GM posts a $39B loss for the quarter
11-07-2007, 09:28 AM
#21
Registered User
Thread Starter
LOL
GM market cap $20B that's a half-year profit at Exxon.
About a year ago the company Sarah Lee (a food company I presume pound cake etc..) had a higher market value than GM.
I do think they should not be on the Dow since really they are a weak company. BUT they do make a lot of net sales (just not profit) and in turn support a lot of jobs (uAW as well as trickle down to millions of jobs) so the market share (ie. it's a weak profit company) is not the same as it's value to the economy.
The new Chrysler is cutting cars that are not selling (PT cruiser, Pacifica etc..). I think the scaple needs to be taken to GM and if it's not a money maker than it's a money loser. If it means laying off more UAW workers so be it. But I don't buy into this model that you paid for the workers (UAW contracts) so you may as well keep making the cars.
Also Lutz (I mean really) come on what has he done? He's a car guy thats all I hear. So what? If I was a shareholder I would want results (ie. profit) or else it's the CEOs fault.
GM market cap $20B that's a half-year profit at Exxon.
About a year ago the company Sarah Lee (a food company I presume pound cake etc..) had a higher market value than GM.
I do think they should not be on the Dow since really they are a weak company. BUT they do make a lot of net sales (just not profit) and in turn support a lot of jobs (uAW as well as trickle down to millions of jobs) so the market share (ie. it's a weak profit company) is not the same as it's value to the economy.
The new Chrysler is cutting cars that are not selling (PT cruiser, Pacifica etc..). I think the scaple needs to be taken to GM and if it's not a money maker than it's a money loser. If it means laying off more UAW workers so be it. But I don't buy into this model that you paid for the workers (UAW contracts) so you may as well keep making the cars.
Also Lutz (I mean really) come on what has he done? He's a car guy thats all I hear. So what? If I was a shareholder I would want results (ie. profit) or else it's the CEOs fault.
11-07-2007, 09:31 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plano
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure there have been some bad decisions along the way, but it takes money to make money and the new(er) non-truck product is just starting to roll out. The new Malibu looks to be a great car. The cross-overs are good product. There is going to be some struggle here, but I think good product will see them through. That said, they really can't afford any big mistakes with products/launches, etc.
As far as the more distant future, I like the technology decisions made with the Volt. That platform may be what saves GM in the long run.
As far as the more distant future, I like the technology decisions made with the Volt. That platform may be what saves GM in the long run.
11-07-2007, 09:31 AM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chris Stack,Nov 7 2007, 10:23 AM
I believe no, with the exception of the SoCal NUMMI plant, which is a GM-Toyota joint venture.
11-07-2007, 09:50 AM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Slithr,Nov 7 2007, 10:31 AM
I'm sure there have been some bad decisions along the way, but it takes money to make money and the new(er) non-truck product is just starting to roll out. The new Malibu looks to be a great car. The cross-overs are good product. There is going to be some struggle here, but I think good product will see them through. That said, they really can't afford any big mistakes with products/launches, etc.
As far as the more distant future, I like the technology decisions made with the Volt. That platform may be what saves GM in the long run.
As far as the more distant future, I like the technology decisions made with the Volt. That platform may be what saves GM in the long run.
They know the truck based fullsize SUV market is in the toilet, and yet they still insist on putting their 2mode hybrid in their tohoe, costing another $5k-$10k more.
While at the same time their car based fullsize SUV (outlook, arcadia, onclave) are selling like hot cakes... yet they do not want to introduce their 2mode design and charge $40k+ like the Toyota Highlander.... so they can recoupe their R&D on the 2mode system.
As for the Volt, it is another wait and see approach. Lets not forget the marketing of GM will sell fuelcell cars by 2010 promise more than 10 years ago. Lutz said it is not marketing fluff, but we will have to see until it is real.
With their reputation, it could just be to hold off their investors. And funny thing is, did you see the Volt ad on the Washington Post on 11/2? Before it is even going to be anounced that it is for sale? And in the ad, it said they do not have the battery technology to make the car.... Uh, what is the Volt ad selling?... HYPE?
11-07-2007, 09:52 AM
#26
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arlington Heights, IL
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
11 Posts
Originally Posted by marthafokker,Nov 7 2007, 01:31 PM
Uh.... there is a NUMMI plant in SoCal? I thought it was in Fremont, in NorCal.
11-07-2007, 10:23 AM
#27
I think the next year will prove Lutz's worth. It takes a while to turn an automaker from a loser to a winner. Product development is a slow process. But the fact he is a car guy, I don't know if that is a positive or a negative. Sure he said "I want the Solstice in production." and as someone who appreciates an affordable roadster, kudos, but it is not going to generate huge profits. If it does not generate the big money is that where r&d should be spent? Same with the G8.
Since they have the lions share of trucks and suv's nailed down, what are the big segments? Four door family sedan, minivan, economy car. That is where the money should go. When you have world class product in those areas generating big money, then dabble in the specialty market.
I don't know that the exciting products turn the company around first. Its the bread and butter stuff, then go for excitement. The will sell a couple hundred thousand Camaro's soon, but why does that come first when you have no minivans? Its the car guy in him that wants to revive a product line that was just axed a couple years ago for lousy sales, and basically the same product as the GTO but in nicer clothing.
DO they need a car guy, or a business mind?
Since they have the lions share of trucks and suv's nailed down, what are the big segments? Four door family sedan, minivan, economy car. That is where the money should go. When you have world class product in those areas generating big money, then dabble in the specialty market.
I don't know that the exciting products turn the company around first. Its the bread and butter stuff, then go for excitement. The will sell a couple hundred thousand Camaro's soon, but why does that come first when you have no minivans? Its the car guy in him that wants to revive a product line that was just axed a couple years ago for lousy sales, and basically the same product as the GTO but in nicer clothing.
DO they need a car guy, or a business mind?
11-07-2007, 10:37 AM
#28
They need Carlos Ghosn in there. Slash what's not working, hold off on major new product, and just get a better grip on what you're currently making.
The thing is, they've already done that, to some degree. Their new SUVs are excellent, their trucks are great, and their new cars are leaps and bounds ahead of their predecessors. They just have a few gaps that need filling, mainly in the low end of the spectrum.
They don't have a single remotely competitive small car in their lineup and their medium-sized cars aren't exactly stellar either (though they're a lot better). They've put so much focus on their big vehicles (SUVs and trucks) that they're still behind on their cars. With the oil prices as they are and the push on environmental change and greater fuel economy, you know that smaller vehicles are going to grab more and more market share. Why not focus on that?
It'll be interesting to see how the new Malibu fares, as well as the upcoming G8. The Malibu may well give a nice boost to their car sales.
The thing is, they've already done that, to some degree. Their new SUVs are excellent, their trucks are great, and their new cars are leaps and bounds ahead of their predecessors. They just have a few gaps that need filling, mainly in the low end of the spectrum.
They don't have a single remotely competitive small car in their lineup and their medium-sized cars aren't exactly stellar either (though they're a lot better). They've put so much focus on their big vehicles (SUVs and trucks) that they're still behind on their cars. With the oil prices as they are and the push on environmental change and greater fuel economy, you know that smaller vehicles are going to grab more and more market share. Why not focus on that?
It'll be interesting to see how the new Malibu fares, as well as the upcoming G8. The Malibu may well give a nice boost to their car sales.
