Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleric
A) dont EVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVER try to take my cookies....or else
B) I think the internal problems within the big 3 is 3 fold
A) too many brands. Its to confusing and to much overhead to take one car and change it just enough so that its on another brand.
B) UAW- GM is a fixed cost heavy business. if the UAW strike it usually mgmt just caved because they were loosing to much money. They bleed the company dry. I read a story that a material handler (guy who moves stuff on the floor) was getting approx 60k in the 80s. That is some sick money. I think a lot of people would not mind getting payed 60k to move tihngs around.
C) they were to focused on what the customer wanted now (SUV) and could not anticpate future needs. The imports just designed better cars.
|
A: Your cookies are your cookies, and I'm not touching them!
B: Many of the internal problems have been resolved within GM and Ford. Chrysler is a disaster. Ford still pays its executives too much. GM has consolidated a lot of white collar jobs, so GM has pretty much restructured itself.
A, again (C?):
There are too many brands that overlap. Redundancy leads to waste, and GM does have a lot of it right now.
B, again (D?): The GM-UAW contract has been renegotiated. That is why GM will have significant cost reduction in 2010. This has been a problem in the past; however, this is not a core problem with the current GM.
C (E?): :seesaw: GM sold a lot of fleet cars and produced a lot of other cars without much market consideration. In other words, when 100k Civics were selling and 30k Tundras were selling, GM decided to make a larger proportion of Silverados to Tundras than Cobalts to Civics. It is all about proportions, and GM did not produce in proportion with the market. That, however, does not mean that GM made inferior cars. At the same time as GM wasn't following market proportions, it was following market trends when it came to the types of cars that needed to be released. For example, when the market decided that the Cavalier was inferior to the competition, a Cobalt was introduced; when the Camry was dominating the market, the Malibu stole its thunder. In summation, GM built amazing cars over the past several years but failed to build them in proportion to the market. Asia and Europe do not build better cars. They just happen to be better at building cars that the market likes more than the cars that the market doesn't like, like trucks and SUVs. Fundamentally, GM made a mistake, but what put GM in the trouble it has right now is the market, not the management.