Grab our RSS Feed
Follow us on:
AND 
AND
GM Launches its Own Rumor Dispelling Website
September 5th, 2008 | Posted in: Public Opinion
I guess GM has gotten a little tired of rumors and accusations that it must bear from the media.
The automaker has just launched a new website, replete with the fanfare of a press release.
The name says it all, GMFactsandFiction.com, and GM states new site will aim “to clarify misconceptions about the company.”
An early review of the site shows they are tackling such issues as whether they are really looking for federal bailouts and whether the Volt is vaporware. The first entry confronts why GM killed the EV-1.
Source (GM)
Posted by: Lyle
70 Responses to “GM Launches its Own Rumor Dispelling Website”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
September 5th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Feeling lazy, so I’ll repost my thoughts on it:
This is one of the craziest PR things I have ever seen out of anyone…let alone GM: A whole website to respond to harsh criticisms. Launched fresh today!
http://gmfactsandfiction.com/
Exciting topics include:
gm is looking for a government bailout
gm vehicles are not as fuel efficient as comparable imports
the Volt is vaporware
gm can’t compete
gm still doesn’t make cars that people want to buy
…it’s like they are fighting against the wind
Personal fav from the site:
Myth: GM can’t make money selling cars
Retort: Well before the recent dive in truck sales, GM was moving to increase the profitability of its cars and crossovers….Finally, although we expect the truck market to be smaller in the future, people will still need trucks. GM intends to defend its truck leadership by making sure we have the best — and most fuel-efficient — trucks available.
What? So, no…you don’t make money selling cars…and you blab on about trucks?
—–
I could live on this fantabulous new site and pick it apart for days…I won’t, but holy cow…somebody has lost it at GM. It’s like your ‘crazy uncle’ drunk again at the family Christmas party.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Statik,
Welcome to the internet. It is not unusual.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
This is hilarious:
“GM killed the successful EV-1 electric car program”
GM’s response: “The EV-1 program ended due to the lack of suitable batteries. Although many people said they wanted an electric car, when faced with a range of 80 miles or less between overnight recharges, most went elsewhere. Other carmakers’ EV programs of that era met a similar fate – the batteries weren’t ready for prime time.”
Yet…why were people protesting the crushing of the EV-1?..Why was there a ‘mock’ funeral?.. Why were people literally begging and offering CASH on the spot for it?
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Mark #3
“Yet…why were people protesting the crushing of the EV-1?..Why was there a ‘mock’ funeral?.. Why were people literally begging and offering CASH on the spot for it?”
*** *** ***
All manufacturers, Toyota, Honda, Ford, Nissa etc only leased and CRUSHED their EVs. Again, what GM did was nothing any of the others didn’t, but guess who gets all the bad press and hatred? Go figure!
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
#4 Grizzly
I don’t think this is true. Toyota came out with the EV RAV4s after GM, learned from GM’s disaster, and let users keep the RAV4s. I don’t think Ford and Nissan ever managed to get a zero emission car out, did they?
GM also didn’t do itself any favors by announcing that the cars were not going to be crushed and then having a helicopter find that it was in fact crushing them! Doesn’t do anything for your credibility.
FWIW you are correct that all manufacturers have a policy of recovering and destroying prototypes. The practice is not limited by any means to the auto sector. And everyone along with GM has always destroyed concept cars. However, in this case GM really messed up on the PR front, managing to take a good deed and turn it into a negative.
But hey, it has a chance at salvation! LOL
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Public relations is a well oiled machine at GM. I will be happy to support them in 2010 if they offer a superior product. The competition will be tough, as it should be. I’m sure most consumers are a lot more savvy these days…I hope.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
DonC #5
Honda had the EV-plus, Ford the Ranger EV etc, they all had EVs out in response to a mandate from CARB. They all ONLY leased these vehicles and then crushed them. After much wrangling, Toyota did eventually sell about 300 of the Rav4 EVs to the public for $42K apiece. The rest were crushed.
Perhaps the bias and anger toward GM is that the star of this crop of vehicles and the most advanced was without doubt the EV-1.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Not meaning to start an EV-1 debate, but would it have really hurt to sell the cars to the owners at their current value and say “You’re on your own, no warranty; we’re not responsible for anything”?
Then they could at least recoup the money they put into them (instead of just crush it…)
What’s the worst that would’ve happened?
Someone else copies it just close enough to not violate patents/etc?
That would’ve shown GM that the market was there, and they could’ve restarted their program.
I’m not one for conspiracy theories, but I wouldn’t be surprised if oil companies were the ones pressuring them to destroy this threat to oil exec’s income.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
#7 Grizzly
Thanks for the info. This is really interesting. I had no idea about the Ford Ranger or the Nissan Altra or the Honda EV plus. Cool.
I really don’t think it was bias per se. GM just went first and took it in the shorts. Ford put about 1000 Rangers on the road, but it saw what happened to GM and allowed “lease return resistors” to keep the cars — for $1. What a deal. Squeaky wheels did the grease in this case.
Nissan only had 200 cars and they were fleet placements. Interesting about these cars is that they used Li-ion batteries and some are still on the road! Nissan didn’t insist on destroying them all. That’s encouraging about battery life since these are basically computer batteries like you’d find in the Tesla. They’re lasting way longer than the estimated five years.
Honda only had about 340 cars placed. Honda allowed some people to extend the lease for a couple of years plus they came out with the Insight as the replacement so their customers had somewhere to go. I’d say if GM had come out with the Volt before ending the EV-1 program no one would have said beans.
But yes, the EV-1 was the star of the class. (A guy at my gym actually had one, he loved it). I’d say the fact it was the best, was placed in larger numbers to individual customers, who were not allowed to keep the car no matter how crazy dedicated,and who had no alternative vehicle to go to, was the reason for the uproar. The different claims didn’t help either.
This entire CA EV story is a fascinating prelude to the Volt.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
I heard the Volt was a fiberglass car like the Corvette.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
DonC #9
“This entire CA EV story is a fascinating prelude to the Volt.”
*** *** ***
It is, and it’s also a lesson. The major difference here is just what brought these cars to market, and this is what is so important to understand. Mandates don’t work, but in a market economy time and incentives do. Every one of those manufacturers found a way to beat the mandates simply because producing these vehicles would never be profitable. At that time few outside of CA would have been interested with gas a $1.30/gal.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
I can’t resist copy and pasting one more quote, that I copied and pasted.
—–
GM and other U.S. based companies are literally reinventing the automobile. This federal direct-loan program is a powerful and appropriate incentive to help spur this transformation, which is vital to our industry, and to the country as a whole.
——-
Oh is that all? The loan is vital to the country as a whole? Overstate much?
Hehe, I love it.
Side Note: I like how all the ‘myths’ have no source link to any actual reputable article that put them forward…they are just pulled out of the sky, makes it pretty hard for retort…(not that there is any part of that site that people could leave comments on anyway).
Also, who exactly is offering up these ‘facts’ in responses to the ‘myths’? Is it Wagoner? Lutz? Who authored this website, I’d like to have an actual name of a GM executive on it, who is willing to be responsible for all of these facts.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
canehdian #8
“…would it have really hurt to sell the cars to the owners at their current value and say “You’re on your own, no warranty; we’re not responsible for anything”?”
*** *** ***
GM has admitted that in retrospect they would have done it differently. Wagoner said that it was one of the worst decisions he ever made. I guess we’d all like to be able to change the past.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Interesting web site…
It seems GM is basically saying that the media tends spin stories to the negative. There is truth there…BUT
On the “GREEN” front…GM gained so much with the EV1. And, lost more than it gained with crushing the vehicle. Some kind of compromise could have been reached there…and it is called a hybrid.
Many of the hybrid owners get a sense of pride that their vehicle choice helps support the next improved version of the “car of the future”. ..whether it does help is debatable. I believe that the hybrid car has done more for battery development than thought possible. “Necessity is the mother of invention”.
GM took away the direct involvement from the EV-1 enthusiasts…and replaced it with nothing except concept vehicles. In other words, GM said you can no longer help us directly. These folks are going to keep reminding GM every chance that they get. At least until the Volts start hitting the roads. Will 2010 be soon enough? One major auto manufacturer has made hybrids more than just a PR campaign…it is becoming part of their core lineup.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Statik, #1.
I don’t see this one like you do, my friend.
I think GM really does need to promote itself in a good way.
With 66% of Americans not interested in buying American cars, GM needs
to do whatever it can to convince these people otherwise. The press really hammers GM. As you know, if the press owns the information, they can bend it all they want.
GM is just trying to help themselves out by fighting an uphill battle.
Personally, I think if the Volt is spot-on, the press will be fantastic. But right now, the site might be out of desperation?
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
I find this interesting, under the, “The Volt is Vaporware”
http://gmfactsandfiction.com/the-volt-is-vaporware/
We find this factoid as proof that the Volt is being made (which for the record I believe is being made, lol):
“On June 3, GM announced that production funding for the Volt had been approved, and that GM’s Detroit Hamtramck plant has been selected as the assembly plant, pending government approvals.”
A press release. And pending government approvals? The actual source link of the announcement says this (June 3rd, 2008):
“Preliminary plans are to produce the Volt at GM’s Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Center, subject to successful discussions with state and local governments.”
Are we still at this stage? Successful discussions with state and local goverments? What if there is no successful discussion? (ie-bigtime tax breaks) The production line has to be running in less than 2 years…what other option is there?
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Someone at GM pass to much time here reading Statik LOL j/k.
The proper PR answer would have to put forward the same messages without mentionning all those stories. By mention those, they actually give them credit…. poor PR. Haven’t check the site… Statik Copy/Past is enough for me.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
#15 Rashiid
Statik, #1.
I don’t see this one like you do, my friend….GM is just trying to help themselves out by fighting an uphill battle.
Personally, I think if the Volt is spot-on, the press will be fantastic.
——
Yes, I understand your point completely…for myself personally I think this was not the right vehicle to accomplish the job…I think this site is going to get harpooned bigtime, and actually hurt their cause.
However, your statement of, ” I think if the Volt is spot-on, the press will be fantastic,” is very accurate in my opinion…that is part of the reason I find this site so hard to believe, why now?
One would think this is the low part of GM’s existence, nobody does believe in them, they are at the stage now where the world is saying, “Show me…make me believe” Everybody has had enough of the ‘talking heads,’ we want ‘the wheels on the road’ now.
If they just kept to themselves and proved to the world they could deliver on their promises with the Volt, the accolades would/will come.
If GM was/is the only player to market with a ‘functional’ EV, they would instantly gain massive credibility.
No amount of press releases/shadow sites is going to get them one tenth of the good vibes that even just one Volt delivered to a customer would bring.
————
#17 frankyB
“The proper PR answer would have to put forward the same messages without mentionning all those stories. By mention those, they actually give them credit…. poor PR”
Your right frankyB, bringing up ALL those stories only alerts ‘joe consumer’ to more ‘myths’ that he probably had no clue about before coming to the site. It’s like you can almost get all the dirt on GM in one place.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
10-88
LJGTVWOTR!
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Some random responses so far to the site, LA Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2008/09/gm-myth-blog.html
———-
Snippet:
“According to an Internet domain registry search, the domain was created on Aug. 6, just days after Senate Democrats introduced a plan to appropriate up to $6 billion of the $25 billion in loans to automakers written into last year’s energy bill. That was right around the time that GM, Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler began turning up the juice in their campaign to get the full $25 billion in loans funded, plus get another $25 billion in loans approved.
That might explain why the topmost myth being busted on the site is this one: GM isn’t looking for a government bailout (the “federal direct-loan program is a powerful and appropriate incentive”).
———
Car Connection:
http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/blogs/marty_blog/2008/gm-launches-facts-and-fiction/
———
Snippet:
“…Other entries, however, trumpet GM’s successes, of which there have been many recently (Malibu, CTS, Enclave, ZR1) without telling the dark side of the struggles and huge losses necessitated by years of financial and product tumult. And stating that it “currently has more models with EPA highway ratings of 30 mpg or better than any other carmaker” only proves that GM relies on badge engineering, that it is an enormous company, and conveniently sidesteps the fact that it also has plenty of thirsty vehicles as well.
——-
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
I find it hard to blame GM for not pursuing hybrids. The EV-1 was such a PR disaster, how could they not be afraid of going down the same road? Of course, they handled it horribly, so I can’t feel too bad for them.
If anything, though, the EV-1 fiasco has always given me a lot of confidence that the Volt is not vaporware. Would they ever let that happen again? I think they will do everything shy of bankruptcy (maybe even including) to, LJGTVWOTR and keep them there.
Well, there were tax breaks in Flint to get the Volt’s engine made…I can’t believe that Michigan/Detroit would pass up on the opportunity to build the vehicle itself. But if they do, GM will find a state willing to give them the incentives they need. I don’t know how I feel about this, but it is the case.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
noel park #19
I’ve been seeing that acro. all over the place but couldn’t figure it out until you posted it here because it’s what you’ve been saying for as long as you’ve been on this site.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
#1 Statik
“I could live on this fantabulous new site and pick it apart for days…I won’t”
——————————–
Oh sure, go ahead and disappoint me! Hehe, I personally would appreciate you doing that actually, it will save me a bit of time.
Stew.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Statik # 18 says,
No amount of press releases/shadow sites is going to get them one tenth of the good vibes that even just one Volt delivered to a customer would bring.
–
Right you are. If anything will give GM credibility, it is the Volt and the Volt being as close to perfect as possible.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
GM just needs to ge the Volt into the showrooms ASAP.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Statik @ 1 writes, “This is one of the craziest PR things I have ever seen out of anyone…let alone GM: A whole website to respond to harsh criticisms. Launched fresh today!”
I agree, pure craziness. What is GM thinking? Why wouldn’t it use friendly proxys like Lyle for dispelling rummors? All this does is create more fodder for the fire. Bad move in my book. Pick the medium for releases and let it rip. I think THIS site is EXACTLY where you win the PR war. If they want to explain the government bailout, write an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. UGH, get down to business already GM; build the Volt.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
#18 Statik
“Your right frankyB, bringing up ALL those stories only alerts ‘joe consumer’ to more ‘myths’ that he probably had no clue about before coming to the site. It’s like you can almost get all the dirt on GM in one place.”
I suspect most “joe consumers” have already heard most of the myths and lies about GM. They are too wide spread and age is not a factor.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
GM needs to put a gm-volt.com link on the site so people could really see the kind of speculation floating around about GM and the Volt.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
—-
Right you are. If anything will give GM credibility, it is the Volt and the Volt being as close to perfect as possible.
—-
I hope the “perfect” includes a non-premium price ….
Otherwise, I’m fairly confident that “prius killer” volt will sell less numbers than either Prius or Insight-2 in the first few yeras – even if Volt could be produced in large numbers.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
It’s a pointless site. If I want snow, I’ll go to the mountains.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
What killed the EV-1 was lack on corporate foresight. GM could not see pass $1.25 a gallon gas, SUV’s and large trucks. Certainly, GM could have promoted the EV program better and kept the program alive for R+D. I do not doubt that at the highest levels of GM and the oil companies conversations took place that asked the question “Do we really want to produce a car that does not require a radiator, oil changes, mufflers, no tune ups, and uses no gasoline.
One final point, it is my understanding the last EV-1’s with there nickel-metal-hydride batteries got 120 miles per charge. If GM had kept the EV-1 program alive and were using today’s lithium-ion batteries the Ev-1 would be getting close to 300 miles per charge.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
It is a sad statement about jouralism when such a site is necessary. With so many sources of information, one of the major challenges is figuring out who trust and how to discern truth from falsehood and subtance from hype. This blog is about as good as it gets. Thanks again Lyle.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
“We are not asking for a bailout, or a handout” is at the start of GM’s website.
But they are. They know it, we know it, the world knows it. Why do they say these things that are so obviously false? It just damages their credibility in every other statement they make.
Then they go on to say “GM and other U.S. based companies are literally reinventing the automobile.” Well hardly. Maybe figuratively (stretching things a bit), but certainly not literally. They are scaling up production and perfecting ideas that have been around for a while, and that is important work, but they are not reinventing the automobile.
LJGTVWOTR!
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
BTVATWB
BUILD THE VOLT AND THEY WILL BELIEVE!
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
RB #33
Loans are not a handout, even if no bank would make them to these companies. Regardless of the rate, even if it’s at 0.00%, (I believe it’s actually 4.5%) the fact is that the money must be paid back. I’ve said it before that in the case of GM, we should look at them as an investment.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Bring on the Volt. By the way isn’t that the same assembly plant where the EV-1 was hand produced at a rate of 4 per day. No wonder there was no profit. Today they could sell thousands per day worldwide.
LJGTVWOTR!
Take Care,
TED
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
#35 Grizzly says “Loans are not a handout, even if no bank would make them to these companies.”
Grizzly, you are kidding yourself. A person who gets a below-market-rate loan is getting a handout. During the last year people have resigned their prominent jobs after it became known they had received such loans, because they were judged to be equivalent to a payment to the person. In effect the government is paying the difference between GM’s rate (4.5%) and the real rate they would have to pay (maybe 10% more). Further, the government is agreeing to cover the debt if GM does not pay it back. That’s a handout for the premium on the insurance on the debt. No one would do such a thing “for free”.
The reality is that GM wants a handout.. You know it, I know it, we all know it. They would just like it called an “incentive” so that it sounds nicer.
Now one can make an argument that such a handout to GM is good national policy, and in line with things for US business and industry in years past. I don’t buy that argument in GM’s case, though I understand there is an argument for it, and most likely congress will do it. But it is just confusing to say that no handout exists, because it does.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
35 Grizzly
If GM goes bankrupt, which is a real possiblity, then the govt does not get paid back.
If I went to the bank for a loan, and they discovered I had a very risky credit history, then I do not get the loan? Not unless I have assets to back up my loan, and no way do they give me the “special, low interest loan”.
Of course GM wants and needs this money to stay afloat, but I am not willing to agree with the terms of this. I know all about the impacts on peoples jobs and the hardships, but I strongly feel you make the hardship worse for many more if you allow companies to have such a crutch.
If GM fails, then they fail. If they succeed then they succeed.
PS: So if GM get these low interest loans, makes a fantastic recovery, makes tons of money, pays its executives large bonuses and salaries, do you think they might send the taxpayers a Christmas present? Do you think the workers will share proportionately in the spoils?
PSS: If I was looking for an investment, I can think of many better things to do with my money, thanks.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
#35 Grizzly says “Loans are not a handout, even if no bank would make them to these companies.”
I guess you don’t believe in free market
Nor in time value of money.
Anyone willing to give me 25M (not B) loan and gaurantee it ?
BTW, I have no problem giving them a loan – but with strings. Just like IMF gives loans to countries – with lots of strings attached.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
There are plenty of ways to secure those loans. We’re all kidding ourselves if we think we’re really in a “FREE” market, in fact there’s no such thing. Any idea what kinds of incentives, low cost loans and….HANDOUTS (the type you don’t pay back) GM’s competitors like Toyota and Honda and Airbus to name a few have received over the years from their governments? Any idea just how closed the Japanese market has been over the last 60 years to our cars and products?? And now Toyota and Honda are poised to take over our auto industry and when GM needs a little help on the verge of a turnaround, we’ve got people clamoring about the impropriety of it in the name of “free trade”.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
#40 Grizzly
I’m with you … but I think the loans are a handout. Does it matter? (Other than making the web site look a bit silly).
What I’d like to see is control over what they do with the loans. Chrysler wants the loans to do CUVs. I dunno. I’d want the loans to be more targeted at meeting the CAFE standards and I’m unsure that CUVs will do that. Maybe those restrictions are there but I don’t think so.
FWIW the first round is a done deal.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Grizzly writes, “There are plenty of ways to secure those loans.”
If GM can put up security to cover the loan value, then they can get a secured loan, which will undoubtedly come at a reasonable interest rate.
So… why don’t they? Ford just did this a few months ago.
It’s a bailout. And a pointless one. If we need electric cars as a national priority, we should incentivize people to buy them and then car companies will step in to fill the gap (this helped launch hybrids… except from GM, which thought they were a fad).
GM is already in the hole for about $80 billion. Even if they get a chunk of the $50 billion that the Feds are talking about, they’ll still be way deep in the hole. They won’t become profitable for YEARS. The Volt has zilch impact on revenue until 2016 or so. Maybe later. That’s essentially no impact on our oil problems.
Want fast action? Put a $2/gallon tax on gas. THAT will cut our thirst for oil. FAST.
GM must save itself. Money from the feds won’t solve GM’s real problems.
This lame web site (GMFACTSANDFICTION) is a prime example of why GM shouldn’t get the money… GM’s not taking care of business today. Their funds should be going into auto development. Nonessentials should be O-U-T. That they put up that stupd web site is a clear demonstration of how GM’s management is insane.
They did do one smart thing… that site does not do comments on the articles.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Part 1 (sorry)
GM said:
Here is a link to a U.S.A. Department of Energy test/specification page for the EV1. http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/ev1_eva.pdf Please note the EV1 with NiMH batteries could travel 160 miles at a constant speed of 60 mph, 220.7 miles at 45 mph and 140 miles doing a driving cycle. The EV1 could accelerate from 0-50mph in 6 seconds! Note the graph where the EV1 had the longest range when compared to the other contemporary electric vehicles. http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/compare_graphs.pdf
It had great performance, how many “production” electric cars can spin (chirp) their tires?
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ev1+chirping&emb=0#
This sounds like a very positive review on the generation 2 EV1 with NiMH batteries.
http://www.ev1.pair.com/charge_across_america/charge_html/nimh_test2.html
Isn’t it strange how GM continually quotes the poorer performing lead-acid batteries and not the high-mileage NiMH batteries used in the gen-2 EV1. Look at the government test results again. It was a very impressive car.
GM said:
I’m not a lawyer so the best I can do is look to examples. Toyota found a way to sell their RAV4e vehicles when pressured.
GM said:
Really!?!?!? Let’s think about what they could have done.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
dagwood55
“It’s a bailout. And a pointless one”
*** *** ***
I believe that government should be minimal. But it must also do it’s job in refereeing many things that despite public opinion do not take care of themselves. One is the economy, and it’s safe to say that if govt didn’t step in to buttress competition and foster industries that for whatever reason wouldn’t be borne out of demand then it wouldn’t be doing its job.
Not only that but our economy would be run by monopolies, anti competitive and corrupt beyond anyone’s imagination, not to mention
failing.
Call it a “handout”, “bailout” whatever you want, it doesn’t change the nature of the necessity or government’s role as a referee. Take this in contrast to the GINORMOUS subsidies that brought Airbus to where it is today. By all measure, call those subsidies what you want, but they are essentially decade long “bailouts” and on terms that would astound. Take Toyota, Honda, Sony and a whole host of Japanese companies on the verge of world domination and have government give them everything they want in “handouts” to ensure it, and that is no small part of why they’re where they are today. The difference is that these are companies given an unfair competitive edge by their governments, not troubled industries on the verge of solvency. One is a proactive government not playing by “fair trade” (I hate that term!) rules the other is a referee stepping in and giving a fighter a standing 8-count because the cost of not doing so would be great to the country. The difference is significant.
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Here’s my response to GM’s reasons for killing the EV1. Too many third party links (including US government) that indicate the EV1 was an excellent electric car and the batteries were ready to post here. Please see the forum link below.
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?p=11175#post11175
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
(Hmmmmm…I want to “make it” on GMFactsandFiction. What rumor can I start?)
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Don’t Ask for Money, Build It And They Can’t Hate!
DAM,BIATCH!
The acronym king has spoken
(Quote)
September 5th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
#43 grizzly,
And if a country gains a competitive advantage due to child labor….what? How about zero regard for the environment? How about slave labor?
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:23 am
Don’t Ask for Money, Build It And They’ll Stop Hating!
DAM,BIATSH!
The acronym king has revised.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:23 am
#47
Exactly. That’s why there is no such thing as free trade.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:28 am
Many many good points being made here. But still, too me it is… *sigh* who gives a…
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:33 am
Speaking of bailouts, the Fed is taking control of Fannie and Freddie. WOW! If the taxpayers have to foot the bill I do hope the bailout wipes out shareholder equity as well. I can’t see the taxpayers footing the bill and the shareholders being made whole.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:36 am
#50 omegamann66
I see that Hurricane Ike is now projected to get into the Gulf and the cone shows another hit on LA. If that’s the case I hope it’s mild. Two hurricanes in a couple of weeks would be very hard to take and this one seems like it might be more than a Cat 2. Hopefully things will be OK on your end.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:39 am
I’m rarely accused of being an optimist, still….I’d at least try not to toss the baby with the bathwater.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:49 am
This is typical GM. Waste time…waste time…waste time, oh and justify your job by wasting time on stupid stuff. Just build the dam car and show us non believers you can put up.
That web site seems like more of the same….save the stock price so the old self absorbed know it all fools can get some more money.
Hey dumb azzez, I am losing interest in this car you keep saying you are going to build. Put up, or shut up. I don’t need, nor care for your response to every tom, dick, and harry’s question. Seeing the car on the road will answer that for all the naysayers.
Bad choice on killing the EV, well then make up for it by giving the people what they want. Duh….how did you ever get to run a company, thats business 001, not even 101.
You need a bailout, gee sounds like admitting that you don’t know how to run a company. Admitting it is the first step, now move on,
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:50 am
Breaking News!
Deakin University to modify a Ford model T to run on compressed air.
We can rely on our aussie cuzzies to have a good laugh.
http://anz.theoildrum.com/node/4491
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 2:39 am
But seriously,
Why is compressed air not an e-flex option? Or at least a research topic?
Interesting commments on modern car concepts not suiting compressed air, but the model T does..
.ok..ok..its the weight of the air bags….its our need to do a 100 mile an hour to work each day…or climb pikes peak before we go to work….but what if that all changes?
GM, are you sure you have the future covered?
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 6:57 am
Pretty smart if you ask me. Even a vague answer is better then a rumor. Good for them. On a completely unrelated note, GM/Ford/Chrysler really need to hire/steal/bribe the people that design the interior for Honda/Hyundai. The biggest problem I have always had with American cars are the shoddy looking interior. The new Malibu is an exciting looking car, but as I spend 99% of my time inside it, it needs to be exciting too and quite frankly, it isn’t.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 7:18 am
#43 Grizzly said “Call it a “handout”, “bailout” whatever you want, it doesn’t change the nature of the necessity or government’s role as a referee.”
Grizzly, I agree with you here. There has to be a referee or you get chaos, or today’s Russia perhaps. I also agree that when you look around the world you see many situations where governments have intervened hugely on behalf of industries in their countries. With GM, I am in favor of supporting the development of electric cars, not the corporation generally. (As no one asks me, however, ….)
LJGTVWOTR
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 8:12 am
As I understand it, GM was on the fence about starting the fact & fiction website until someone started a nasty rumor that Bob Lutz has hair cancer.
After that, they decided to go full tilt with it.
A rumor will go half way around the world before the truth even gets its shoes on.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 10:29 am
#28 N RIley
GM needs to put a gm-volt.com link on the site so people could really see the kind of speculation floating around about GM and the Volt.
——-
Honestly, this site does alot more good for GM’s PR than that site will ever to.
For instance, this thread. A ‘first timer’ may come here and think, ‘Yupe look at this article, GM positive,’ but because Lyle is a unbelievable tolerant webmaster and understands that by not filtering the comments to only show good things/comments, it lends credibility to the site and his cause.
The reader who clicks the article and reads through the comments will say, “geesh, this is not a GM ‘managed’ site, look what these comments are saying, they are ripping GM a new one on this topic”…and that is the problem with the ‘facts and fiction’ and the ‘blog’ sites the GM PR department puts out. People know a ‘massaged’ site when they see one, they aren’t stupid.
If they read this thread front to back, they’ll probably come away with a couple things:
A) GM’s PR department/management is dellusional at best…marginally insane
B) However, the Volt will indeed bring GM the credibility it needs, and in the most relevant segment to the future of the auto industry
Long story short…thanks for the site/environment Lyle. And letting my rant at post #1 stand, lol.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 10:47 am
The big problem of the bailouts or loans is the fact that Honda and Toyota can also qualify for these loans. IS THIS A GEAT COUNTRY OR WHAT. Welcome to BAILOUT NATION first the financials then Freddie and Fanny. Tax cuts for everyone lets have a big party this is BAILOUT NATION brought to you by the crooks that have run this country into the ground with tax cuts and tax breaks for companies moving jobs overseas. I can support help for American and I mean American car manufacturers but for Honda and Toyota give me a break.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Hey’ Lyle;
When is GM going to update this site?
http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Statik wrote:
“—–
GM and other U.S. based companies are literally reinventing the automobile. This federal direct-loan program is a powerful and appropriate incentive to help spur this transformation, which is vital to our industry, and to the country as a whole.
——-
Oh is that all? The loan is vital to the country as a whole? Overstate much?”
Overstated? Maybe not to you in Canada. Canada has over eight times the oil reserves of the USA. You’re probably aware that oil has become a political weapon, right?
Canada and the mid-east are sitting pretty with lots of Oil. The USA is not. Energy independence is a matter of national security for the USA. That independence requires the development of non-oil-based transportation fuels and systems. That’s what GM was referring to.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
#44, Grizzly, defends the notion of a bailout…
Grizz, Those are reasonable thoughts you have. However, the problems with bailing out GM are:
1. GM’s first problem is that GM is in a very, very deep hole and it’s likely to get deeper before it gets filled in. I would support a bailout if the Feds actually picked up the charge for insuring the loans, didn’t just agree to pay it someday IF GM defaulted. Agreeing to pay IF GM defaults makes it look like this is cost-free. It isn’t. And agreeing, for “free” to back the loan makes it easier for GM to come back again and again to get more. If we don’t do more of this “free” stuff, GM might still fail and we can’t have that, so we’ll back another loan.
If we buy the insurance for a private loan, GM gets what it says it needs (access to cheap money) but we put a price on the operation that everyone can see and we leave ourselves in a position to cut our losses if GM slides further down the tubes. In fact, GM does not want this. They don’t want people to realize the price and they want Uncle Sam on the hook for more if they need it. The “free” guarantee provides that but the insurance payment doesn’t.
2. GM isn’t in trouble because of any external factor. GM is in trouble because GM is badly run and has been for a decade or more. There is no guarantee that the money will go to anything that’s really useful.
To have a chance of this plan working, GM must have something, in the pipe, that makes sense. They don’t. Now, many people will rush to their keyboards to say, “The Volt!” but that’s not the case, at least not in GM’s current plan. The Volt’s quantities are too tiny to make a difference to the country or to GM. To address our oil problem, put consumer tax incentives in place. That will draw vehicles onto the market. To increase manufacturing flexibility, make more Aptera-like vehicles possible with key deregulation that encourages some cottage industry in alternative vehicles. Provide fast or simplified track for low-volume vehicles.
Toyota and Honda are building and introducting cars that reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Ford has the technology. We don’t need GM. Or raise the gas tax… that will do it.
More importantly, to the loan guarantee, is the impact of the Volt on GM. It’s zilch for the foreseeable future. GM plans 10K in 2011. Maybe they’ll actually achieve that. They plan 60K for the next few years. This is a drop in the bucket for GM and inadequate revenue to service the debt on the loans they want. These will be very long-term loans, to say the least.
The Cruze, nice in concept, is going up against stiff compeittion. And it’s not that big of a deal. And GM has never demonstrated an ability to build low-cost small cars profitably for the prices at which they’ll sell.
What GM really wants here is a sort of Fuel Supply Hail Mary Play. They’re hoping that the SUV and pickup market will bounce back enough over the next few years, praying for tolerably cheap oil and/or consumer indifference to $4/gallon gas to bring back sales of their big vehicles. That’s the only revenue stream that will really work for GM. But, if it does, it just increases our oil dependence.
GM has shoved these things onto the market and advertized them, hard, for decades. They know where oil comes from and they know what uses it. They haven’t been good coroporate citizens of the US and I see no reason not to let them slide into a well-deserved oblivion.
Well… they won’t. They can file Chapter 11, reorg, fire all the current management and then they might have a chance. But they don’t need public money for that.
In fact, all public money does is give Wagoner and Lutz a chance to keep their jobs. They don’t deserve it.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
dagwood #55
First of all GM is not in the position it’s in because of Wagoner and Lutz. They inherited a multitude of problems from decades of management neglect and IMHO are pragmatically trying to rectify them not by juggling the balance sheet and Inc. statement , but by aggressively restructuring the business model. They keep their jobs because they have the backing of the BOD, not because they put on a good show. I respectfully disagree with your opinion that they have very little to offer. No other car company has shown this dramatic a change in their product lineup with the last 3 successive car of the year awards.
With the sale of Hummer and the suspension of development of large scale SUVs and trucks, I disagree with your assertion that GM is hoping to get back in that business soon. The new GM is leaner and meaner and will become even more so over time. This combined with an ever improving model lineup and the jettisoning of LT retiree health care obs. are all part a a business model that will allow GM to be profitable in ways they never thought possible.
.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2008 at 9:37 am
I have a supply of fence posts that I’m willing to give to the many folks on this site who need to plant them in their back yards and then go out and argue with them. When you are done with that, pull them out and argue with the hole in the ground.
Obviously GM felt the need for a website, and no matter what your esteemed and learned position may be, they are perfectly entitled to undertake such an effort.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Don’t blame the american car companies, foreign car companies have vaporized their EV’s too. After all american car companies have been making cars and trucks way longer than the foreign competitiors and can make them better. The media needs to get behind them!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Why do you think they want to drill now and here. Bring on the Volt!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Grizzly offers, “First of all GM is not in the position it’s in because of Wagoner and Lutz.”
Wagoner has been CEO for 9 years and Lutz has been Car Guy for 6.
Let’s talk about Lutz first… Lutz was in place in 2004 when the Gen 2 Prius was introduced and he was noisily (obnoxiously) dismissive of it (he’s stil obnoxious about this stuff).
Years later, we find that Lutz has a hissy fit… not over the success of the Prius 2, a car that is making money for their chief rival but over the introduction of the Tesla, a boutique vehicle from nobodies which bodes NO THREAT to GM… In ‘07, the Volt concept is introduced to some acclaim and GM decides to go for it. Some rewriting of history is occurring and we find that Lutz is reputed to have been a champion of EVs for a long time. Except that “the Car Guy” at GM has never pressed the issue and started a hybrid or EV car project for real.
But Lutz was able to get the Camaro underway… kinda, sorta. It’s a late and too thirsty for the market. But it’s a real Car Guy’s car, isn’t it? Of course, we ask, why isn’t a Camaro on the market today? Well, GM killed it in about ‘03. Why? POOR SALES. No one wanted a thirsty, sporty coupe with near-useless back seat. But Lutz is bringing exactly that back.
Lutz is a loser. He has a good track record for building the wrong cars and ignoring the right ones. He has been digging GM’s hole deeper.
Wagoner’s been at the helm of GM since ‘99, IIRC. That’s long enough to turn this ship around. Yet, I read one of his recent messages to the investors and most of the things on his list of strategies are simply things that well-run company should be doing. Why wasn’t GM doing them?
Now, interestingly enough (and I wish I could find the link), Wagoner made some public statements early in this millenium about GM’s direction… and that was a huge commitment to and focus on big vehicles. Now, sure, they make money. But GM is also heavily into the Chinese market and forecasting huge gains there, along with everyone else. What will that do to gas prices? If you guessed, “raise them dramaticaly,” give yourself a gold star.
Why didn’t Wagoner ever put 2 and 2 together and get 4? The head of the company is supposed to be good at the long-term strategy and Wagoner, clearly, is doing a poor job of strategy.
Yes, Wagoner and Lutz inherited a bad situation but they’ve both been working overtime to make it worse. They have to go.
(Quote)