Sunday, December 11, 2005
A Minor Obsession
I have another albeit minor obsession: watching General Motors' super-slo-mo meltdown.
As such, GM CEO Rick (Boy Wonder) Wagoner's whiny piece in the 6 December Wall Street Journal was particularly entertaining.
By way of background, Wagoner got the job with apparent mandate of, you know, juicing things up.
He was so successful, a year or two in, he had to bring in Bob Lutz to, well, in effect, do the most important stuff for which Wagoner was appointed CEO. (Lutz is an Alpha-male outsider but he is brilliant and really knows the industry.)
Four years in, Lutz has failed to do that job. So let's briefly go to the numbers: About six years in (IIRC), neither Wagoner nor his double, as it were, can say "Mission Accomplished" (to coin a phrase).
Wagoner and GM have a couple of major problems.
In the car biz, sex sells. A successful (profitable or profit-generating) vehicle has to be attractive. Sports cars (outside of Porsche -- and not even there these days -- and Lotus are exceptions) are irrelevant. A successful luxury brand is minimally relevant at best -- and it's too early to tell whether Cadillac will be a player or is just a fad.
But a vehicle that is just well designed (I do not mean styled although good styling's a plus) and well and dependably built is attractive too -- look at Toyota and Honda.
All Wagoner says apropos that is to whine that GM's building their best vehicles ever. Well, Ricko, every manufacturer (except Mitsubishi) can say that -- and if they want to stay in business it damn well better be true.
It's called keeping up with the competition. OTOH, who care if the new Buicks are better built than a Lexus -- they are, in a word, somnolent. And derivatively styled. (All GM Chevy and Buick sedans have to look like old Ford designs.)
Wagoner manages to avoid discussing a few minor points of more importance than what he does whine about:
GM has another source of major expense besides legacy healthcare that it stupidly, desperately, thoughtlessly agreed to years ago and Delphi and too many plants and idiotic joint ventures and investments: The need to shutter a huge number of dealerships. Part of the problem is to provide enough product for the oversized pipeline. Which GM can no longer afford to do. And never will again.
And then there's the need for some sort of national healthcare. The private sector has successfully f---ed up in this country.
But of course that genius, Wagoner, doesn't want that.
What's good for GM is still good for, well, at least a small segment of this country but its CEO is happy to show everyone that he knows neither what's good for GM nor what's good for America.
(If you have access to the Journal, read the piece; it's entertaining enough: http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB113383985657014845.html)
CORRECTION (sort of): a review in the Times, of all places, reminded me: Besides a few trucks in the top ten of sales month after month, the Impala is there pretty consistently and almost as consistently has been the Pontiac G6. (OTOH, I don't know whether these sales numbers would include fleet sales.) So given all the trucks and cars in the top ten, why is the company hemorrhaging? Still say it's a dearth of attractive product. And healthcare. And Delphi. And the infrastructure twins, the dealer network and excess capacity. Everything Wagoner doesn't mention. So we'd have to add: Clueless management.
As such, GM CEO Rick (Boy Wonder) Wagoner's whiny piece in the 6 December Wall Street Journal was particularly entertaining.
By way of background, Wagoner got the job with apparent mandate of, you know, juicing things up.
He was so successful, a year or two in, he had to bring in Bob Lutz to, well, in effect, do the most important stuff for which Wagoner was appointed CEO. (Lutz is an Alpha-male outsider but he is brilliant and really knows the industry.)
Four years in, Lutz has failed to do that job. So let's briefly go to the numbers: About six years in (IIRC), neither Wagoner nor his double, as it were, can say "Mission Accomplished" (to coin a phrase).
Wagoner and GM have a couple of major problems.
In the car biz, sex sells. A successful (profitable or profit-generating) vehicle has to be attractive. Sports cars (outside of Porsche -- and not even there these days -- and Lotus are exceptions) are irrelevant. A successful luxury brand is minimally relevant at best -- and it's too early to tell whether Cadillac will be a player or is just a fad.
But a vehicle that is just well designed (I do not mean styled although good styling's a plus) and well and dependably built is attractive too -- look at Toyota and Honda.
All Wagoner says apropos that is to whine that GM's building their best vehicles ever. Well, Ricko, every manufacturer (except Mitsubishi) can say that -- and if they want to stay in business it damn well better be true.
It's called keeping up with the competition. OTOH, who care if the new Buicks are better built than a Lexus -- they are, in a word, somnolent. And derivatively styled. (All GM Chevy and Buick sedans have to look like old Ford designs.)
Wagoner manages to avoid discussing a few minor points of more importance than what he does whine about:
GM has another source of major expense besides legacy healthcare that it stupidly, desperately, thoughtlessly agreed to years ago and Delphi and too many plants and idiotic joint ventures and investments: The need to shutter a huge number of dealerships. Part of the problem is to provide enough product for the oversized pipeline. Which GM can no longer afford to do. And never will again.
And then there's the need for some sort of national healthcare. The private sector has successfully f---ed up in this country.
But of course that genius, Wagoner, doesn't want that.
What's good for GM is still good for, well, at least a small segment of this country but its CEO is happy to show everyone that he knows neither what's good for GM nor what's good for America.
(If you have access to the Journal, read the piece; it's entertaining enough: http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB113383985657014845.html)
CORRECTION (sort of): a review in the Times, of all places, reminded me: Besides a few trucks in the top ten of sales month after month, the Impala is there pretty consistently and almost as consistently has been the Pontiac G6. (OTOH, I don't know whether these sales numbers would include fleet sales.) So given all the trucks and cars in the top ten, why is the company hemorrhaging? Still say it's a dearth of attractive product. And healthcare. And Delphi. And the infrastructure twins, the dealer network and excess capacity. Everything Wagoner doesn't mention. So we'd have to add: Clueless management.
Website Counters
