I interviewed GM vice chairman Bob Lutz at the Detroit Auto Show in January of this year. It was at that event that the Voltec-powered Cadillac Converj was first unveiled and was the same time GM was first surviving on government bailout money.
When I asked Mr. Lutz at the time whether GM would build the Converj, he replied if it were up to him they would, but due to GM’s “extreme financial stringency” at the time, they “would have to ask the federal government if the car would qualify for loan for extremely energy efficient new vehicle programs.” Yes, I detected a bit of despondency in his tone. By the end of that month he announced his retirement.
Now of course with the newborn GM, Maximum Bob is re-energized and staying to take over product development, marketing, and communications.
In a new interview with USA Today Lutz admitted his prior despair and the reason for his change of heart.
“When I made the decision to retire, I thought we’d be in bankruptcy for a long time. I thought we’d lose our freedom to design and build the products the public wants as opposed to the products the government wants to see on the road,” said the 77 year old Lutz. “I thought all of the fun is gone from the business. … But lo, and behold, the government task force were not a bunch of ogres. They were extremely helpful, and their only agenda was to make GM the best company it could be.”
Yet despite his fathering of the Volt and the clear path GM is taking to greener cars, including a new dedicated hybrid, Lutz still appears skeptical about how successful such vehicles can be.
“Other than in the media, there is not a groundswell toward green vehicles in the United States,” said Lutz. “In fact, they’re a very hard sell.”
This entry was posted on Saturday, July 18th, 2009 at 8:23 pm and is filed under Hybrid, Marketing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
+3
Jul 18th, 2009 (8:38 pm)He retired because he thought the company was going to be bankrupt for a long time? That sounds terrible…
I agree about the hybrids but that is only because there is a premium on them… If only they didn’t cost more… I just bought a car and it wasn’t a hybrid, even though I’m pretty gung-ho about environmentalism because it wasn’t enough bang for the buck for me.. In the end money won
(Quote)
+3
Jul 18th, 2009 (8:39 pm)Great to see Bob out of retirement !
“Hybrids” are a tough sell, but “Electrics” are easy to sell, just look at the wait list for the Volt at 48,000+ and growing.
NPNS !
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (8:44 pm)Switching first to E-85, then to a Volt and finally to a BEV may have been the smoothiest transition. I’d rather have an E-85 car then a Prius. Especially a car with an engine designed specifically for E-85. Of course the Volt is the best for the transition in the auto industry to electric.
(Quote)
+5
Jul 18th, 2009 (8:47 pm)It is good to hear that Bob does not think the Govt. is the overbearing ogre that he (and I would have) assumed they would be. I hope he is not just kissing up to them when he says this.
As far as hybrid sales goes, I see the Toyota priius everywhere in the MD/DC area. They must not be too tough of a sell.
Gas will be 4 to 5 dollars per gallon again. When that happens, people will again flock to whatever vehicle is available that can save gas and is affordable. The Volt will not be this vehicle for some time to come since it has a high price. There will be a strong market for a $20,000 price range vehicle with the highest possible mileage.
For now it looks like cars like the Prius will carry this Market.
GM needs a good hybrid now while we wait for electric and EREV cars to become cheaper.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 18th, 2009 (8:51 pm)I can clearly understand where Bob is on hybrids.
From my viewpoint, Voltec is 15 years ahead of the
hybrid past.
It’s really reasonable for Bob to push the future and help to economically abandon the past, as Bob knows all those detailed lessons of the past.
He is valuable in the sense also to provide critical guidance for the newer members of upper management.
I think Bob brings that energy and drive for Voltec for GM’s future, and, I think adaptability is seen there also within his achievements as well.
Adaptability is the most important thing that you need to have when you are dealing with technologies nowadays.
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (8:57 pm)No word about the future of the “ex” Saturn Vue 2 mode plug-in hybrid in the new GM?
http://gm-volt.com/2008/01/14/saturn-vue-plug-in-hybrid-to-begin-production-in-2010/
(Quote)
-9
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:08 pm)This will refute a lot of Republican/Fox News talking points.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:11 pm)The BAS + system should give better mileage and it wont be too expensive, perhaps GM will pair it with an Atkinson cycle ICE for further gas savings.. hopefully GM will sell lots of them.
(Quote)
-2
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:15 pm)I definitely agree that hybrids are a tough sell. Especially when you design them to provide practically no discernible improvement in MPG yet jack up the price $3k or $4k.
The Volt, however, is a different experience altogether. There isn’t a single person who buys a Volt that will NOT see their MPG go up, most will see a drastic improvement.
What I see in “good times Bob” is his continued lack of vision for the goldmine he accidentally fell into with the Volt. If he has anything to do about it GM will squander the wonderful opportunity they have lucked into and will continue to dream of past glory in the internal combustion segment. Meanwhile your competitors who don’t have their head in the sand will move forward aggressively with plans for advanced plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles.
Recent history should tell ya, Bob, that your glory days are over. Stop living in the past and get GM to put its eyes squarely on the future that you and all of us know is coming. The gasoline engine is dead. You have already driven GM to bankruptcy once – - are you going for number two?!?
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:17 pm)I agree. In principle they should be able to make this thing (the BAS type systems) work well. I hope they do.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:21 pm)The problem is, Voltec will not be available to the masses for at least 4-5 years. GM is a business that needs to sell cars every year and right now they don’t really have a Prius killer on the market. GM is caught with their pants down. Waiting on Voltec and ignoring hybrids is not a good plan.
(Quote)
+6
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:24 pm)(addendum to my previous post)
Put a Voltec drive system in all vehicles made by GM and you will see that hybrid is NOT a tough sell. You will dominate the auto industry again.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:29 pm)What I see in “good times Bob” is his continued lack of vision for the goldmine he accidentally fell into with the Volt.
——–
Wow – talk about revisionist history ! Put down the hash pipe, CS – I’ll bet you rant about GM having killed the electric car, as well. History proves you wrong, even delusional.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 18th, 2009 (9:47 pm)Give $3500 for every hybrid car Made in the USA. Pay for it by a gas guzzler tax or a oil import tariff. And eliminate the sales tax on all hybrid cars made in the USA.
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (10:12 pm)You’re right, Guido. I would never say that GM killed the electric car or EV-1 and sold the NiMH battery technology to oil companies so it could never be used in a vehicle again. How stupid would I be if I did that!
And thinking that GMs market decisions could have been responsible for the company going into bankruptcy is also totally revisionist history.
(Quote)
+4
Jul 18th, 2009 (10:21 pm)“As of April 2008, 591,600 Prius automobiles have been sold in North America” -http://www.drivehomesafe.com
/news/the_prius_exceeds_the_million_vehicles_sold-10.html
“Other than in the media, there is not a groundswell toward green vehicles in the United States,” said Lutz. “In fact, they’re a very hard sell.”
-B. Lutz
Bob Lutz is an utter, utter disaster for GM.
“When congress raised emission standards, we hired fifty more engineers. GM hired fifty more lawyers.”
-Soichiro Honda
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (10:26 pm)“If only they didn’t cost more”
So, are you willing to pay $0 pemium for any hybrid or do you mean more after factoring in gas savings, higher resale, any aplicable rebates, and any state perks?
What hybrids did you analyze? What car did you buy? What do you estimate your annual city and highway miles driven to be? How long do you intend to own the car?
(Quote)
+4
Jul 18th, 2009 (10:28 pm)Let me add my agreement, as well as to say that GM needs you to get both the plug-in Vue’s AND the Volt’s superb technologies into several other vehicles, so…..
WELCOME BACK, BOB! ….It’s time to Leap into action!!!
(Quote)
+2
Jul 18th, 2009 (10:37 pm)“Sales of the company’s (Ford) hybrid vehicles totaled 3,649, a June
sales record and up 91 percent versus a year ago.”
-Official Ford press release, July ‘09
Meanwhile, results for other types of vehicle platforms, (from all manufacturers) are generally being trumpeted as “falling less swiftly”
Bob’s vision? More Camaros.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 18th, 2009 (10:39 pm)With gas at $2.39, hybrids are a hard sell, especially when they have such a premium over the standard model.
It has been reported locally that used SUV’s are selling pretty well again. People have such short memories…… The prices are actually up, because people are not buying new cars and trading in their old vehicles. So there is kind of a shortage in used cars.
If you believe that gas prices are back down for good, then buying some huge monster vehicle to go back and forth to work is the right thing to do.
If you think that this is temporary price drop, and that gas prices will shoot back up, then a parallel hybrid is your best bet at this time.
Personally, I intend to wait for the E-REV design of the Volt. IMHO, it has the best of what is available in technology at this time – a decent AER range, no range anxiety, and good mileage once the ICE kicks in. For my next vehicle, it makes perfect sense.
NPNS
(Quote)
+1
Jul 18th, 2009 (10:50 pm)Its true to sell green washed hybrids but did prius sell more than a million ? Ford Fusion is selling good ?
Good cars have always market to a block of customers. You cant sell same car to all customers.
Look at GM products :- example: do they have a minivan ? – no sliding doors
Lets make good cars first, they will sell them self. From horse mouth : camaro didn’t have any other adv than transformers movie.
(Quote)
+8
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:02 pm)From the thread, Lutz said:
“When I made the decision to retire, I thought we’d be in bankruptcy for a long time. I thought we’d lose our freedom to design and build the products the public wants as opposed to the products the government wants to see on the road,” said the 77 year old Lutz. “I thought all of the fun is gone from the business. … But lo, and behold, the government task force were not a bunch of ogres. They were extremely helpful, and their only agenda was to make GM the best company it could be.”
—-
Lutz translater on:
“I’m here as long as times are good and I can have fun…otherwise, not so much…even if I was the man most responsible for running the ship aground. Now I got a even bigger bag of money to spend, with even less restriction than before…and I’m just the guy that can do it.”
…friggin’ Bob Lutz
(Quote)
+2
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:20 pm)I might be misreading but you seem a little angry there… Well I’m willing to pay a little extra, but I really don’t drive enough to break even for at least 5 years, if gas stays under $3. At that point I hope to trade in for a Volt (I generally don’t like to buy first generation products). So I’m just saying I’m waiting for the day when hybrids cost less from day one, no minimum-mileage-before-break-even necessary because I think that is the point when hybrids will become a big success.
One of the things that bugs me most about hybrids is their lack of power. The two hybrids according to reviews that address this problem are the Altima hybrid and Fusion hybrid. Both were more than I wanted to pay for because I just wanted a car to hold me out until I can get a plug-in. I ended up with a 2006 TSX, since there were no used Fusions and the Altima had terrible visibility, which made me feel unsafe.
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:26 pm)Its a Lutz thread, so this is as good a place as any.
I thought the other day when he saved the G8, that was a pretty decent move, because it is actually a really good product. Then when he decided that it probably shouldn’t be a captive import from Australia, and it would be better as a North America built Chevy Caprice, and sell a ton to fleets and police services, and to give people something to buy when their Impalas go all Epsilon II on them….well that was actually a great move.
Well…after 4 days or so, he flip flopped, or more likely someone at GM got ahold oh him (*cough* Fritz *cough*) and made him make down.
From Fastlane:
———–
“It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time…”
By Bob Lutz
GM Vice Chairman
OK, I have some late-breaking news for you from the world of GM, where things are indeed moving quickly, and what I’m about to say is proof.
In fact, we’re moving so fast, we’re going back in time to, oh, about four or five days ago, when the Pontiac G8 was going away and was not going to become a new Chevrolet Caprice.
And therein lies the news: The G8 will not be a Caprice after all. I’d mentioned it, and said we were studying it, giving it a serious look, because a car like the G8 was just too good to waste.
That’s all still true. But I have to say that, with my new “marketing” hat on, upon further review and careful study, we simply cannot make a business case for such a program. Not in today’s market, in this economy, and with fuel regulations what they are and will be.
I know that we’ll get a lot of complaints from G8 lovers, because I’m one of them. And the product guy in me is complaining as loudly as anyone. But the marketing guy says there’s no case. With budgets being what they are for the time being, the resources must be allocated elsewhere.
http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/archives/2009/07/it_seemed_like_a_good_idea_at_the_time%E2%80%A6.html
You were so close to doing the right thing Bob, unfortunately my lone ‘moment of praise’ for you, I have to retract.
/how will he go on? lol
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:40 pm)Put a Voltec drive system in all vehicles made by GM and you will see that hybrid is NOT a tough sell. You will dominate the auto industry again.
****************************************************************************
Wow, and they call ME an optimist. The lifetime of the current fleet just being replaced will take decades – and that’s assuming incredible output of plugins and widespread acceptance.
Be well,
Tagamet
(Quote)
+4
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:43 pm)Sad to hear all the Lutz bashing.
Be well,
Tagamet
(Quote)
-4
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:47 pm)You gonna build the Volt or not Bob?
That last sentence makes me wonder.
=D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:51 pm)If gas stays as cheap as it is the EV won’t make it out of the gate. I don’t think that will happen but I have no idea what the price curve will look like. Cheap gas prices kills everything. Maybe there are a few corporations out there that are counting on that?
(Quote)
Jul 18th, 2009 (11:58 pm)What premium? I’m seeing great efficiency from a competitively priced hybrid…
54.2 MPG average as of 3,500 summer miles.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:04 am)I live in an ex-GM town.A GM foundry closed about 5yrs ago.The people here that have purchased the Prius are the older genset,(BOB’s age) that grew up on 30cent a gallon gas.They know gas will fluctuate its way to five dollars a gallon since the oil companies got a taste of $4 gas.At trade in time if gas is back to 4-5 bucks a gallon they can get the newest high miler AND get a good trade in value.Smart people that older generation……….
(Quote)
+3
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:19 am)The only products Lutz cares about are the high-end, high-performance ones. He’s an inappropriate leader for a company that needs to offer a wide range of products.
He’s perfect to run Tesla or BMW.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:21 am)Not decades — car companies don’t sell used cars.
The number you want to look at isn’t life-of-car, it’s the turnover rate. New cars turnover around every 5.3 years.
So within six years, if GM has the product everyone wants, that’s when sales take off.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:28 am)It’s much deserved. Bankrupt Bob is back inna houzzzze….
(Quote)
-7
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:39 am)waiting list proves nothing – its costs ZERO to get in or out.
I would be surprised to see even 1% of the suscribers actually buying Volt.
(Quote)
-7
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:52 am)Lutz should retire for good IMHO. Give some air to more capable and accountable leaders with vision. GM deserves it… Or not? Probably not with the same old farts on board.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:14 am)Put a Voltec drive system in all vehicles made by GM and you will see that hybrid is NOT a tough sell. You will dominate the auto industry again.
_______________________
They’re trying to get the price down and the product ultra refined by gen 3. What you’re suggesting will take time. A lot of time IMO, and if GM tries to force it on the market (it took ten years for the Prius to evolve into the franchise’s category killer) it would be the lead in to the GM bankruptcy, part two.
Having a lot of cars that seem like great news at first but, ultimately people are not buying en mass (Malibu Hybrid, Saturn Sky) will kill GM’s ability to turn their fortunes around in the future once and for all. JMO at this point.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:17 am)GM then went on to pioneer the commercially viable catalytic converter that has evolved to be standard equipment in all new vehicles.
(Quote)
+4
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:25 am)And I’m 77 years old, I can retire any second it’s in my or my families best interests. Do you really think I’m here to be dragged through a month old bag of crap every workday to go home and take out my frustrations on my wife and grand kids after several great careers, working straight through for more than 50 of the last 77 years?
(Quote)
+3
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:30 am)“He retired because he thought the company was going to be bankrupt for a long time? That sounds terrible…”
Not really. He can essentially retire any time he wants given his career, there’s no reason for him to stay at a job he doesn’t enjoy. I stayed at my last job about 3 years too long, and the ulcers and heartburn still haven’t completely cleared up.
The fact that he came back is encouraging for GM’s future.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:35 am)Lutz loves to develop cars he thinks are cool. This is why he was instrumental in turning around GM’s product portfolio, and it’s why he wasn’t interested in hanging around if GM wasn’t going to develop cars he wanted to develop. That’s not any different than anyone else who has decided to find a different job.
I just don’t see Lutz as being instrumental in running the shop aground. Quite the opposite. In fact I don’t see Wagoner as being responsible for running the ship aground. I see him more as not being to take the dramatic action needed to prevent the ship from running aground. Maybe that’s too fine a line but there seems to be a difference between messing things up and not being able to fix the mess.
What’s interesting is how surprised Lutz was by the Auto Task Force. Seems like he underestimated the kid with the big ears.
//I’m with you on the G8. Too bad.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:35 am)I’m not sure ignoring 2.5% of the US market is going to cost many execs sleep at night. Generation 1 Volt will sell to early adopters looking for something “new”. I expect by the third generation Volt, it’ll be competitive with more conventional power-trains.
(Quote)
-1
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:36 am)The Republican/Fox News brigade have not demonstrated that facts will alter their talking points in any noticeable fashion.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:41 am)Green cars sell fine. Three examples are the Civic, Metro, and the Prius.
It has been mentioned MANY times here before, but I’ll say it again. Up to this time green cars have NOT been fun to drive. 0-60 in 11 seconds combined with a cramped driving cabin just doesn’t do it for most people.
Now, with the Volt, we have a potential for 100+ mpg AND a very real fun factor. 0-60 acceleration around 8.5 seconds.The drivers cabin is similar in size to a BMW or an Accord.
Don’t forget these factors when juggling potential Volt sales numbers.
=D~
(Quote)
+4
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:44 am)Yes, but that’s over 10 years, and is a minuscule fraction of the cars sold in this country during that time period.
When hybrids account for 10% of all sales in this country, you might be onto something… at the moment, they’re about a quarter of that.
Bob Lutz has started the Volt when he did, because by the time the market will *really* be ready for it– it’ll be ready, and affordable. Bob Lutz, pink tie and all, along with Ed Wellburn, will go down as two of the biggest reasons why GM survived.
Funny how with all those engineers, Honda still produced a hybrid that flopped. And when Clarkson and Consumer Reports are both in agreement, it’s a good chance that the Insight will flop this time, too.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:48 am)Meanwhile, the Camaro sold 9,320 units in the month of June. Ford moved 7,632 Mustangs in the same time period. That’s just a hair under 17,000 muscle cars sold in one month.
To be fair, the V6 Camaro only gets 7 mpg less than the Ford Fusion on the highway.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:51 am)I think he’s wrong about the groundswell of support for green vehicles. It’s definitely there. He just keeps missing this particular trend, for whatever reason.
But he’s right that hybrids are a tough sell — unless you get them right. Honda has failed miserably with the Insight. Toyota has hit a home run with the Prius. At the moment the problem for Toyota isn’t that it can’t sell enough Priuses, it’s that it can’t make enough of them. The factory in Japan is running flat out and there is still a backlog of orders. And let’s face it, the Prius is not a great car to drive and it’s nothing special to look at.
I think this may happen with the Volt. Henderson has said that he wants to see 14K before 2012. Unless the price is much higher than they’ve suggested so far, that’s not a lot of vehicles given what I see the demand being.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:31 am)The Pius can sell w/o a rebate and so could BAS, just not as $3500 greenwashing option. Remember there were/are rebates of up to $3500 for hybrids. GM is spreading these out over two many vehicles and programs, without any real commitment to one to build volume and reduce cost. They are, or at Bob Lutz is, stuck in the same mentality that hybrids should be a value add upcharge that carries a signifcant premium like going from a G8 base V6 model to loaded V8. GM needs to commit to technology that they can drive costs down with volume so they can add “apppropriate” value. GM has done a good job of commiting to Voltec thus far. Hopefully, this is a sincere commitment and they will see it through to volume production. They have stated a comitment to BAS+ and two-mode in their business plan for government loans. Quite frankly, Bob Lutz’s comments are at odds with this plan.
For “appropriate” application of BAS, it needs to be implemented in models that make sense. They put it in the Malibu, Vue, and Aura. Only the Vue made sense and they only put it in very limited production. Dealers didn’t have this model readily available for test drives and delivery times were very long. Maibu and Aura are mid-sized sedans with medium picing and reasonable fuel economy in standard versions. Hybrids advantage is in city driving, not highway driving. They should pick a market that is heavily weighted to city driving (e.g. taxis and soccer moms) and strategically address it.
Also. for the lower end BAS, they should put it in the highest mileage model that can carry the premium. Using myelf as an example: I wanted the highest mileage vehicle that best met my needs. I think there are plenty of buyers with this mndset. The Vibe did this and gets basically the same mileage as the BAS Malibu. If they offered the Vibe with a BAS option that got 30/33mpg, I would have gotten it if it netted out to <$2500 premium after rebates. Similarly, I think models like the Cobalt and upcoming Cruze would also benefit from BAS. On the other hand, I think models like the Aveo are too low end. Ultimately, the mileage benefits of the curent genration of BAS probably justify @$1500 premium in the mass market with today’s consumer mindset. With a long term marketing strategy of engraining all of the benefits of hybrids in the cosumer mindset, today’s BAS could carry a higher pemium of perhaps $2k.
I’m fine with the plug-in rebat, although that should have been for the first 500k vehicles total from all mfg instead of 250k for each mfg (IMO). We should have slowly stepped in a gas tax years ago to encourage alternatives and fund some oil’s “soft” costs as well as alternative adoption programs.
Sheesh. I’ve rambled a bit here but basically if GM commits to selling EV’s (hybrids, EREV’s, and othewise) in volume, appopriately targets the right audience for each product, and markets properly they will be successful.
(Quote)
-2
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:19 am)or imported from China
(Quote)
+6
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:27 am)wait list proves that 48,000+ people have taken the time to say they want an Electric Vehicle, not a hybrid.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:31 am)You can always get a Cruz and pretend it is a Volt , the look the same from the front .
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:54 am)You can always get a Versa and pretend it’s a Cruz.
Or a Rio and pretend it’s a Versa.
Or a Miata and pretend it’s a Vette.
=D~
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:27 am)Cruz interior…
http://garfwod.250free.com/cruz-interior.jpg
=D~
(Quote)
+27
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:59 am)They have to stop calling these “green” cars. I happen to believe global warming is real, but there many others who don’t, perhaps half the people on this forum. Peak oil is real, and most people realize oil won’t last forever. Even if oil didn’t run out in the world, it has essentially run out in the U.S., so we have to import 2/3 of what we use, which means countries like Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and Russia all get more powerful, while the U.S. gets weaker. And even if that doesn’t motivate you, there are a lot of people who just hate the big oil companies and want to stick it to them any way they can. Last but not least, how about the link between oil money and terrorism? So let’s stop calling these “green” or “ecological” cars, and start calling them “energy independent” cars.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (7:23 am)I agree, Dave, the American driver does not want to go from his/her SUV or minivan into a subcompact. What they really want is a similar vehicle with better gas mileage.
However, many people who had large SUV’s in the past are now turning to the smaller CUV’s. People with larger cars will likely consider mid-size.
But all-in-all, people want what they want. If you look at the cost of ownership for a car, gasoline at $4 per gallon, with a 25 mpg car, fuel cost is $0.16 per mile. The government rate for mileage reimbursement is ~$0.50 per mile. So vehicle price, interest, insurance, maintenance, excise tax, and all the other costs associalted with car ownership still constitute the bulk of the cost per mile.
The question becomes how much extra cost will the hybrid option cost relative to its savings? I think this is the point that Bob is trying to make.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 19th, 2009 (7:26 am)RIGHT ON DAVE G.!!!
(Quote)
+6
Jul 19th, 2009 (7:32 am)rvd
,so you would bet that only 480 out of 48000 would buy. I suggest you stay out of Vagas.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (7:35 am)Capt. Jack…
Bob Lutz and you can probably can agree on this direction for Marketing. From the linked article:
(Regarding Lutz)
“Once he spent the bulk of an interview bemoaning the loss of scantily clad models at auto shows, pointing out that at one time, the Paris auto show was filled with topless models.”
And I don’t think he’s talking about convertibles!
So we need the Volt in a nice setting (like Tahiti) and some gorgeous topless native girl gets out and leans on the car. Then the narrator uses a phrase that a boss of mine used to say to us young engineers,
“If it’s got tits or tires, it’s going to get you in trouble.”
Then I would follow that with, “But of course, life wouldn’t be nearly as fun without a little trouble now and then.”
(Quote)
+2
Jul 19th, 2009 (7:48 am)Still coming for my daily Volt fix.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (7:49 am)After that remark I have changed my mind. You should sell everything and GO TO VAGAS.
Smile
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (7:52 am)Hey Dave G.
When we were warned and warned and warned years ago that if oil went up, “it would ruin the American economy”.
So, oil executives motivated the people in power to go to war with made-up reasons.
Deceitful reasons.
Unlawful reasons.
Corporate profiteering reasons protected completely by the “corporate veil” with absolutely not any legal accountabilities.
But oil went up anyway just before the last presidential election, (as it did at the previous 3 or so). (Was that timing deliberate or somehow artificially-triggered to somehow “teach” us something?).
So, in any case, we were “taught” many a lesson anyway when the price skyrocketed last year.
Price wise or otherwise “shorting the supply”, you have to consider that somewhere in the world petro-greed would have kicked in anyway, and, we might have had the deep recession a lot earlier. That might have driven down demand and collapsed the price earlier for a non-violent “free market solution”. We might have been on the road to electrification of the auto earlier.
“Free Market Forces”, I was told, “do a lot of corrections”.
(As I was admonished that from two different very arrogant “pro petro-warlord private contractors” repeatedly, as if it (the war) were a god, to the point of ad-nausea. And, as if the price of oil itself, going up, was unAmerican, and was a cost-justification to go to war, as perverse as they were for their twisted criminal reasons[sic]). Suspension of the Constitution occurred, and, parts of that attack on our Constitution are still wrongfully in place.
Privacy is still trampled by corporate America as an accepted practice even today, as if it is their God-given right to not only trample on your rights to privacy, but, if you do not acquiesce to the abandonment of your Constitutional rights as liquidated by the previous administration, then, you somehow may be made to be penalized in the most underhanded of ways.
“You wouldn’t believe what’s going on over there”. “They don’t even have roofs on their houses”, that “private contractor” (out of Camp Mabry here in Austin) continued. (This was several years ago.)
That arrogance was so deeply ingrained into that right wing “private contractor” to the extent that he was inconguent for the fact that it was American bombs that blew the tops of those houses in the first place!!
The sickening and Constitutionally-criminal methods that petro industries utilize to get what they want must be moderated intensely, and, their unaccountable “informal interest groups” and formal “private contractors” contracted apparently through our own military, need to re-establish a true grip on reality ASAP.
Dan Petit
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (8:27 am)DonC
Doesn’t a groundswell of support imply that pent up demand would overlook some shortcomings? I don’t think many people wait for the “perfect” vehicle (though the Volt had better be “close”).
I agree that demand will be there, but it’ll take quite a while (after the initial surge of advocates – us) for widespread demand OR availability.
JMO,
Be well,
Tagamet
/no mention of Bob’s tie yet?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (9:25 am)“They’re trying to get the price down.”
That is exactly what mass production of the Voltec drive system will do. Have you heard of economies of scale.
(Quote)
-6
Jul 19th, 2009 (9:27 am)From my viewpoint, Voltec is 15 years ahead of the hybrid past.
————————————————————-
Too bad the Volt will be 15 years ahead on price also.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (9:34 am)Sounds like the same Lutz for the supposedly new GM. I think that the new GM is taking the wrong kind of risk by bringing him back. And, this interview proves it.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 19th, 2009 (9:40 am)You expect one vehicle model from one car company to capture 10% of the market?!? That’s your benchmark for success? Who has that chart of car makers and their sales by model. It shows the Prius is one of Toyota’s top selling models. Toyota proved that mass production of hybrid vehicles is PROFITABLE.
GM, on the other hand, says “hey, we don’t want to make a profit” and wants to make hybrid a four-letter word (see the idiocy?) and continues to make product and marketing decisions that could not help but thwart and hinder hybrid sales. When you plan to FAIL and you do everything you can to ensure that you FAIL at a certain endeavor – what do you expect as an outcome?
GM board members: Put Lutz back into his cage and start LEADING the auto industry again, instead of cutting off a market segment that has ALREADY proven to be profitable.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (9:41 am)The Chevy Volt is coming out at the end of next year. Production will be ramped up quickly over the following year.
So that’s about 2 years before the “masses” can buy one, not “at least 4-5 years.”
You underestimate the ability of Americans and American business to change when the need arises. We have a history of doing so.
You’ll see.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:04 am)While yes, the initial price concerns are a stopping point for most potential buyers, there are very good aspects for an initially somewhat higher cost of a Volt net of cost assistance incentives, etc. (the most efficient ways to help get it going).
No entirely new set of technologies would, should, or could cost the exact same thing as old technologies as measured in those 15 year old pre-inflation dollars.
If some accounting majors did the math for what the Volt will do for us in just saving gasoline alone over the ten year battery warranty, that is SIXTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS at a $2.85 cost of gasoline. So, subtracting that, you have this technology FAR FAR CHEAPER over the 10 years, if you do the simple math for just the gasoline savings.
As well as that, and, in addition to, for just the sticker price if you adjusted for inflation from 15 years ago.
The really really crazy thing about all this is that other OEM’s just are not “getting it”, to their eventual widespread loss of market share as Voltec developmental-costs become mostly-absorbed by the initial buyers (who deserve to get help for just helping get Voltec “on the road”).
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:07 am)“Yet despite his fathering of the Volt and the clear path GM is taking to greener cars, including a new dedicated hybrid, Lutz still appears skeptical about how successful such vehicles can be.”
Has anyone heard anything about a “new dedicated hybrid?” Which Hybrid power train will it have? BAS+? That does not make sense, since that can bolt on many GM engines. FWD two mode? Certainly a possiblity. EREV? I doubt it.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:14 am)Huh, I’m a member of the public, but until the Volt, The GM core brands weren’t designing any products that I wanted to buy…
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:19 am)The 2010 Camaro compares quite favorably against the 2010 Mustang. It gets better highway mileage (3 MPG diff. which is over 10%, 26 Mustang vs 29 Camaro). Camaro also has more horsepower.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/03/16/2010-camaro-takes-advantage-of-six-speed-for-29-mpg-highway-rati/
Camaro is $2k more on the low end but $2k LESS than the mustang on the high end loaded model.
The Camaro is one kick-a$$ performance vehicle, there is no doubt. But comparing Camaro to the Fusion Hybrid is a red herring or apples/oranges thing.
MPG for 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid: 41 City/36 Highway
MPG for 2010 Camaro: 17 City/29 Highway with a manual transmission. The automatic (also a six-speed) bumps the city number up to 18 mpg
That’s a 140% improvement in city MPG and 24% highway MPG in favor of the Fusion Hybrid.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:21 am)Oh, I get it …. Obama is really INVESTING all our grandchildren’s money in all those subsidies for illegal aliens ! What a concept !
I’ll bet that sends a tingle down YOUR leg, as well as Chis Mathews and Keith Olbermans!
(Quote)
-4
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:25 am)Don’t let the fact that NOBODY wanted to lease the EV-1 taint your perspective !
Of course, the fact that Lutz was the primary driver for the Volt shouldn’t taint your perspective, either. Let’s salute Toyota, instead, who have badmouthed the technology every step of the way. Very insightful.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:31 am)NICE GOING LYLE !!!!!
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2007/11/meet-the-blogge/comment-page-1/#comment-62319
A must read for everybody .
(Quote)
+7
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:31 am)My admiration for Mr. Lutz probably reflects everyone else’s here. The only constant though I don’t believe Bob Lutz has right is this is often mentioned by him as sold as a Green car. The Chevy Volt is an American Independence car to me. Independence from foreign oil, which if the military, which I retired from the Air Force is equated into costs, puts the cost of a gallon of gas much closer to $10 per gallon. The rest of the world doesn’t pay, because by our taking on the cop/police role there, we absorb the cost and subsidize our competitors while the Middle-east in turn despises us for meddling.
Want to end terrorism, then get us the @!#!@ off of foreign oil. No offense to Bob, but the advertising campaign should also focus, if not more so, on this being American-fueled (or whatever country the car is located in).
CHEVY VOLT: American-made, American-FUELED.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:38 am)…Lutz still appears skeptical about how successful such vehicles can be. “Other than in the media, there is not a groundswell toward green vehicles in the United States,” said Lutz. “In fact, they’re a very hard sell.”
—————————————————————————
I think that a Toyota executive would agree that so called “green cars” are a hard sell. But Toyota spent years getting there. As for the Volt…at $40K+…most car buyers do not have the funds to buy an EREV at this price. In other words, it is not a mass market. It is no brainer…produce something nice in the $20K-$30K range…and work your butt off making it a long term success. Heck, Honda has edged under $20K.
Does the new GM have the right people, foresight, and assets to progressively create a market for a product that is a “very hard sell”…and eventually make a profit?
As for the right people…
Mr. Lutz comments a few years ago…
Hybrid cars make no sense
http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/06/pf/autos/detroit_gm_hybrids/
Today…
same story…different slant with an EREV on the way
You decide…
(Quote)
-1
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:42 am)From the linked article:
“Still, Lutz stands by his skepticism on hybrids, which he says are having trouble selling in the current market because gas prices are too low and the cars are not cheap. People still want bigger cars, he says, with more power.”
______________________
Size and power trumps efficiency. That’s what Lutz believes, and it’s what he’ll push through GM marketing and product development.
What a colossal mistake that Lutz and his attitude are still at the core of GM.
(Quote)
+4
Jul 19th, 2009 (10:50 am)Ok, you your giving Lutz a pass on the past eight years, even though he has had a good deal of control over the GM lineup for going on 8 years now. I can indeed see that he was not completely responsible, and he had alot going against him. (Although I still think he is a glorious disaster, lol)
Today however, everyone who was anybody (with power) is gone, Wags is gone, the board has been decimated and the government(s) has the most control, but chooses to be a bystander, and has obviously rubber stamped the ‘ok’ on Lutz’s resume to lead the charge.
I think we both can agree Lutz is completely on top of the mountain now…and he controls the vision, and the future. He has the ‘leanest’ GM in 40 years, he has a huge bag of cash to spend that rivals Microsoft (or soon will), and 80% of the product already in existence is his, or he signed off on.
Can we agree that everything that happens from here on out is on him? Whether that be success or failure?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (11:15 am)“The sickening and Constitutionally-criminal methods that petro industries utilize to get what they want must be moderated intensely, and, their unaccountable “informal interest groups” and formal “private contractors” contracted apparently through our own military, need to re-establish a true grip on reality ASAP.”
So, in your story, are the oil companies, the Constitution and the military good or bad?
=D~~~
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (11:18 am)I see your point and agree completely.
It’s all about getting off your previous addiction to foreign oil. May I ask you to pass along your thoughts when you fill up your tank?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (11:42 am)Some of the posters here on this board seem to be reading something into Lutz’ comment that is neither there nor implied. If you look at his collected comments over the past few years you will see that his head is stuck in the “bigger engine, bigger vehicle” mindset and he will use his considerable power inside GM to put a cap on hybrids – - of which the Volt is the prime example.
Forget mild hybrid. Forget weak hybrid. Forget 2-mode hybrid. Forget parallel hybrid. These are a waste of time and money and do not provide profit potential for GM, nor will they increase market penetration.
GM has the golden ticket with the Voltec drive system, the serial hybrid system. Put a Voltec drive system in ALL vehicles made to bring down costs and incrementally improve the technology AFTER mass production has brought the costs down to where they need to be.
(Quote)
-6
Jul 19th, 2009 (11:44 am)According to the White House Auto Task Force, and I quote:
“GM makes low-quality cars”
Repeated for those on this site that just don’t get it.
They said, “GM makes low-quality cars”
Nothing I have seen NEW GM do has required a change in this statement at this tiime. If the Volt will be a quality car remains to be seen.
(Quote)
-1
Jul 19th, 2009 (11:48 am)Do not bother me while a wrap up this Championship in the next hole…
(Quote)
+2
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:02 pm)Another gem from Statik! Great post, sir.
I, too, am suspicious of Lutz’ commitment to the Volt. I think his focus is on internal combustion engine cars.
The Volt is the ONLY thing that will save GM from another bankruptcy.
Let’s get the Volt wheels on the road – and Voltec Converj – and Voltec Orlando – and Voltec Silverado – and Voltec Cruze – and a BEV small car of your choice that is basically Voltec minus the ICE related stuff.
Dump all the worthless hybrid crap that is not selling anyway (per GMs own numbers). It is not providing the greenwashing Lutz thought it would anyway. Trim the fat and get Voltec mainstreamed!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:13 pm)Tagamet says: “Doesn’t a groundswell of support imply that pent up demand would overlook some shortcomings?”
I’m not sure how to read that comment. Do you mean that many hundreds of thousands of people will buy a Prius even though it is quite small, not very comfortable ride, and not peppy in the acceleration department? Or do you mean that people should have flocked to the Malibu hybrid even though it added $$Thousands to the cost of the vehicle but didn’t add much to the economy of the vehicle?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:16 pm)Under normal circumstances, I’d agree. But to quit just when your company is headed towards bankruptcy, which is arguably when they need you the most–I think it’s disloyal, and selfish.
It’s not like he’s a regular employee. He’s the head of a major division. His departure must have added the confusion at a time when GM needed all the stability it could get. And it wasn’t like he was taking a job elsewhere because he needed the job security. Or because he couldn’t keep up with the job anymore. That I could understand.
To make things worse–this is GM! A company that is being bailed out by the US government because it’s so essential to the US economy. And he was doing it in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression. Because it wasn’t fun? Tell that to the tens of thousands of people GM had to lay off! And the 300,000 people who can still lose their jobs if GM’s turnaround fails! Not to mention the multiple layoffs at the other businesses that will be affected if GM goes under. And GM’s retirees who still rely on GM for a portion of their pension and health care costs.
And then there’s the Volt. Yes. I know he said he was finishing the project. But, no GM means no Volt. And an ex-marine, he’s supposed to care about national security if nothing else!
I normally defend Bob Lutz. And I really hope there’s more to it than what he said here. But, if he really quit because he didn’t think it was “fun anymore”–yes, that’s very selfish in my book.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:21 pm)That puts you in a very LARGE group of people. I drive a Toyota Highlander and it’s almost paid off. GM hasn’t made a vehicle I would buy in decades.
When the Volt comes out all that will change for me. I don’t want a Volt, though, I want an Orlando or a Silverado (or a minivan please) as long as it has the Voltec drive system.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:28 pm)Toyota to this day is selling every Prius at a loss. If GM wants to go into bankruptsy again then maybe they should follow toyota’s business model.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:29 pm)The Prius is a very practical car, good space age looks for us geeks, decent performance and roomy for both cargo and passengers.. and very durable… no wonder it sells.
Very interested to see the 2010 fitted with an aftermarket plug-in pack.
You driving normally to get that mileage?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:30 pm)Laura, at 77 years of age he is entitled to do whatever he wants.. he paid his dues already.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:33 pm)I’m not sure how to read that comment. Do you mean that many hundreds of thousands of people will buy a Prius even though it is quite small, not very comfortable ride, and not peppy in the acceleration department? Or do you mean that people should have flocked to the Malibu hybrid even though it added $$Thousands to the cost of the vehicle but didn’t add much to the economy of the vehicle?
*****************************************************************************
Uh, “none of the above”? I just meant that it’ll take time for the general population (read “not us”) to see and appreciate the wonders of plugins.
Be well,
Tagamet
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:38 pm)Shows why we need a carbon tax (that can then be distributed). High price of gasoline is necessary to convince people to change their fossil fuel habit. 20 cents a year going up till the gas hits $10 a gallon would be great …
BTW, something wrong with the blog software. It is showing every comment to be the first …
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:39 pm)As far as beating up on Toyota goes, Toyota has a million dollar an hour research program where the company is on the verge of commercializing a fuel cell vehicle at a price that the masses can
afford.
As far as questioning Lutz’s assertion that hybrids are still a tough sell, hybrids offer minimal gain for maximum price. The most fuel efficient conventional cars get 35 mpg. A hybrid generally only gives a small improvement raising the mpg to say 40 mpg. If the hybrid achieved 70 mpg, it would be a much more attractive car. Sadly for the improvement, a hybrid is at least $5k more than a
conventional car. It isn’t gas free, so what’s the point?
Fuel cell technology is less mature than battery technology and therefore likely to come down in price a lot. It already has.
Between platinum nanowires and other technologies, the cost
barrier is dropping. It appears to be a matter of when the car
companies will mass produce fuel cell EVs, not if.
As far as petro wars, securing oil is less of a concern than rogue
nations right now. Iraq and Iran were both on the radar as dangerous states before the Iraq war where at least Iraq now seems to be in much better shape. Believe it or not, there is a
large domestic supply of oil and a fair amount of America’s oil comes from Venezuela. There is probably a 60 year domestic
supply of OIL, although the cost of tapping it may be too high.
I’d say that my parents represent the average middle class person and frankly they are not going to buy a hybrid because of the price. As far as people wanting bigger cars with big engines, that depends on where they live and what their needs are. If you need a truck, you buy a truck. If you need an economy car, you buy an economy car.
Bush, unlike Obama, pushed OIL free transportation technologies.
BEVs come with so much range anxiety that they aren’t practical and Nissan quite frankly is nuts. Fuel cell vehicles on the other hand refuel in minutes, start in 20 below weather, have a minimum range of 150 miles, they have a maximum range of 500 miles, they are getting more reliable, and they are getting much cheaper. Most important, fuel cell vehicles need hydrogen which is NOT a fossil fuel. Even if methane is used to get hydrogen, methane is a domestic fossil fuel.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:40 pm)I would like it if they would interview Lyle again. I think it would bring even more people to Gm-Volt.com.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:45 pm)In addition to the $7500 govt tax credit I think what would help is zero percent interest on the portion of the vehicle’s sticker price that covers the battery.
Oh, heck, just go with 0% financing on ALL Chevy Volts sold.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:46 pm)Just don’t put the carbon tax on our industrys. It is already nearly impossible for us to compete against such poluters as China and India. A carbon tax should be enough to put the few left in a position of no longer being able to compete.
PUT THE CARBON TAX ON IMPORTS FROM COUNTRIES THAT ARE THE WORST OFFENDERS.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:47 pm)I have never bashed him before. In fact, I’ve defended him. In general, I think it’s a lot easier to criticize other people for messing up than it is to actually do their jobs. And hindsight is generally 20-20. So, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt.
I also think anyone associated with GM for the past 15-20 years had major headwinds going against them. And that he’s probably done more good than harm at GM.
But his explanation for coming back from retirement? It would be like if Citibank asked Chuck Prince to come back as a consultant, and he gave an interview announcing he’d agreed to come back because it was “fun again now.”
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:52 pm)From the older article linked above an ironic quote from Lyle:
“I was hoping the site would be a way of constantly demonstrating to GM that the public is interested in this car. I really think it has had that effect on them, because they seem to genuinely curious about how many visitors I’m getting, about people looking at the site in every country in the world. I think it is in someway helping the process. Not that I think I’m that important, but I think it’s letting them know the public is out there. They’re also very interested in hearing suggestions because the car is not here yet, nothing is finalized.”
So naturally, they started their own site (not).
Be well,
Tagamet
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (12:55 pm)Well they DID both get a bailout….
Be well,
Tagamet
(Quote)
+2
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:22 pm)I disagree. When you accept a job, you accept a certain amount of responsibility with that job. That means that you don’t retire at the worst possible time.
Contrast him with Lee Iacocca (who’s in his 80s) and the other Chrysler retirees, who offered to volunteer their services to help out with the new merger. Yes. They have ulterior motives. (Executive retiree benefits.) But at least they’re being constructive!
http://www.detnews.com/article/20090612/AUTO01/906120400/1148/rss25
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:25 pm)Hi Michael. Really missed ya….
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:29 pm)In fairness to Lutz–I’m really hoping that this is his way of lobbying GM for a gas tax.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:30 pm)So the pink tie is backkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk!
Not impressed by someone who returns to a job, after admitting he is in it only for the fun. He admitted he left because things would be tough, and he was not willing to roll up his sleeves (and take off his pink tie), and help rebuild GM.
Bobby, you dissapoint me
(Quote)
-1
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:37 pm)Lyle looks scared in that picture to me…like he is posing beside a bear that could swallow him whole at any moment.
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/images/2007/11/17/robert_and_me_3.jpg
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:39 pm)I can’t believe I’m defending Lutz again–but if it probably wasn’t his decision? How was it his fault?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:39 pm)Nice day today isn’t it JEC?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:42 pm)I will own that tie someday…oh yes, I will own that tie.
Sidenote: Props to Lyle for that picture.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:46 pm)Absolutely…if only my Dihydorgen monoxide (DHMO) splitter were working, my life would be sweet!
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:52 pm)Exactly. You said it so it so much better than I did.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (1:58 pm)That’s more than fair.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:19 pm)Here is the entire quote:
“Still, Lutz stands by his skepticism on hybrids, which he says are having trouble selling in the current market because gas prices are too low and the cars are not cheap. People still want bigger cars, he says, with more power.
“Other than in the media, there is not a groundswell toward green vehicles in the United States,” Lutz says. “In fact, they’re a very hard sell.”"
The Volt isn’t larger, it is more expensive, and it suffers from a worse economic equation. About the only thing it has going for it over a hybrid is a 0-60 of 8.5 ish compared to 10.0ish for a hybrid. Neither is particularly fast and anyone who wants a fast car wouldn’t buy either.
So forgive me for questioning why this quote applies only to hybrids and not the Volt.
(Quote)
-2
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:20 pm)Any thing the white house says or any of their task forces say should be taken with a grain of salt. I wouldnt trust any of them to find thier way out of a paper bag. This task force is completely political and out for an agenda, not to save the auto industry.
(Quote)
-3
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:23 pm)A cabon tax would be great. We wouldnt have to worry about the Co2 problem any more in this country, we would all be riding horses agian and be back in the stone age as or economy went to crap.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:38 pm)Hmm?? I agree with everything you’re saying but when did we say “green cars”? I also believe that global warming is real, or at least that [car] pollution is a very serious problem. Why does everybody sound somewhat agitated to me today… Maybe I’m just a little too giddy because the sun finally came out in Massachusetts this week.
Another thing I realized as I was car shopping, is that I kept thinking to myself, Well, I don’t REALLY need a maximally fuel efficient car, I can just conserve by driving less or more carefully. Maybe other shoppers out there think the same thing when they see the sticker price on a hybrid versus a regular gas car.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:38 pm)Link to source please.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:39 pm)You make some good points. But like so many others you want energy independance but fail to mention NUCLEAR POWER. Without Nuclear Power plants all the dreams of energy independance are just that-dreams!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:43 pm)That’s the question: what DOES the public want? what does the gov’t want to see on the road?
I know what I want, but I know I’m in a minority and given the current price of gas ($2.35/gal), I won’t see an electric vehicle until the next gas crisis….even then it’ll probably do what it’s been doing: gas goes sky high, the economy goes the hell, then when everybody’s up in arms about it, gas prices quietly go back down and the automakers have their excuse not to build fuel efficient vehicles, and given the low cost of fuel (energy) the economy rebounds.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:53 pm)I wouldn’t agree that everything from here on out is on Bob Lutz. Let’s get real. Since his job is to control marketing communications it’s fair to evaluate him on … marketing communications. I don’t see how anything else makes sense.
One big difference between us is that you think GM’s product mix is terrible. I don’t. First of all, since the lead times in the bar biz are so long, taking eight years to turn around a vehicle lineup isn’t unreasonable. And to a great extent GM has done that. GM has decent product, it just also had too many brands, too many models, and too many dealers. Not every vehicle that GM has released in the last four years has been great, but there have been some very good releases.
As for greenwashing, I can’t say this is a Bob Lutz or even a GM thing. Other manufacturers have done the same thing. Or worse. How about Toyota? You don’t think that the GS 450h, which makes the hybrid Escalade look positively brilliant, isn’t the dumbest hybrid around?
What’s interesting is that Honda could have used a Bob Lutz. Honda’s hybrid efforts have been sad. Unlike Toyota which went off chasing dreams of global domination, Honda really stuck to its mission of selling fuel efficient cars. But it just can’t seem to get its hybrid passenger car right. First it was too small. Now it’s too performance and handling compromised. I’m thinking that a Bob Lutz would have stepped in and said: “Sorry guys, a lower price is great, but you’ve taken too much content out.” And that would have been a good thing.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (2:57 pm)I was thinking the same thing.
Lutz continues to believe, as much as he will deny, that “there’s no replacement, for displacement” mantra.
I know Bob was the one who wanted the Volt, but I believe his idea was an electric assist to make the car even more of a performer. He wants 0-60 to match an F16, and adding electric motors gives him all the torque one could desire.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:03 pm)So, does every blog start with “I’m first!…”?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:05 pm)So…you really think Toyota just finished designing their latest upgrade to the Prius and it’s drivetrain, is pushing production to the max, and is selling every vehicle (now more than 250K per year) vehicle at a loss when they have a month’s long waiting list? Why do you propose they would do that? Do you think they are that altruistic or just business stupid?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:06 pm)Tag, for me it’s mostly anecdotal. Within a couple of hundred yards of my house I have two neighbors who want to buy an electric car. This week my wife’s VP of sales announced, out of the blue, that he wanted to buy an electric car. (He knows almost nothing about them so he may change his mind when he sees the price). A guy at my gym a few weeks ago said he and his friends had been talking about getting a Model S. My next door neighbor has said he’d love to buy a Volt.
These are all insignificant data points, but here is the deal: When you come out with a new product it’s frequently better to be lucky than good. People have to be ready to buy the product. For whatever reason or reasons, a lot of people are predisposed to buy an EV or E-REV. So unlike 1999, when GM released the EV1, it’s going to be releasing an EV to a public that is thinking EVs are the coolest thing around. I just don’t think Lutz gets this.
I think people will overlook some issues but not a huge number. The vehicle has to be good. To Lutz’s credit he understands this.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:06 pm)Yeah, a bear . . . . or maybe a big smokey factory.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6e/Roger_and_me.jpg
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:15 pm)Good post.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:18 pm)I’m definitely pulling for your experiences over mine. MY neighbors are really excited about those new cars in the Sears and Roebuck catalog that don’t have a crank on the front. I hear that they are toying with the idea of cars coming in colors other than black, too.
Seriously, I’ll believe in electric cars when telephones don’t have cords!
Be well,
Tagamet
/who is STILL omitting the acronym…..
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:19 pm)I know you just love to bring up your precious Prius, but it only got above a 4-star crash safety rating in one of the 5 categories. Vehicle stability control is optional, not standard. You should take into consideration that MPGs is not all everybody cares about.
What premium? The 2006 (the model year of the non-hybrid I bought) base level Prius KBB value is $15,780 for Good Condition with no extras (good luck finding one at that price though, try more like $16,999). The 2006 Corolla S (which is more comparable to a Prius than an Acura, since they’re both small Toyotas) is $10,810 for Good Condition with no extras. The $4970 difference buys about 2000 gallons of gas at $2.49 (price at the pump this morning). That’s 7.76 years to break even at my personal driving habits of about 7500 miles a year. By that time in 2017, I’ll be finally saving money in my 11 year old embarrassing-to-be-seen-in junker. Thanks but no thanks, the ugly and unfortunate truth is, I’m in my early 20’s and I have an image to maintain.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:45 pm)Off topic, (but still with a pink tie)
Good interview with Frank Weber (jan, 2009):
http://evworld.com/EVWORLD_TV.CFM?storyid=1720
of note —
-When asked what his biggest ” known unknown” is: Battery durability.
-He confirms that (in EV mode) ice will come on under some circumstances to condition the battery. (he’s talking about when it’s too cold, but doesn’t correct interviewer when he says too hot, I would think Weber would have corrected him if needed)
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:47 pm)I’ve heard this a lot but I just don’t buy it outright. It can be true and is true for plenty of drivers for plenty of hybrid models but it is not true for many others. Some many comparisons done earlier this decade said they weren’t quite there when gas was just under $2. Hybrid’s performance has improved significantly since then, costs have come down, and gas prices are higher. If you do a a full analysis that includes all lifetime ownership costs, including any relevant residual value, good hybrids often do pencil out.
Just look at Haley comment at #1 that the extra costs wouldn’t be recouped until at least 5 years later as the reason for it not making money sense to purchase a hybrid. My contention is that hybrids will always cost more but they need to be marketed better. It seem to be the only automotive feature that so many people say that they would like to have with their car, but yet aren’t willing pay any more for it. And if you rationally analyze it, if the time to recoup the premium is actually 5 years all-in, then the hybrid was actually the better long term financial decision. Some might say but then you have to own it longer than 5 years to realize this benefit. That is not neccesarily true. The cars cost different for a reason and are worth different amounts for the same reason. Just look at Ford Escape and Prius residual values. I think you’ll find a significant disparity in price between the hybrids and comparable ICE models remains long into their life. The savings in running cost only need to cover the initial difference in cost (including $ costs) less the residual difference in cost. This is the part that rarely seems to be addressed in most hybrid viability analyses. The other weak part of most analyzing, IMO, is the contention that since we don’t know what future gas prices will be, they should be factored at current prices. This argument implies that since it is an unknown, ingnoring the issue is somehow more accurate. Well, since gas prices are still part of the financial analysis and cannot be ignored you fixing them at current prices is an assumption in itself. IMO it is a much weaker assumption because it is based on nothing. I think it is much more approriate the use an expert opinion or the pleathura of data available to make an educated guess at future pricing.
Then there are the soft benefits of hybrids. GM needs to be playing these up big time, even if they’ve written of HEV’s and are internally counting solely on Voltec for their EV future.
Bottom line, I don’t think the issue of hybrid viability should be punted so easily.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:49 pm)Sounds dangerous…I think we should ban DHMO, lol.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (3:55 pm)“(he’s talking about when it’s too cold, but doesn’t correct interviewer when he says too hot, I would think Weber would have corrected him if needed)”
–disregard, I misunderstood that, they’re just talking about cold
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:01 pm)He’s not just marketing communications, he is the “head of product development, marketing, advertising and communications”
http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/07/lutz-stays-on-with-new-gm-heads-all-things-creative.html
What part of GM’s future isn’t his job if he controls not only the devlopment of products, the marketing of it, and the advertising resources behind it? What percentage of GM’s future would you say is in his hands? Would you allow for saying that he is/will be the person ‘primarily’ responsible for the future?
Unhappy moment for me when he ‘unretired’ was when the press release mentioned this, “Mark LaNeve will continue to be the head of sales, and will report separately to him” If those two directly together working in the same room isn’t a sign of the apocalypse, I don’t know what is. (=
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20090710/bob-lutz-un-retire-gm-ceo-henderson-says.htm
—
Sidenote: I don’t know about all that other stuff you are commenting on…greenwashing, Toyota. etc. I’m not a big fan of the GS 450h either, I think it is misplaced/mispriced, but I’m not sure what that has to do with the price of soup in relation to talking about Lutz’s future at GM.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:06 pm)He bails/jumps ship then finds out the grass got greener then comes back……into his same position.?????
Whatta jerk. That’s like getting a divorce because your significant other has cancer then you find there is no cancer and try and get back.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:06 pm)It would be classy if those that previously ranted about “government-designed cars” and “socialism” updated their conclusions based on Lutz’s input. It would show humility and rational thought.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:09 pm)“But lo, and behold, the government task force were not a bunch of ogres. They were extremely helpful, and their only agenda was to make GM the best company it could be.”
-Bob Lutz
…I like a grain of salt (or two) on my margarita glass.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:13 pm)Hard to believe that the price will remain at 2.49$ a gallon for the next 7.76 years. So any calculation of that kind is flawed from the beginning since the trend should be that the prices will rise over time.
I’m also surprised that you value image over long term planet survival. I would understand more if you were in your forties and had to show the world how successful you were and all that but at this time in your life, it makes me wonder…
Do you believe global warming is just a scam ?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:20 pm)In my opinion:
It is his fault because he is now the ‘head of product development and marketing’ and he represented that he had the authority to make that decion, and it was made… saying, ‘the G8 is great, we can’t let it die at GM and we won’t” Only to have to slink off to the blog to say, ‘oopsie’
1 of 2 things happened:
A) He opened his trap and then realized it was a economic nightmare to back that decision the moment he said it and back out as quickly and quietly as possible.
-or-
B) He made a statement/announcement that he believed in…but overstepped the bounds of his job (in the very first days) or didn’t fight Fritz on that decision (because it sure sounds like a decision that should be his), which undermines his authority/credibility from here on out…and actually created a marketing disaster in so doing.
Either way…his fault. (again, imo)
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:20 pm)Thought I was a person, guess I’ll have to re-evaluate. Lutz, and to a large part GM’s, problem is they are too well in touch with the market that thinks like they do. People change, markets change, and if you don’t change with them then you end up where GM did.
LauraM, later in the same article Lutz talks about having to do a better job of telling it like it is. He said this in two different ways in this article. He has said basically the same thing in the past. I cannot alot him this “fairness”. He simple does not understand very well the segment of the market that doesn’t hold size and power at the top of their car buying priorities. That is OK if he can bring himself to listen to others that do and apply his thinking to the development of cars like the Converj. Fortunately, Voltec offers GM a drivetrain that can satisfy at least the speed and “fun” aspect of driving that appeals to Bob and many others, while still trouncing the efficiency of the best hybrids on the market today.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:37 pm)Not true, he wanted a BEV but John Laukner and others convinced him an they still weren’t practical but an EREV could be. My “concern” is that he is or isn’t behind the technology of the Volt. My concern is with his belief and determination to MAKE it a long term mass produced success and with his ability to properly apply this technology to the market. The Volt conecpt is pretty good but it could and should have been more market relevent from day 1. I believe GM’s misunderstanding and desire for green cred affected some of their decisions. Ironically, they should have come out of the gate first with a car that is more up Bob’s alley, more like the Converj. That said, the Volt has it mostly right. Hopefully, they and Bob can get a grasp of all segments to the market so they can do a better job of applying and developing their new technology more appropriately for the different markets that exist.
Good, appropriate green vehicles can be sold, as Toyotal and Ford (and Tesla to an extent) have proven, but mediocre ones like any other products don’t sell too well.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:42 pm)Excellent post.
It’s the same thing that happened in the 1970s. First the oil prices shot up through the roof and many companies started plans to make electric cars. Then the oil companies dropped the price of oil to far below where it was before the crisis and kept it low for as many years as it took to kill off the electric car companies. THEN the oil companies started raising the prices again.
Sounds familiar, right? We need to make a different outcome this time. Hopefully with enough of us working toward electric cars and (hopefully) continued government support until the electric car industry can stand on its feet.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:44 pm)/who is STILL omitting the acronym…..”
I forget, is this a protest against http://WWW.Voltage.COM?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (4:52 pm)I have to agree with DonC more than Bob (Pink Tie) on this one. If you look at the Prius owners, I think the majority can afford a more expensive car but they have chosen efficiency over other car virtues. The vast majority of car buyers do not have efficiency as that high of a priority but the “greenest” car is an easy sell to those that do. Hybrid sales in the US are running north of 200K this year and supply is limited at the same time as gas being recessionary cheap.
LJGTVWOTR!!!
(Quote)
-3
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:00 pm)I agree 110 percent.
Lutz and Wagoner where both “asked” to leave but didn’t have to, they could have put up a fight like honorable men do. They were in reality gutless when it got hot in the kitchen. When times got tough they bailed like wimps to protect their golden parachutes no doubt. Spineless is what I call’em.
(Quote)
-5
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:05 pm)Yeah, even tougher to try deception and sell a Hybrid as an Electric. You need to dial 1-800-GET-A-BRAIN.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:09 pm)You could do those same things as a hybrid owner as well.
(Quote)
-2
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:11 pm)I wouldn’t want him near my foxhole.
(Quote)
-8
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:20 pm)Get a grip dude. If all cars in the USA were electric tomorrow we would still be heavily dependent on foreign oil. You seriously need a checkup from the neck up.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:24 pm)_____________________________________________________
I’m a Lutz fan but I agree w/ Laura’s post.
_____________________________________________________
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:25 pm)Wonder if Bob keeps up with this kind of thing?:
Ford hybrid sales up 91 percent in June
http://www.hybridcarblog.com/2009/07/ford-hybrid-sales-up-91-percent-in-june.html
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:26 pm)Every industrial country in the world has more expensive gas than the US. You are just a bunch of spoiled cry babies. Hybrids and
EREV are going to look real good when gas goes back over $4 a gallon, and it will. Bob should join the 21 st century and stop being so skeptical because the good old days of gas guzzling are gone forever. Or he should retire for good.
(Quote)
-11
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:27 pm)(click to show comment)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:29 pm)In two years GM will be selling the 2011 Volt. That is Version 1.00 of the Volt and it is not priced for the masses. They claimed yearly procution numbers of 10K, 50-60K, and then ?? That means we are in year 2-3 (from now) before they make 50K vehicles. That is not a game changer and is a pittance compared to the Prius. Version 2.0 of the Volt may be affordable but it is 4-5 years away.
My point was that a company cannot plan on making money in 4-5 years and just leave the market to the others in the mean time.
GM needs a strong hybrid product for less than $30K right now.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:32 pm)… Personally I would be happy inside, knowing that I am not sending my hard earned money off to terrorist countries.
Go E85!
(Quote)
-3
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:32 pm)Go Laura.
Lido was and is THE MAN.
After they way Ford treated him and the way he stood his ground I have the utmost respect for Mr. Iacocca.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:37 pm)No, not angry. Evryone’s car buying descision is there own. I do get frustrated when economics are misapplied and then used as an argument against hybrids. Not saying you did this but is done often and thus my questions. I also don’t understand the concept of being “pretty gung-ho about environmentalism” but placing little or no value on the environmental aspect. In fact, you will have paid significantly higher total ownership cost for your TSX even if you only keep it 3 years. The total cost would most likely be higher for the Corolla you mentioned below as well. Keep in mind the cars do not depreciate to equal values when you purchase them. The Prius would retain a significant premium for a long time. The question is will the gas savings make up for the premium reduction as the cars depreciate. I also wouldn’t consider a Carolla any more comparable to a Prius than a Prius is to a TSX, but that is me, and if you see them as comparable then they are for you.
Bottom line is that you wanted the TSX more for various reasons. Nothing wrong with that but doesn’t make sense to justify it’s purchase based on an incomplete cost comparison between a Prius and a Carolla. The TSX was more appealing so you bought it, and it sounds like you are hoping the Volt will make sense when your next purchase comes around. Again, nothing wrong here but the Volt will fail even worse in a comparison done the same way as your Prius/Carolla.
My hope is that young, concerned people such as yourself learn enough to factor in the whole picture (all financial aspects and societal aspects). I also hope the car companies come to learn that plenty of people want the TSX fun together with the gas savings of EV’s. It sure would make the buying decision a lot easier for people with buying preferences like yours.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:40 pm)Dan,
the math does not work.
Compare the Chevy Cruze (30 mpg avg – $20,000 cost) vs the Volt at $35,000.
at 12,000 miles per year the Cruze costs $1,140 in gas for the year (using your 2.85/gal number).
Thats $11,400 over 10 years in total fuel cost for the Cruze.
The Volt could cost $15,000 more for about the same car.
This is money up front which costs even more over 10 years.
$15,000 is worth over $22,000 in 10 years at 4% interst.
The Volt will have some gas costs and some electrical cost which I am ignoring.
One will likely never make up the difference in up front cost on gas savings in the Volt.
(Quote)
-1
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:42 pm)+2
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:43 pm)^ Irony
|
|
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:43 pm)According to a Des Moines Register report, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, wants Congress to use “climate change” legislation to mandate that auto manufacturers fit all new cars to run on a blend of 85 percent ethanol.
“We own the automobile companies,” Harkin said earlier this week. “Why not? I think that will be an easy one.”
U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu agreed, stating in a speech last month that all new vehicles should be equipped to run on E85
**************
Is Lutz just kissing up to his Govt. masters?
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:49 pm)Yep, Koz. I’m still miffed about that. Not like that’s going to matter to GM.
Be well,
Tagamet
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:54 pm)Excuse my omission.
I was comparing the savings to a 22 mile per gallon benchmark for what I estimate as a national composite average. (For example, the cash for clunkers for vehicles less than 20 mpg. Also, my current vehicle gets 20.5 mpg, which is just above that, as well as maintenance savings, which are too numerous to detail.)
Add up everything you’ve spent for the last 10 years.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (5:58 pm)Many people believe man made global warming is a scam.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:04 pm)That is true Dan. It depends what you compare.
I like to compare the Cruze to the Volt. When Joe Smoe goes to the Chevy dealer in a few years, he will see the Cruze and the Volt together. They are both on the same platform and the Cruze is supposed to be a little more upscale like the malibu so it should compare well in features to the Volt.
There will be plenty of consumer reports types magazines or car&driver type articles that will compare the savings and they will make people wonder if the Volt is a good deal.
For me, I value not sending money overseas. That is why I am a GM fan in the first place. I will place a value on buring less gas.
My point was that it is a tough sell to go on the gas savings alone since poeple will compare to cars like the cruze and not your typical 22 mpg clunker.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:06 pm)I too think he should mentor second line leadership and make them capable.
Lutz unretirement sounded me like ” We dont have a secondline Young leadership who ca take the company ahead”
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:10 pm)Yes, if all cars were electric we would still import a lot of oil. I’ve said this many times here. Cars only account for around 44% of our oil consumption, and we import around 66%.
But we have to start somewhere. Let’s put it this way: If we don’t convert cars away from oil, then we will never become energy independant.
The United States imports around 2/3 of the oil we consume. Oil consumption breaks down roughly as follows:
• 44% gasoline (mostly for passenger vehicles)
• 17% diesel (mostly for heavy duty long distance travel)
• 5% jet fuel
• 15% fuel oil (home heating and industrial)
• 19% other (petro-chemical, plastics, fertilizer, etc.)
So it’s obvious to me that we need other solutions in addition to plug-in cars. These would probably include:
• Ethanol from non-food sources ( http://www.coskata.com )
• Bio-diesel from algae ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxNeBQCRv1c )
• More domestic oil production (stripper wells, oil shale, tar sands, offshore drilling)
• Conservation
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:13 pm)The idea that GM killed the electric car is a farse. GM does not have this power and never did.
1. NiMH batteries are used in Electric cars so GM could not have stopped that.
2. If electric cars a such a great idea in the US with its cheap gas, why aren’t they everywhere now in Europe where gas has been more stable at a higher price for years. Are the French and German’s in on the conspiracy to kill the electric car too. France is flush wih electricity and has high gas prices. Surely they would be out in front on electric cars if they were a good idea.
3. GM would sell anything that the public wanted in a car. If electrics were truly in demand, the auto companies would be selling them.
4. GM was forced to sell the electric car by govt intervention. They did a nice job of building one. When the govt lost interest and dropped the mandate, GM stopped building it. This makes perfect sense to me since it was unprofitable. The group with the power to startup the electric car program also has the power to kill it. This group is the California Air Resource board. They killed the electric car.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:23 pm)Wonderful point about Lutz not understanding that “green creed” is but one of several compelling reasons for having cars that getter mpg. What’s puzzling is that he has said as much when saying that he believes energy independence is important.
Seems pointless to argue about why using less oil is a good idea when any one of several reasons provides sufficient justification.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:29 pm)koz,
Your right.
What I was attempting to convey, was Bob’s desire to make a performance car, and all the other aspects, such as environmental and energy independence are not part of his way of thinking. Whether it be a BEV or EREV did not really matter, but making something cool and high performance (ie: fun for Bob), was what he wanted.
I guess you could say, this is Bob being Bob, but I hate that as much as “Manny, being Manny” crap.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:42 pm)I think Michelle Kreps is a fine journalist but I think she was a little sloppy with her language. The actual press release said this:
“Bob Lutz has agreed to join the new GM as vice chairman responsible for all creative elements of products and customer relationships. Lutz and Tom Stephens, vice chairman, product development, will work together as a team, partnering with Ed Welburn, vice president of design, to guide all creative aspects of design. GM’s brands, marketing, advertising, and communications will report to Lutz for consistent messaging and results.”
I don’t see any direct line reporting here.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:45 pm)His fault for what? For being Bob Lutz and talking before checking? That would be a “yes”. For canceling the G8? That would be a “no”.
You keep assuming (and claiming) that he has direct line authority over the decision but he doesn’t.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:51 pm)Also, if we include interest of that money “differential-of-higher-cost” over ten years, let me raise your very generous 4%, to my expected 6%, and recompute the numbers, and, then,
Then, Offset that 6% interest completely with the gasoline and maintenance savings monies that you are now applying to extra payments on higher interest credit cards or other debt.
So, if we have a high interest credit card at 18%, then, as three times that 6% (as extra principal paid on that 18% debt) for the extra over your regular payments with those Voltec savings of about $145 a month to apply to offset on top of that, would have a daily compounded interest savings possibly equivalent to three times that $145 when applying your gasoline cost savings to kill those higher interest numbers (if interest costs need comparison).
All Voltec vehicles likely will get sold for the first few years in the first few days. If the point is that you want to buy something non-Voltec for whatever formula you wish, then go for it. Your formula for returns are distinctively yours.
But, I’d bet that for a huge population ready to buy a Volt, the returns will be very rewarding for exactly the numbers and reasons I’ve explained.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:52 pm)Laura, Lutz has worked at a lot of companies — Ford, Chrysler, BMW, GM.
His employment relationship with GM was entirely at will. He could leave at any time and GM could ask him to leave at any time. You’d have a much better point if he had an employment contract. If he worked in health care, where 2-4 year contracts are common, then quitting before serving out his contract would be one thing and I’d agree with you. But without a term limit you’re saying that a 77 year old guy can never retire.
(Quote)
Jul 19th, 2009 (6:55 pm)Cap’n Jack, How you know that?
(Quote)
-1