apparent, I don't think it's fair to call the ES a Camry. It's like calling an Accutron basically a Bulova, or an Ovation basically an Applause. Technically, it might be true, but in execution not so...

So for a long run on any freeway, or even around town for groceries and a pharmacy visit, I don't see much advantage to the ES over a trimmed Buick, frankly. Philosophically, they've become very closely related, and in execution, they're really not that far apart. Even on reliability I think Buick's marks have been historically better than typical GM, if not the highest GM has accomplished.

So I think Lutz could take a piece of the ES pie with a little more work. I don't think they compete at any level with the GS, LS, RX, and they certainly have nothing near as hip as an IS!
;-)

wale_bate1 · March 2005

I think that's a fair question.

I think we're all hoping for some trickle-down here, varmint. First-off, I'd say yes, but the success was in motion before he got there. No matter your feeling on the styling, inside or out, of the CTS, it is a success and a family sedan at that. The translation has yet to be made to other levels, other marques, but success it is.

I'm hoping for great things from more enthusiast's models. Sky and Solstice are ones I'm watching eagerly. These are going to be weather vanes for Lutz's tenure I think. If the press likes them, the public will buy them I think. It's not a high-volume family sedan, but it's not a lux or near-lux pricing segment bid either.

If they're hot and some of that rubs off on a new sedan or two, some turnaround could be scented, like a far off fox to the hounds...

davem2001 · March 2005

Another thing to consider, there will be a RWD Buick sedan hitting the market fairly soon.

lemko · March 2005

...too soon. Cadillac's comeback took a long time. It began back in 1992 with the introduction of the exponentially better Seville and Eldorado. I bet if there was no Lutz at GM, the LaCrosse would still have the same ugly Century/Regal interior. I see a stark contract to pre-Lutz GM and now at the Buick dealer. A LeSabre is parked next to a LaCrosse. Peek inside both cars and the difference is apparent.

sls002 · March 2005

I wondered if the ES was closer to a Camry than it was to the LS, in terms of isolation (harshness, noise, vibration). I think that you may have answered my question though.

hammen2 · March 2005

Someone brought out the point if Lutz has ever been involved with a successful car that was non-sporting in design.

I think this bears further thought. The Viper as "halo car" was one of his big claims to fame at Chrysler. So, what does he try to do? Give every GM division (sans Buick) a halo. Chevy's had the Vette and gets the SSR (oops), Pontiac gets the GTO (Monaro), Caddy gets the XLR, et. al. So, that's not helping.

Next he tries to push the sporty small car market (Miata competitor) with the Kappas (Solstice/Sky). I think they'll sell their 20k of each, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to the success of the new Chrysler 300.

Look at the new Impala - a fairly "clean" design. But it doesn't stand out. No risk, no reward. I remember one of Lutz's quotes when he first took the job at GM was that the problem was, no kid came home and told Dad that they needed to go out and buy a Chevy Lumina. So, what comes off Chevy's drawing boards for the 2006 Impala? A car that looks amazingly similar to what an evolution of the 1995 Lumina would look like. Clean, bland, but not compelling.

Look at the old Chrysler 300 - pretty vanilla compared to the new one, and not nearly the sales success. I am beginning to question his sense of style for non-sporting cars - this is assuming he has any say-so (I know he fixed the "beaver-like" front end for the 2004 Grand Prix, and killed the Regal replacement to allow for the La Crosse's clean but bland styling).

If you don't swing for the fences once in awhile (for a mainstream car, not just a halo car), you don't end up winning the game. That seems to be a huge problem for GM right now.

--Robert

sls002 · March 2005

The XLR was already off the drawing boards when Lutz was hired. Lutz really can't take credit or blame for the XLR. However, the GTO was all Lutz's doing, as well as the Kappa's. The LaCrosse was off the drawing board too, but Lutz delayed it to upgrade the interior mainly. So the body style is probably Buick's fault, but the interior fit and finish is Lutz's fault/credit. He may have had some impact on the Lucerne styling, but it too was off the drawing board when he got involved. The Lucerne's taillights are just bland, like the LeSabre...

hammen2 · March 2005

You do have to give him credit for _trying_ to improve the interiors. That much has changed. Of course, they're not as good as they should be, due to beancounting and supplier material changes (see C6 'Vette).

I think Lutz said the first car to bear his total imprint was the G6. I drove one home one night when my GTO was in the shop, and wasn't impressed (the A-pillars are just huge). Honda-ish front, Neon-ish rear.

But you bring up another point... derivative styling. That's what GM seems to want to do. Steal the front grille from one vehicle, headlights from another, taillamps from a third. Not only does the car not seem to "flow" sometimes, it also tends not to stand out.

Overpriced cars, huge rebates, low resale, past issues with reliability (may or may not be over), and bland styling = huge sales problem. Let's also not forget about poor marketing...

There's also the issue of GM's inability to launch a car complete - usually the engine intended for the car doesn't arrive until a year or so later (see Olds Intrigue 3.8->3.5, Pontiac G6 3.5->3.9, et. al.). As I've said before, you only get one chance to make a first impression...

--Robert

strager · March 2005

According to Toyota and Honda, it takes them 2 years to redesign cars like the Camry and Accord. As an example, for the redesigned 2007 Camry due around August 2006, Toyota probably started in August 2004.

Lutz has had plenty of time since he came on board in Sep 2001 to redesign every one of the vehicles in GM's lineup to his satisfaction, if GM had the budget to do that. In my book, Lutz takes the blame/credit for all the vehicles that GM has come out within the last few months.

Time for Lutz to retire. I'm convinced that GM needs radical surgery from the likes of Carlos Ghosn.

merc1 · March 2005

"As for "cheap" plastic - heck ALL cars are plagued by plastic interior bits. In my book, ALL plastic is cheap whether it's in a Kia or a Maybach."

You're right all car have plastic bits, but they surely aren't all cheap and most aren't nearly as cheap as most GM "plastic bits". You must not have been in a Mercedes CLS or any Audi because their plastic isn't cheap at all. IMO, this is just an excuse to let GM off the hook for their miserable interiors, not all of them, but most.

I agree, anything is better looking than the ES330, but the LaCrosse a remodeled Grand Prix. Its hardly a seperate car/platform, so GM is just doing the same thing as Toyota did, take a lesser car and dress it up. Its one thing to say it has gauges like a Lexus but to say its built like a Lexus overall simply isn't true.

M

merc1 · March 2005

You're right plastic is plastic and the only way to make one car differ from another is the finish and the way all fits together. This is where GM hasn't a clue on some of their models.

Saying the LaCrosse is better than the Regal or Century isn't say much because those cars were truly awful. Yes I've been in the LaCrosse, wasn't impressed. Take a look (a first look according to you post) and let me know what you think.

M

grbeck · March 2005

This past weekend I finally saw a few Cobalt sedans on the road. What surprised me was how much the Cobalt resembles the Neon from behind.

Between the Cobalt and the upcoming Chevy HHR, it looks as though GM has a case of "Chrysler Envy" when it comes to styling.

The whole manner in which Lutz was brought in to GM highlights the problem. It's as though GM management expected Lutz to make some quick, easy fixes and then bow out gracefully, without upsetting the apple cart TOO much. The finance people, meanwhile, would still hold all of the REAL power.

As for Lutz himself - I agree that he is too enamored of "halo" cars. The Sky and the Solstice are beautiful cars, but two-seat sports cars are not enough to turn around a lackluster brand. Mazda, after all, still hit the skids despite the success of the original Miata. GM needs something that either makes the Accord and Camry quake in their boots, or does an end-run around them (Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger).

But Lutz doesn't seem too interested in producing that kind of car. And I certainly hope that he doesn't view the upcoming Impala as fitting into either one of those categories.

merc1 · March 2005

"Merc: I just beg to differ somewhat on Buick/Lexus. I'm in ES330s from time to time, as, along with the RX, it's the favored loaner from a Lexus dealer. I'm also in a variety of Buicks from time to time as it's the typical Emerald Aisle offering from (ugh) National. I can, and do, draw the parallel with ease between any number of outgoing Buick models and the ES."

Ok then you answered my next question:

"It's not quite as plush or as well turned, obviously, with regard to materials, but it's darn close in image, feel, driving dynamics and overall experience. Darn close.

I agree, which is what angers those Lexus owners on the other boards. I've long said that a Lexus is pretty much for the Buick crowd (except the GS/IS) and the fans of yester year Cadillacs and the current DeVille. This is why the RX/ES/LS are their biggest sellers not the IS and GS. Even the press has said as much, especially about the SC430, calling it the new Rivera. I think Lutz, with a bigger budget could duplicate the ES/RX experience, but not the overall presentation of the LS, but he'd come close if given the money and a proper rwd/V8 platform.

M

nvbanker · March 2005

"Lutz has had plenty of time since he came on board in Sep 2001 to redesign every one of the vehicles in GM's lineup to his satisfaction,"

Sure, if Lutz worked for Toyota and Honda, he could possibly do it. For one thing Honda makes about 24 cars, not 24 LINES of cars...... But GM is built on the principle of that nothing can be changed anytime soon - I'm no where convinced he has had enough time to do much we can see yet at all. Remember too, that Lutz was originally a Ford guy, though we all remember him now, as a Chrysler guy. And GM, is nothing like either of the former. He's is in over his head there.

merc1 · March 2005

IMO, Chrysler has always lead the domestics on one thing - styling. Especially in recent years. If nothing else Chrysler always looked good no matter how bad a car they were.

M

mariner7 · March 2005

"or does an end-run around them (Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger). "

That's a great way of putting it. 300 combines old world (Hemi) and new world (3.5 SOHC), and doesn't compete with any import sector.

Even if poor Bob dreams up a concept similar to 300 (and GM has all the ingredients, drop 'Vette engine into a 4 door GTO), he'd never do it. It'd undercut GM's prized Caddies too much. 300C has more power than STS V8 for just over half the price. Ditto 300C SRT8 and STS-v!

We've all heard they can't move Caddies w/o huge incentives. Part of it is overproduction, part of it is 300C.

merc1 · March 2005

I think the STS in particular is just way overpriced, especially the V8 version. Ditto for the XLR. I think GM thought because of the CTS' success that Cadillac was back and their image was restored. Not only are they priced like the Germans, but the Japanese have 3 new entries in the STS' class that cost either less or the same, and we know what the public thinks of the Japanese's quality. It will be interesting to see how long they take this stance of no incentives on these Cadillacs.

M

davem2001 · March 2005

Between the Cobalt and the upcoming Chevy HHR, it looks as though GM has a case of "Chrysler Envy" when it comes to styling.

Well, the guy who designed the PT Cruiser, Brian Nesbit, now works for GM

davem2001 · March 2005

Yeah, I agree- I do like the STS and the XLR, but when it comes to actually buying one, I think they are somewhat overpriced....I like the STS a lot better at $45K than at $62K if I'm a buyer

merc1 · March 2005

Yeah I too kinda like the XLR too, it really is something to see one on the road, very rare. I've seen some with the right size wheels and tires and man does it turn heads. The standard wheels/tires look way too narrow. They should have priced the XLR at the SC430 level or a little less than the XK8 imo.

M

lemko · March 2005

...is overpriced. The ceiling for the STS should be around $55K, (loaded - everything in and on it) and the V-6 version should start somewhere in the upper $30K range. I would buy a new STS in a minute if it weren't for the ridiculous price. As a result, my next Caddy may end up being a DeVille or DTS.

mkco · March 2005

I love the way Lutz keeps saying the cars that show his real design direction haven't hit the market yet. The facts say different...

1) Lutz IS responsible for the looks of Lacrosse! There was a different car (Regal redesign) planned which he killed. He delayed that Regal successor to bring out the Lacrosse -- a pleasant-looking but unremarkable design that looks merely like an improved Taurus.

2) Lutz also modified the STS from its original design. What he ended up with looks (to me) like the child you'd get if you mated the CTS and DTS. Too conservative and stodgy! (But of course, Lutz HATED the CTS..probably the most successful GM car of recent years.)

3) I think (but not 100% sure) that Lutz was the driving force behind the HHR. Does anyone really think this PT clone will be successful?

4) The GTO was his baby all the way. Case closed.

But, I know, in the future we'll get the cars Lutz REALLY was involved with. OK, we'll see how they do.

What a spinmeister!

lemko · March 2005

...if Mr. Lutz kept the LaCrosse from being another iteration of the Century/Regal with its butt-ugly interior he is already a success in my book.

Anybody have any pictures of the hard-edged prototype STS?

sls002 · March 2005

if the STS should be cheaper, then the CTS has to have a lower price too. I do think that the 2.8 liter V6 CTS is too expensive.

I think all of GM's new cars have had some of Lutz's influence. How much redoing the LaCrosse got after Lutz delayed it I don't know. The Lucerne was also delayed at the same time. The interiors certainly got a big redo. Those of you who think that you know more should present your evidence in the form of links to some evidence.

I think the fact that GM hired Lutz to fix a problem indicates that GM is serious about moving in a diffent direction. Since I am not in the market for a new car, I really don't want to go to a dealership to "just look". Salepeople think you want to buy and will hound you. That is how I ended up with the 2002 Seville, even though I did not look at anything. The saleman that sold me my previous 98 Aurora thought it should be time for me to buy a new car and had just the thing...

saltysam · March 2005

Here's an opinion from a 78-yr old car guy who has owned a '65 Riviera, a '555 Ford Convert.,a XK-120,a slew of Cameros,and even an Isetta, along with the present SEC 380 and a 99 SLT.

The entire GM stable is entirely too confused and complicated for today's auto world. No more does the old tyme structure work for GM. IMHO today's buyer seeks excellence. He/She can find it if they search worldwide at the chosen price point. All these super cars are sold in the USA. GM does not market such a high degree of excellence. Vast organizational change is required if folks such as Bob Lutz are to have a chance to work their beautification schemes.
Cheers!
Bill
olde USN Fighter Pilot

transpower · March 2005

Most GM vehicles use old engines and old transmissions. How many V-8's are available? How many 5-speed, 6-speed, or CVT's are available? Does GM have anything like the Jeep Quadra-Drive II? No, to all these questions. I agree with the poster who calls himself "AnythingButGM."

sls002 · March 2005

One assumes that you are speaking of automatics, and yes GM does have a 5 speed. And, yes they have V8s, including DOHC VVT V8s. Clearly you are quite clueless.

branch2 · March 2005

Lutz is one man, an older man, and GM is the largest auto co in the world.......do you think it an embarassment that such a co would require to be 'saved' by one man????....pathetic GM.GM is it's worst own enemy...every technology, design, execution, safety, etc is last rate. Just a few recent notables.....equiping it's Lacrosse etc with archaic engines, 4sp trans.....showing them in black in commercials to hide their less than attractive design ie Ford's Five Hundred, then offers rebates because the car is uncompetitive. Saturn's CRT failure, Fiat 2 billion $ fiasco, Wagoner and prior chieftans clueless about production, another bean counter, one that will be rewarded like Smith etc with a golden parachute worth millions for having overseen yet lower market share. The Cobalt and G6, only decent cars, replacing the leading volume car of ea div after umteen years....Toyota and others had 3 generations in same period, always Kaitsu I believe ie slow progressive improvement vs GM clueless redesigns. GM saw the [non-permissible content removed] coming 30 yrs ago, yet continued to pay, pension, and retire it's most inefficient workforce the highest amounts.......now they are concerned about explosive costs??? it's ludicrous. Just look at what Ghosen did to Nissan in 5 years!!!!!........GM deserves and will be eliminated in the marketplace, probably in 10 years.

elagee · March 2005

I'm sure that my opinion has been said over and over by the previous 100 messages but my 2 cents is as follows: Except for the Cadillac and Corvette the Gm styling is drab, old fashion, and very tired. My last GM car was the 1992 STS and since then I've not owned any GM cars. Recently, my wife went shopping for a new car--hers being a 5 year old Lexus--and quickly discounted any GM models. Then she saw the Chrysler 300 and fell in love with the styling and bought the car after her test drive. Lutz needs to understand that styling is a major component considered by most buyers of new cars.

branch2 · March 2005

Furthermore, GM cars, with a few notable exceptions, rank dead last in safety, customer satisfaction, durabilty,etc.........just look at Consumers Report, MT, C & D, Autoweek,etc...even thea Koreans are killing them of late in competitive contesta......and they entered the auto business only in the last 20 years!!!!GM has demonstrated it can't get it's act together, repeatedly. It's both entertaining and sad hearing every CEO in the past 30 years proclaiming to the public 'we will turn around revenues, or market share, or earnings' The only pronouncement with any validity that we will all soon hear is GM is bankrupt, closing it's plants, and firing all it's grossly overpaid/inept mgt and line personnel ie leave the business to the automotive producers that designs attractive reliable cars.....is this rocket science or what, given they have been producing cars for about 100 years now???

branch2 · March 2005

Sometimes, usually in fact, I chock when I hear how many engineers GM employs................given the Cavalier, Trans Am, Grand Am, Regal, etc are ANCIENT RELICS before a redo........and then it's done to a very low benchmark. How can a co employ so many inept professionals for so many decades.........GM has a systemic problem, and only their elimiation in the marketplace, which surely is arriving sooner than later,will solve. Related is FMC......similar awful cars, for years.........Mustang(former), Grand Marquie, Crown Vic, Tarus, Focus, Sable, Continental, etc.......all relics, like GM......and what does this inept co do for new designs???.....use the Mazda 3 and 6 for virtually every damn car in the past few years and coming several years.......eg Lincoln's Zepher etc. This co to should be eliminated from the competitive landscape, and surely will.

gearhead4 · March 2005

Vision.
That's what it takes for someone in Lutz's position to turn a big organization like GM in the right direction. It's hard to visualize what product will sell and when.
Could Lutz forecast that the price of a barrel of oil would be at an all time high in March 2005? Could Lutz see that fickle SUV and truck buyers would find that operating costs are too high?
And what about total vehicle sales dropping? Today, even the best selling automobile in the American marketplace (Toyota Camry) must be discounted to move vehicles ($750 rebates and other incentives).

I wouldn't be too hard on Lutz.

gearhead4

logic1 · March 2005

What is the point of a post like this?

Most of what you claim is in fact, dead wrong.

GM's current lineup of vehicles in whole have above average safety, customer sastisfaction, durability and consumer ratings.

GM executives are paid fairly modest amounts, considering executive payment in the US in general.

GM has among the lowest level of middle management of any large manufacturing company on the planet.

Sure there are problems, largely related to pension and current employee medical payments. The cars could have more pizazz.

Simply throwing off fabricated complaints is a waste of everyone's time.

davies1 · March 2005

GM has been looking for easy fixes-GTO Australia-give me a break! Pumping up the HP on the GTO and Chevy ssr isn't the sales answer either. Now had they dropped one of the F bodies, say the Firebird, and concentrated their efforts on the sweet Camaro, now that would have been a good business decision. Not selling enough Camaros? Well when was the last year GM actually spent a dollar advertising them before they pulled them. GM had the answer in front of them and let it slip away.

Bob Lutz - Is he making the grade?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles