đź“° Auto News GM's To Do List for 2010 - By Bob Lutz

Mook

Mr. Manager
Staff member
Admin
May 23, 2007
207,212
118,948
Elgin
Real Name
Mike
The editors at Edmunds' Inside Line have graciously given me this virtual space to write about virtually anything I want, so I thank them for the opportunity, and I'll tell you how I'm going to use it.

What follows is a to-do list for General Motors for 2010. It's technically not a list of New Year's resolutions, because that is such a trite and tired format...and, what's more, New Year's resolutions are rarely, if ever, kept. These are things that GM can, must and shall do this year. So, without further ado....

1. Remain focused on the product above all else.

GM builds cars and trucks and crossovers. That is what we do. In 2009, we were given an opportunity to continue doing so, and we must not squander that opportunity. Therefore, we are resolved, if you will, not to lose sight of the fact that if we don't build the best cars, trucks and crossovers on the planet, that opportunity will go for naught.

It may sound simple, and you may think it would go without saying, but it's hugely important and it's the most essential element that all of us here need to keep top of mind as we begin 2010.

2. Remain focused on the product above all else.
That's how important it is. I'm listing it twice. After that edict, the rest of this list is not going to be in order of importance. And, you could argue that we can't just be great to win consumers. With our image challenges, we've learned the need to be exceptional.

3. Change minds.
This is the big one. It's the most important thing we have to do, other than #1 (and #2). We have to make more people aware of what's going on in relation to #1 (and #2).

Let me digress for a moment and say that I've seen it written that GM's marketing strategy is based on the fact that the consumer is too dumb to know what great vehicles it makes. I take huge issue with that. That's an example of the media trying to ascribe some of the old GM arrogance where none exists.

It's not arrogant to think you have great vehicles, so long as you do, and to try to spread the word about them. No one at GM has said that every vehicle we have is world-class — we still have room to improve. And no one at GM, including me, has said that the consumer is too dumb to realize how good our new products are. All we've said is that the consumer perhaps is unaware of said fact. That's a far cry from being dumb.

And the typical consumer's unawareness is a result of one of two things. First, the consumer literally may not know about our products and what they offer; or second, the consumer knows of them but chooses not to consider them, for a variety of reasons ranging from a bad previous experience to a relative's bad previous experience to a neighbor down the street who has a relative who knows someone else who had a bad previous experience. In short, it's reputation.

We face an enormous reputational deficit, one that took decades to develop and one that, unfortunately, we earned. And it's going to take a long time to turn it around, but we certainly can do it. That's what our satisfaction guarantee and "May The Best Car Win" campaign were all about. Those are just the first steps to putting consumers on notice that we believe in the appeal and quality of our vehicles and we feel they deserve more consideration than they're getting. And increased GM consideration numbers from here at Edmunds and other sources show that the campaign was a very good first step.

From here, the plan is to continue to put our message out there, aggressively, and take away every last excuse people have for not trying a Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick or GMC product. We're stepping up our marketing and communications spending to ensure that, and we'll be reaching more and more consumers, especially on a grassroots level, to make sure they make an informed choice when they decide upon their next vehicle.

The best and perhaps quickest way to improve a reputation is to improve relationships with customers, because that is the nature of this business. You want customers to fall in love with your vehicle the moment they lay eyes on it, and you want them to stay in love with it when they own it. One customer at a time, one vehicle at a time. You can change the opinion of generations that way.

4. Be vigilant about quality and technology.

Of course, if you don't have the quality, reliability and durability dialed in, that's what destroys relationships and reputations. We know that as well as anyone, and other companies have also found out (or will find out) about this the hard way. We will be vigilant about quality, as well as leadership in advanced technology and fuel economy — we'll have new entries in the small-car segment that are aimed at best-in-class.

As we ramp up in the new year, we face a lot of challenges in adjusting to fewer brands and fewer nameplates and moving ever more quickly. We simply cannot afford to let things slip in the process; we cannot overlook one detail that would adversely affect quality, reliability and durability. One step up and two steps back gets us nowhere.

5. Design is still king.
I've been saying this ad nauseum for years now, so I don't feel the need to go into great detail. Suffice it to say that, like quality, we cannot afford to let our guard down on great design. It's not a difficult concept to grasp: The only way to turn an auto company around is to build vehicles that people want. Period. And the only way to build vehicles that people want is to design them so they look good. Period.

That's not to say that's the only criterion. See quality, reliability, durability and reputation, above. But you can have the world's best quality and the world's best fuel economy and the world's longest-lasting vehicles, and if all that comes wrapped in ugly boring packages, you won't sell any.

I'm proud of the strides GM Global Design has made in recent years, and the awards we've won show that people have noticed. And we will continue to put that message out (see #3). Just as we will continue to empower GM Global Design and give it the freedom it needs to create. Ed Whitacre, Tom Stephens, Ed Welburn and I are in lockstep on this one.

That's the beginning of a pretty good to-do list. There's a lot more. Continue to pursue leadership in advanced technology and the electrification of the automobile, get the Chevy Volt on the road, pay back the loans on or ahead of schedule.... I could go on, and I will go on, just not in this space. I should also point out that all of these things, and more, will be done against the backdrop of developing our four brands to their full potential.

We realize, and this may be a little inside baseball for you, that "General Motors" itself may be what someone could label a "damaged brand." (Someone might say that, but not me!) Even if that were true, and it may be, that alone would not be the reason we would choose to emphasize our brands more than the parent company. The reason for emphasizing the brands is that we're proud of them, and their heritage, and their vehicle lineups, and what they represent: a glorious past and a potentially bright future.

Besides, there may still be that one person out there who says, "GM? They went bankrupt! Took money from the government! I'm not buying any GM car! Chevrolet? Yeah, Chevrolet's OK. American car, right? I'd look at a Chevrolet..."

I'd put that guy in an Equinox in a heartbeat.

IL_logo.gif
 

Oreif

Crazy Little Child
Oct 17, 2008
1,168
2
Schaumburg
The best and perhaps quickest way to improve a reputation is to improve relationships with customers, because that is the nature of this business. You want customers to fall in love with your vehicle the moment they lay eyes on it, and you want them to stay in love with it when they own it. One customer at a time, one vehicle at a time. You can change the opinion of generations that way.

The reason for emphasizing the brands is that we're proud of them, and their heritage, and their vehicle lineups, and what they represent: a glorious past and a potentially bright future.

If the morons at GM would have realized this point back in the early 80's, They would not have ran Oldsmobile or Pontiac into the ground.
 

02BlueGT

No Fucks Have Been Given
Feb 21, 2008
9,922
18
Now apearing in Hanover Park
But you can have the world's best quality and the world's best fuel economy and the world's longest-lasting vehicles, and if all that comes wrapped in ugly boring packages, you won't sell any.

Then explain the rise of the Corolla? or many many cars during the 70's and 80's that were ugly as sin, even for the day, and did very well due to efficiency, build quality, and reliability, nothing to do with looks
 

KnightFan26917

Old Cars, Strong Hearts
Apr 28, 2009
1,132
2
Elgin IL
We realize, and this may be a little inside baseball for you, that "General Motors" itself may be what someone could label a "damaged brand." (Someone might say that, but not me!) Even if that were true, and it may be, that alone would not be the reason we would choose to emphasize our brands more than the parent company. The reason for emphasizing the brands is that we're proud of them, and their heritage, and their vehicle lineups, and what they represent: a glorious past and a potentially bright future.

Had GM emphasized the brands ... and improved relationships with enthusiasts/fans, they wouldn't have:

*shrugs*

But, what's done is done ... and hopefully things are turning the corner. We'll see....



Cort | 36swm.IL | "Mr Monte Carlo"."Mr Road Trip" | pig valve.pacemaker
WRMNshowcase.legos.HO.models.MCs.RTs.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort
"Action speaks louder than words" ... Black Crowes ... 'Hard To Handle'
 

Stink Star

Don’t Drive Angry!
TCG Premium
Jan 20, 2008
16,309
12,089
Big wood cock
its funny how all the media and politicians tout "if american companies could only make a fuel efficent small car..." or "gas guzzling suvs are the problem"... well did it ever occur to them that the products from domestic automakers are just pieces of shit? i mean bland and unappealing and cheap feeling inside? that motivates buyers more than vehicle size or fuel economy.... people bout the trucks and suv's because they like them and like having a big vehicle and it frankly was the least piece of shit thing coming out of detroit at the time... i mean honestly, a 1997 taurus sucks.... so does a 2000 impala, intrepid- fuckin joke... they are basic transportation at best, but those were the premier american sedans from the mid 90's through the mid 2000's.. no wonder the foreign companies have taken over. if it wasnt for the cheap used performance car market, i wouldnt have ever bought an american car because they are shitty and overpriced. but give me a $25000 used C5Z or a $6K camaro ss and im willing to deal with the shittyness for the fun to drive factor.

i am personally pissed at american car companies and the media... do they think that we are all stupid and dont realize they made bad cars and we will buy the media reports that claim we need smaller more fuel efficent cars and that will save the american companies? how about make a car that isnt a POS and is actually desirable.. that will be the thing that swings buyers back, not this force fed media shitstorm.
 

Turk

Lt. Ron "Slider" Kerner
TCG Premium
Jan 21, 2008
28,518
7,969
its funny how all the media and politicians tout "if american companies could only make a fuel efficent small car..." or "gas guzzling suvs are the problem"... well did it ever occur to them that the products from domestic automakers are just pieces of shit? i mean bland and unappealing and cheap feeling inside? that motivates buyers more than vehicle size or fuel economy.... people bout the trucks and suv's because they like them and like having a big vehicle and it frankly was the least piece of shit thing coming out of detroit at the time... i mean honestly, a 1997 taurus sucks.... so does a 2000 impala, intrepid- fuckin joke... they are basic transportation at best, but those were the premier american sedans from the mid 90's through the mid 2000's.. no wonder the foreign companies have taken over. if it wasnt for the cheap used performance car market, i wouldnt have ever bought an american car because they are shitty and overpriced. but give me a $25000 used C5Z or a $6K camaro ss and im willing to deal with the shittyness for the fun to drive factor.

i am personally pissed at american car companies and the media... do they think that we are all stupid and dont realize they made bad cars and we will buy the media reports that claim we need smaller more fuel efficent cars and that will save the american companies? how about make a car that isnt a POS and is actually desirable.. that will be the thing that swings buyers back, not this force fed media shitstorm.

Totally agree. People will come in here and say, well american cars are just as reliable as their import counter parts. This may be true, but perception is reality. When I sit in a German car, it just feels like it's been put together better. No cheapo plastic interior etc.
 

jason05gt

TCG Elite Member
Jan 17, 2007
15,307
7,195
Naperville
Totally agree. People will come in here and say, well american cars are just as reliable as their import counter parts. This may be true, but perception is reality. When I sit in a German car, it just feels like it's been put together better. No cheapo plastic interior etc.

Every brand has it's issues. German cars are percieved as being problematic and unreliable, Japanese cars reliable, etc.

America cars have come a long way and I firmly believe that GM & Ford will take market share from the imports in the near future. Both companies have some great products. It's just going to take a bit of time to change that perception (I feel Ford already has done this recently). 10 years ago Hyundia was looked at as junk economy cars; look at them now.
 

Bru

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
TCG Premium
May 24, 2007
40,511
10,220
^^^^ :werd:

There are some amazing domestic products out there right now. I'm not defending the big three's choices of years past, because it's mostly shit, but in the past three years alone there have been significant advances made. Well, except for Chrysler.

The Fusion's reliability is currently better than the Honda Accord (Consumer Reports). The Malibu has a better put together interior than a Toyota Camry, and much better execution of small things like iPod integration, which Toyota still doesn't grasp.
 

Oreif

Crazy Little Child
Oct 17, 2008
1,168
2
Schaumburg
When I sit in a German car, it just feels like it's been put together better. No cheapo plastic interior etc.

That's funny you feel that way when you sit in a Greman car because the reality is they use cheapo plastic as well. Every winter BMW had to replace the speaker rings on our doors because just closing the door would crack the plastic rings. The plastic covers for the seatbelt mounts cracked over time as well. I have had less plastic parts crack on our 2002 Pontiac Montana than our BMW 325Xi over the years. (Both vehicles were bought new). Hell I've had less repairs done on our 2002 Montana in 94,000 miles than what had to be repaired on the BMW in 80,000 miles. (Hence why we traded in the BMW last year and still have the Montana.)

The only difference is mounting of interior parts. Many companies use just screws. Some upper scale brands (BMW, Benx, Acura, Lexus, etc.) tend to use felt washers under the screws to eliminate squeaks over time as well as extra sound deadening material. You can take any car (Honda, Chevy, Toyota, Mopar, etc.) and pull the interior out than buy a felt washer kit and some dynaliner. This will make the interior feel like an upscale vehicle because it will be quieter and "feel" better. Most base brands don't do it because they want to keep costs down.

The truth is domestic vehicles have come a long way in terms of quality and reliability. So much so that the difference between import and domestic vehicles in the same class, in my opinion, have the same reliability and quality.
 

Aircal

TCG Elite Member
TCG Premium
Nov 10, 2008
7,132
7,865
Countryside
Real Name
Tom callahan
its funny how all the media and politicians tout "if american companies could only make a fuel efficent small car..." or "gas guzzling suvs are the problem"... well did it ever occur to them that the products from domestic automakers are just pieces of shit? i mean bland and unappealing and cheap feeling inside? that motivates buyers more than vehicle size or fuel economy.... people bout the trucks and suv's because they like them and like having a big vehicle and it frankly was the least piece of shit thing coming out of detroit at the time... i mean honestly, a 1997 taurus sucks.... so does a 2000 impala, intrepid- fuckin joke... they are basic transportation at best, but those were the premier american sedans from the mid 90's through the mid 2000's.. no wonder the foreign companies have taken over. if it wasnt for the cheap used performance car market, i wouldnt have ever bought an american car because they are shitty and overpriced. but give me a $25000 used C5Z or a $6K camaro ss and im willing to deal with the shittyness for the fun to drive factor.

i am personally pissed at american car companies and the media... do they think that we are all stupid and dont realize they made bad cars and we will buy the media reports that claim we need smaller more fuel efficent cars and that will save the american companies? how about make a car that isnt a POS and is actually desirable.. that will be the thing that swings buyers back, not this force fed media shitstorm.

But a 97 or even a 2000 camry sucks even more! Accords didn't have a better interior they just had larger plastic pieces so they had less places to rattle. Service is a huge part that no one is talking about here.......
Weither its selling or mechanical service the consumer felt ripped off and that's wha they won't forget.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 90 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant. Consider starting a new thread to get fresh replies.

Thread Info