On August 24th, the CARS program (more affectionately known as ‘Cash for Clunkers’) ended. The program was rolled out to generate sales to the distressed North American car industry (and the economy in general), while putting more efficient cars on the road.
Was it well received? Very much so. Who doesn’t like free money* after all? In fact, the initial funding of a billion dollars was exhausted in a week. A further two billion was quickly infused into the program, which allowed it to reach the one month mark before closing.
In total, the DoT reported that 690,114 deals went down, good for about 2.9 billion worth of stimulus. Many critics of the program feared that the program merely dragged forward future sales and really did not generate anywhere near that many ‘new’ sales and that a wake would be left in months following it.
The industry as a whole did indeed report growth…over 1% worth, with small car maker Hyundai naturally receiving the largest boost, up 47%. Also faring well were Ford (+17%), Honda (+10%) and Toyota (+6%). However, our own GM pulled up the rear, reporting year over year sales of 246,479, good for -20%. A look at the top selling vehicles in the CARS program gives a glimpse of part of the problem:
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Camry
4. Ford Focus
5. Hyundai Elantra
6. Nissan Versa
7. Toyota Prius
8. Honda Accord
9. Honda Fit
10. Ford Escape
You will notice, there is not a GM vehicle to be found on that list. Of all sales generated, only 17% of the CFC deals went down at a GM dealership, and of those, a good bulk fell to ‘dead brand’ Pontiac.
Breaking down August’s -20% monthly sales number at GM, we find Pontiac reported a 23.3% sales increase, while survivors (and unlikely beneficiaries) of the CARS program Cadillac and Buick, were off 55% and 52% respectively. (GMC and Chevrolet were off 45% and 9%)
Looking ahead, GM has a couple big issues. For starters, Pontiac sold 30,000 odd cars last month, which leaves them with only about 15,000 left in new car inventory total before they slip quietly into automotive history. In fact, the ‘dead brands’ made up about 1 in of every 6 sales for GM last month. GM is so concerned about the orphaned customers of these brands, or ‘free agents’ if you will, they have recently set up a special task force to try and rustle those costumers back into the fold.
Even before the loss of the ‘dead brands’ themselves are felt on the monthly sales, GM’s market share has plunged from 24.7% to 19.5% in the last 12 months.
On top of the future loss of ‘free agents’ (about 15% of GM’s business YTD), they now face the vacuum the CARS program has left, which primarily benefited Japanese auto makers (and Pontiac clear outs).
What did newly promoted, vice president of rose colored glasses U.S. Sales, Mark LaNeve, have to say about all of this and GM’s diminishing share?
“The Cash for Clunkers program was certainly a success, but our momentum continues to build on the strength of our new cars….our four core brands – Chevrolet, GMC, Buick and Cadillac – (which) are well positioned with new products to take advantage of the ongoing recovery in the market.” Mark continues to bat a thousand with optimism on the monthly sales results and forward looking statements.
Inside the same press release, the the usual paradox between reason and the words coming out of Mark LaNeve’s mouth presents itself. Mark announces that current production of cars for the quarter is set at 535,000 vehicles, and will be 655,000 for Q4 2009. Which of course means to any of us that are good at math, (and/or own a calculator), if GM sells every car they make, they will still average about 40,000 less than they sold this month.
Normally your supposed to wrap these articles up with some hope, so what is the answer? Is it the Voltec project(s) going to lead the charge at the ‘new’ GM and turn things around? It might. Unfortunately volume and profitability for this platform are a long way off, and there isn’t any new products that can fill the gap in the meantime…unless the new Equinox (and its legion of rebadges) are going to sell 1.5 million copies in 2010.
GM is going to need a lot more help from you and me (the taxpayer) to get there, so are we in? Or out? Do we even have a choice? Next up…the DoE loans.
This entry was posted on Saturday, September 5th, 2009 at 8:46 pm and is filed under Financial, Op-ed. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+3
Sep 5th, 2009 (8:59 pm)A coworker recently bought a new Prius. Another traded her red Mustang for a Corolla. Another bought a new Scion. He said, “They were willing to deal”. Payments are $429 a month.
=D~
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:23 pm)I love the article Statik.
With GM’s questionable reliability compared to the Japanese, with Alan Mulally at the helm, Ford’s consumer satisfaction is skyrocketing in the last few years, and the Korean autos now winning vehicle of the year awards. It makes sense their market share continues to fall.
Luckily the auto task force and GM knew this was coming and has cut so many dealerships and jobs.
I love having complete bafoons in charge of one of America’s most important corporations for 20 years at a time when manufacturing in America is being obliterated.
And America’s unemployment continues to increase. Anyone think we can hit double digits next month? Another 275,000 lay offs ought to do it.
+3
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:23 pm)Pontiac likely took sales from Chevy due to the going out of business sale that they ran, so I wouldn’t presume that Pontiac is more popular than Chevy based on these results.
As for the surviving brands’ current market position, GM knew they were ill positioned for high gas prices and have been working on entirely new platforms like the Chevy Volt. The pain is expected to continue until these new products emerge.
The Malibu and Camaro are still selling well, along with the trucks, so GM will crawl along until their new products come out next year.
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:29 pm)“The facts maam, only the facts”
But they can be so darn depressing…I guess I will say thanks for the numbers, but as your article construes, their really is not a lot to take out of GM’s latest success, or lack thereof.
Happy Labor Day! (kinda appropriate that Statik would post now)
/No pink tie for Statik…I think Lutz just ordered a fleet of black Caddy’s with heavily tinted windows to find Statik and bring him in for a little chat.
+9
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:34 pm)I traded the “blown head gasket” ’94 Cad Eldo for a ’09 Chev HHR. Because the HHR is a category 1 truck, the CARS credit was $4500. Test drove the Honda Insight (too noisy, no power) and the 2010 Prius (7K more than HHR and it didn’t have a 5 star crash rating.)
I am enjoying the HHR very much and am impressed with the great service from the Chevrolet dealer.
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:35 pm)Nice job statik. You left JUST a glimmer of hope available (which is far more than I personally need). I agree with Jason, the best is yet to come. And who would have thought that odd Pontiacs would sell so well.
Be well,
Tagamet
/I wonder if the rose-colored glasses fellow needs an assistant?
“Things still suck, they’re just going to suck a lot less”
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:37 pm)I know a couple of people that only failed to buy a Honda or Toyota under C.A.R.S. is because the they literally ran out of cars. The Toyota and Honda dealerships were turning people away because they had nothing left to sell.
Unfortunately the way cash for clunkers was structured did nothing but hurt market share of US built cars.
The Voltec is a game changing technology, but I’m inclined to accept the possibility that Statik is right and maybe it’s too little too late.
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:38 pm)I can see Lutz putting on his brass knuckles with Statik tied to a chair.
“Let’s talk about those blog posts, Mr. Kling”
…
“Wow, that sounds like a pretty a good deal. But I’ve got a better one. How about I give you the finger, and you give me my phone call.”
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:44 pm)Tag,
My guess on the Pontiac sales was that they were basically giving them away. Along with the govt rebate, I would bet that GM was providing heavy incentives to buy the Pontiacs and get them off the lot.
Of course someone who actually has the real goods on this subject, can chime in and let me know if this really was the case.
+5
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:44 pm)“GM is going to need a lot more help from you and me (the taxpayer) to get there, so are we in? Or out? Do we even have a choice?”
________________
Big problem here. The more “help” GM gets, the more animosity it breeds in the discriminating “free market minded” consumer. Many do not want to support socialism and see the purchase of a government motors vehicle as a vote in the wrong direction.
Whatever GM is going to be, it needs to be on its own very quickly. Long term government ownership will only drag the future of GM and this country down.
+3
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:47 pm)Lutz has been working hard to reinvent GM’s lineup, not least of which is the Volt, so there is nothing statik is saying that he doesn’t already know. A great leader doesn’t sweat criticism, especially when they have been working the solution for over two years.
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:48 pm)Should have been ONLY for Chrysler, Ford, GM vehicles.
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:48 pm)JEC,
Yeah, it’s a tough sell to move those “dead end” vehicles off the remaining lots. Cars have enormous depreciation in any case the first 2 years – I wonder what depreciation a dead end car has??!!??
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:48 pm)Yeah, CARS program didn’t benefit GM that much, but, China sales are going very well.
GM is becoming smaller and more focused. You don’t cut a company in half and project sales increases. I don’t see anything counter to the gameplan here.
I haven’t been a real GM fan in the past. Since the Volt was introduced, I have become a raving maniac.
Just get me a Volt!
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:52 pm)jscott1000,
It’ll take years to see progress, but I think GM is at least on the right path now. The “conservative” roll out of Voltec numbers will almost *impose* a slow growth period. Once it’s accepted, it’ll soar (I think).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (9:57 pm)I disagree. Any automaker with domestic (US) production should be eligible.
The government should look closely at these results to reaffirm they are investing in the right next generation technologies. Given the success of small cars and hybrids, the government should be satisfied with the development of the Chevy Cruze and Volt.
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:00 pm)On some level I think Bob would recognize that the numbers are what they are, and not that Statik was doing a hatchet job on Gm.
On the other hand, he’d probably show up with the tinted windowed caddy….(g)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:02 pm)Vincent,
If they had competitive models it wouldn’t require protectionism. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:02 pm)Very well put. A pruned shrub takes time to blossom.
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:04 pm)Loboc re raving maniac about the Volt.
DUH. Of COURSE we are (lol)!
Be well,
Tagamet
/good point about the smaller company and growth.
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:09 pm)Jason,
And you never know how deep a puddle is, until you step in it. That could be a Volt engineer’s mantra…
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:20 pm)Tagament my friend ….we are trying to revive the great Dinosaur of GM.
You don’t do that with our tax dollars and feed it to the competition.
Just like when Regan helped out Harley Davidson and the end result is fantastic history with a bright future. Jap bikes were limited in importation and taxed.
Jason the money from our pockets needs to stay in this country. While other countries are our friends I don’t like the bill of the global economy stimulus being passed on to our future generations and not theirs equally.
It no different than keeping money here instead of to Oil countries. Same reason you are here cheering the Volt correct. Energy freedom. You also need to be financially strong to remain a superpower.
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:20 pm)I would agree GM and Lutz are now working hard to reinvent the lineup.
Kind of a long jump to calling Lutz a great leader though. The lineup you see today that they are trying to reinvent is mostly from Lutz himself, and he is trying to fix it with the public’s money.
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:26 pm)I wonder how many of the top ten vehicles were assembled here in the US. One hopes this will at least benefit the American workers at transplanted assembly plants of the Asian automakers.
Since the 1980s, I’ve owned a Honda Accord, an Eagle Talon (Chysler Mitsubishi – Diamond Star), 2 Geo Metros (5 door hatchback and convertible, GM-Suzuki), a Suzuki Grand Vitara AWD, and 3 Buicks (Regal and 2 Centuries, GM-made in Canada). Were ANY of them American cars?
None were especially unreliable. Many were damaged in collisions. The most costly was the Eagle Talon which experienced a broken timing belt, a collision with a deer, a very costly transmission failure, an impressive blowout at highway speeds all in the space of 3 years. Even with all its problems, it was probably my favorite car.
The Honda Accord finally died at 15 years of age (2 years after I donated it to my sister who likely did not maintain it properly) but was subject to frequent electrical issues and body corrosion.
My current 9-year-old Buick (a twin of one that saved my life when I was rear-ended by a Tractor Trailor) has had only one major issue. A cheaply-made intake manifold gasket, the replacement of which required a large labor bill, was anticipated and saved for. Another future cost will be the repair of both driver’s side power windows. Worst-case estimate will likely be $1000 to repair a feature I only grudgingly accepted with remote keyless entry (obviously not a priority).
I can see where people experiencing any of the problems I have had as enough to put them off a particular Marque forever. However, I believe if GM lives to the time of my next car purchase, it will be because they have overcome years of bad reputation. The only vehicle they have that interests me is the Volt. The only one I’m likely to purchase will be the next Buick that incorporates a VOLTEC drive-train.
Alternatives I will consider include Honda, Mitsubishi, Toyota (for the second time since a long-ago test drive of the Camry) based mainly on the potential of the HSD, Nissan, BMW, and Tesla (the Model S or the cheaper one after).
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:28 pm)Vincement my friend – even Reagan wasn’t perfect (and Obama is certainly no Reagan).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:31 pm)… A lineup that includes the Malibu and Camaro. Remember, the failure was not anticipating high gas prices. Lutz succeeded in creating great cars that Americans would want to buy if gas was cheap.
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (10:49 pm)Vincent.
Toyota is a publicly owned company, many Americans benefit from their profits. And Toyota employs many Americans. Most of their vehicles are made by Americans, many of their parts are made by Americans, and their vehicles are lasting a lot longer, which give Americans the ability to be productive in their lives and spend money on things besides vehicle maintenance.
GM is moving more and more of their production overseas.
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:02 pm)That intake issue with your 9 year old Buick has become a well known black eye for GM and hallmarks the old GM’s terrible decisions to save literally a buck at the expense of their reputation at a time when the Japanese companies were really starting to make bulletproof cars. Ever since the 2000ish generation of the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord hit the market (you see them everywhere now, I own one), the domestic auto industry world has completely fallen apart.
The Big Three US market share has fallen from 70% in 1998 to around 53% in 2008, and it’s probably less than 50% by the end of 2009 judging by these numbers.
-1
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:09 pm)Just blew a wad of dough on a custom made bicycle. I have no interest in buying a car. When an electric one is available in a price range I can afford, I will shop.
-4
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:10 pm)GM has been structuring deals for the uncreditworthy for a long time. C4C was another round in that game. This guarantees that GM’s problems will continue.
+1
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:12 pm)Toyota didn’t just run out of the top sellers, they also ran out of Yarises.
Many people took advantage of the C4C program to get a better deal on their trade-in than they had expected and bail out of GM cars.
Sad. Very sad. But it’s the end result of poor customer satisfaction.
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:23 pm)Yes the Camry and Accord are the result of years of attention to quality. I believe only in the last few years has GM begun to produce vehicles of similar quality. The new Malibu, the new Camaro, and the new 2010 LaCrosse, and the Cadillac lineup are very good examples that would stack up well against the best vehicles GM has ever produced.
Unfortunately for them that is not good enough for me. Only a VOLTEC vehicle of similar build-quality will keep me in the fold. Failing that I may even drive into Ford dealer someday.
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:32 pm)A man gets in a car accident. In the wreck, he loses a finger and his right leg is severed just above the knee. While bleeding badly, the goverment health care worker rushes in and applies a bandage to the hand missing a digit and proclaims, “all better now”.
The same is happening with the economy and the government bailouts. I’ll give them credit for trying, but very little common sense in the execution.
People bought inexpensive cars because they needed small payments because the economy has reduced their credit ratings, personal incomes, and sucked their savings dry. So when Uncle Sam starts handing out money to buy cars, it is obvious to everyone but Obama that the bulk of the money would go to cheap foreign car makers.
Nice try, guys. But just like the trillions you threw at the banks to pay off ‘toxic assets’ but instead they socked it away where nobody knows what they did with it; so too this plan has failed. The temporary ‘bump’ in car sales will be followed by an equal drop in sales for the rest of this year.
It would have been cheaper for the government to have purchased every legal citizen tax payer a new VOLT.
But as we all know: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:42 pm)Excellent ‘Matrix’ reference!
+9
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:43 pm)“The numbers” may not be what you think they are.
The DOT numbers for “CARS” are based on the power train– so a vehicle sold with two different engines counts as two different vehicles, even if they’re both the same make/model. This gives cars like the Corolla a bit of an advantage.
See the article at http://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/01/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy/ which goes into the details on both D.O.T.’s numbers and the same numbers crunched by Edmunds.
I’m not necessarily saying GM’s sales were *good* (Although they accounted for 17.6% of C4C sales– second only to Toyota), just that the D.O.T. figures are already suspect. To further average in the sales declines for brands like Saturn (down 60%) is once again proof that you can prove anything with statistics.
No offense to Statik, but I suspect someone at GM has a much better handle on production vs. projected sales, and right now, doesn’t care that their market share is slipping. You eliminate brands, you go through chapter 11, you lose market share.
The question is, can GM’s cash flow last long enough for GM to reinvent itself, correct it’s (deservedly) shabby reputation, and start experiencing actual growth?
GM’s goal should not be to be the #1 car company in the world right now– GM’s goal needs to be to improve itself to the point where every car they make flies out the doors so fast they have to make more.
The generation 1 Volt has already done it’s job– they’re guaranteed 500 sales out the door, they’ll pick up more from people who can afford it, and then they roll out the Gen 2 Volt at a price people are less likely to panic about. It’s also generating press, and discussion about GM, and the fact that others are jumping on the EREV bandwagon suggests GM has the right idea.
+4
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:45 pm)I think Frank Weber would tell you that they know how deep, how wet, how muddy, how wide, and what the average density and temperature of the puddle is.
He would still be concerned about how noisy the splash is, however.
Sep 5th, 2009 (11:48 pm)Vincent, would you rather GM go under entirely and all those former GM employees that were laid off have no chance to be called back by GM. If that were to happen, what we went through with the recession will end up a lot worse. Give the economic stimulus package time to work. The figures aren’t in yet on what will happen. I read an article (believe it was in New York Times) that said the automotive industry is rapidly moving to the electric power train and that the internal combustion engine is definitely an the way out. More and more OEM are developing EV’s. What I wish would happen is for America to wake up and buy American. GM has some excellent vehicle for sale. All to many are pulled in by Toyota’s green image while in fact it is not green at all. They are subject of patient infringment on many of their hybrid’s and may find they are excluded from the U.S. market entirely.
The objective of the C.A.R.S. program is multi-fold: getting clunkers that consume a lot of gas off the road (is how it is first recognized); pumping cash into the market to save dealerships (be they foreign OEM’s or U.S. OEM’s); but the most important one most people don’t realize, make a significant reduction on the expenditure on foreign petroleum.The later will have a positive effect on our deficit.
Foreign OEM’a like Toyota will have to jump directly to BEV’s for future sales. Hybrids like the Prius don’t but a dent in consumption of foreign petroleum: never will. It important for this country to increase the MPG of the American driver as quickly as possible : only the Volt can do it in a meaningful way in a short time. Toyota, unless it has been keeping development of all electric propulsion vehicles will have a hard time catching up to GM. Since it will take time, for the infrastructure to provide us with charging stations throughout the country, the GM Volt is the correct answer with its range extender ICE generator. In the mean time, they have some excellent vehicles for sale. In time, GM will recover and begin to regain its former position as World leader. No other OEM is leading the way to electric propulsion; they are following GM’s lead. Unlike Toyota which has found itself in patient law suites by copying a U.S. companies innovations, GM will have cornered the design of EREV. and hold a major lead in that area for a long time. Plus, the patients will cover not just innovations in the electric motor drive train relating to EREV but those relevant to BEV,s and battery design. This will insure their market presence as we move through EREV designs to the ultimate BEV, where gasoline will no longer be needed.
I would have preferred the C.A.R.S. gave cash only to domestic companies like you, but I do understand omnimoeish position above.
“Toyota is a publicly owned company, many Americans benefit from their profits.”
You must realize that if you want American freedoms, you have to accept that their is foreign investment within the nation.
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:03 am)I’ve heard there are some cool bikes out there that are also battery electric powered. I suppose you could call them EREVs because when the battery runs out, you have leg power to keep you going until you get home to recharge!
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:06 am)I read that GM ran out of desirably equipped Cobalts very early in cash for clunkers and that put them out of the race almost immediately. Haven’t seen any confirmation of this though.
Driving by the local Toyota lot it appeared they had blown out from a third to half of their standing inventory ( scientifically calculated from drive by recollections of highly suspect reliability).
-13
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:09 am)(click to show comment)
+7
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:11 am)Here is the actual market shares for CARS:
– Toyota 19.4%
– General Motors 17.6%
– Ford 14.4%
– Honda 13.0%
– Nissan 8.7%
– Hyundai 7.2%
– Chrysler 6.6%
So while GM didn’t have a car in the top 10, it had the second largest market share. This would seem to be a signal of strength, not weakness, especially considering that GM doesn’t have that many smaller cars which ended up being the meat and potatoes of the sales. Who knew that being so successful could be such a catastrophe?
GM will be just fine so long as they stay focused and avoid the temptation to try the quick fixes like fleet sales. This shouldn’t be that hard actually since they no longer have to listen to twenty-something Wall Street analysts. In the car biz, product creates market share, and there isn’t anything fundamentally wrong with GM product lineup that better marketing communications can’t fix.
In this regard, to read a completely different take on GM’s liklihood of success, from someone with considerable experience working in and reporting on the automotive industry, check out Gary Witzenburg’s piece in autobloggreen. His summary:
“I now have no doubt about the future of this company,” said a magazine-editor friend at its end. And, at the risk of annoying all those GM-haters out there, I couldn’t agree more.
http://green.autoblog.com/2009/08/17/at-witz-end-a-sneak-peak-at-the-new-gm-s-critically-importa/
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:20 am)When an electric one is available in a price range I can afford, I will shop.
There are some great hub motors activated by pedal torque that multiply your pedal power, for $1000.
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:08 am)Yeah, I just had to throw in the second line about the finger, it’s pretty much the only funny part of the movie.
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:10 am)Amen
-15
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:23 am)(click to show comment)
-10
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:27 am)(click to show comment)
-12
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:38 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:58 am)And Toyota didn’t participate in C4C?
+3
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:08 am)Fuel cells MATURE in comparison with batteries???? Come-on!!! Major advantage of EREV is that infrastructure is in place. CNG has disatvantage that is available only for U.S.A. and for limited time. Europe lacks that resource. I would support load carriers and public transport to be based on CNG.
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:33 am)Not everybody’s a fan of Gary Witzenburg.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/volt-birth-watch-83-gary-witzenburgs-reasons-to-be-cheerful-pt-1/
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:15 am)Cash for clunkers top three:
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Camry
If you like one of these. You’ll love the Volt.
=D~
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:56 am)Not everybody’s a fan of TTAC either. Not pick’in, just saying.
-1
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:59 am)Good article Statik. The Cruze and Orlando sure would have been nice to have for Cash for Clunkers. I still can’t get the rationalization as to why they can be ready for Europe already yet we have to endure the Cobalt for awhile longer. The Cruze might have made the top 10 list. But what do we know?
+3
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:02 am)Has anyone ever seen Consumers Report write any positives of real value about GM cars? I never have. No matter how great of a car GM makes, they’ll tear it down. For example with the Corvette, they have it as a gas guzzler. I don’t think they know how to compare and apple for an apple. Most people know the Corvette for what it is gets great gas mileage. On a long trip I can get 30 MPG and better with my new Vette.
Many car buyers rely on what Consumer Reports says….and if they only they knew how bias of a magazine they are, maybe GM would get more sales.
+4
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:06 am)As I was reading this, I was thinking that “Wow Lyle, you are starting to sound like statik!” Then I got to the bottom and saw that it was statik…..
We know that GM needs another year to get out the new Cruze and Volt. So what is the surprise here?
All this thread did was to bring out the anti-GM trolls…..
JMHO
+4
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:07 am)GM is not betting on the Volt to save them. GM has in store many great cars soon to come. One of them is the Cruze. I can not wait to buy one. I know it will be a hit.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:16 am)Yea, and to whose country does the profits go?
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:18 am)I agree with you. The problem is, many are not smart enough to figure it out!
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:29 am)Two things will prove an EREV’s success: market acceptance and amount of petroleum miles displaced by electric miles, while meeting the everyday utility required by the drivers.
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:39 am)grat
Well put.
I hope he’s still glad they stepped in it!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:40 am)A Volt with a renewable fuel range extender would displace petroleum – hydrogen or alcohol ICE, compressed air motor, hydrogen / alcohol fuel cell.
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:51 am)I bought Currie Technologies E-zip Hybrid Electric Mountain Bike from Walmart.com for less than $300. I then bought a 2nd battery to extend its range.
You can read about on my blog:
http://www.jason-hendler.mainstreetautos.com
It really climbs and moves fast.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:59 am)Grat, that is a phenominal post. Every thread about GM financials or sales should hyperlink your comment.
Not that I think everything is all rosy at GM. I’m not drinking the LaNeve Fantasy Island coolaid any more than Statik is but this OpEd goes way too shallow into the situation to have a lot of value. I would agree GM could have done a better job capitalizing on CFC, but they were in a difficult position to do much more.
It would interesting to see the full numbers and where the Malibu and 2010 Equinox came in. If dealership availability was on par with their competition and the significantly underperformed in CFC sales, then I believe it is sad testament to the state of American purchasing psyche.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:03 am)And it was with very little Vibe inventory and no ordering. This was probably their best CFC vehicle.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:06 am)I suspect Europe gets them first, because they are based on an Opel platform.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:10 am)Gardening reference, Nice!
-3
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:14 am)That is statik’s purpose – to cherry pick information to present GM in its worst light, then throw a big turd in the punch bowl to spoil the party.
No worries, I, and countless others, will always be here to refute him.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:24 am)Hi Jim. Regarding the Cruze and Volt, it is pretty well understood the time involved with developing the Volt, but the Cruze is what baffles me. If I’m not mistaken the Cruze is already or very soon will be sold in China and Europe. the U. S. isn’t expected to get the Cruze until early Spring. In my eyes, the Cruze is of equal importance from a sales and fuel efficiency standpoint. GM needs th Cruze like yesterday. What would have the C4C list looked like if Chevrolet had the Cruze and Ford had the Fiesta? GM needed a scolding for this missed opportunity.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:24 am)“In the car biz, product creates market share, and there isn’t anything fundamentally wrong with GM product lineup that better marketing communications can’t fix.”
====================================================
Better marketing? GM better first work on improving its quality. I do not need to see another GM commercial, telling me that I should “eat” apple pies and Chevrolets.
I agree all is not lost on GM, but marketing is not going to improve GM’s long term outlook, but a quality product at a competitive price will.
-2
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:27 am)Ideal market shares by each automaker (in my opinion):
1). Toyota : 25%
2). GM: 11%
3): Ford: 9%
4): Honda: 20%
5). Hyundai-Kia: 15%
6): Nissan: 8%
8): Chrysler: 3%
9): Volkswagen: 3%
10): Mazda, Mitsubishi, Subaru, Suzuki, Isuzu, Volvo, MB, BMW: 6%.
I strongly support Foreign automakers who build plants in the USA, btw, my Corolla was made in Japan and does not seem to be any better than a US made model.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:27 am)CG,
And the govt worker would congratulate you that your other fingers are fine. (g)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:33 am)Jim I,
I actually went back and looked at the user name of each poster, that has posted to date, and I was surprised that I could not identify a single “troll” posting.
Not that they probably will not post, but your presupposition seems misplaced.
Of course your definition of troll could differ from mine. Maybe I am considered a troll, since I agreed with Statiks post and appreciate not being constantly fed the GM line. I could go to GM’s new blog site, if I wanted that.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:35 am)I hope you’re happy with your custom bike – but – please, please, please ride it outside of the automobile traffic lanes. It is extremely disrespectful to motorists, who paid tens of thousands of dollars for a car, to force them to slow to 5 MPH in a 40 MPH zone.
I personally saw a bicycle rider who had backed up traffic as far as I could see. No shoulder on the road, the bike rider was in the middle of the traffic lane. I was approaching from the opposite direction, and pointed out to the bicycle rider the traffic he had backed up, and – believe it or not – he smiled at me. The stupid !!!%$#%!! SMIlED at me! I never wanted to kill someone so bad in my life.
If you want to save the planet with two wheels, get a small motorcycle. Over 100 MPG, and they can maintain the speed limit uphill – most bicycle riders can’t. If you MUST ride a bicycle, use a bike path, a road with a shoulder (use the shoulder), or ride on private property.
Bike riders who back up traffic should be assesed the same points on their drivers license as a DWI, and have their bike taken away permanently. If driving 20 mph above the speed limit is dangerous, imagine how dangerous driving 35 mph BELOW the speed limit is. And disrespectful – it’s like riding their bike with their middle finger extended to the backed up traffic behind them.
And “Share the road” also means sharing the same speed. Imagine if there was a law that said bike riders had to share the road with slugs – and if they got behind one, they had to go the same speed, and they could not go around it. That’s how I feel about bike riders doing 5 mph in a 40 mph zone.
Respect is a two-way street. Please respect the motorist’s need to maintain the speed limit. Please and thank you.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:39 am)Statik, how is the cash-flow for the “Good GM”, Now that the union obligations have been provided for by government? How is the “Bad GM” doing? Negative cash-flow in billions…
I do enjoy reading about the money, follow the cash-flow.
Yeah, I think Static should write a book. Maybe it would not be quite as interesting as Bre-X, a nice Canadian gold scandal. However I think it would be a good read as long he could maintain his edge.
Plenty of political intrigue, money power and corruption. Plus a few good bits for the motorhead. It would give statik something to do since he is not posting every hour…
/That black Caddy with the tinted windows, going to take Statik to the Volt!
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:43 am)Jim I,
To be fair, Statik was never one to “preach to the choir” with all the GM fans here. He has to call them as he sees them – through those really, really, really dark glasses. (g).
There have been some remarkably positive posts on this thread too.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:46 am)Hybrids like the Prius don’t but a dent in consumption of foreign petroleum: never will. It important for this country to increase the MPG of the American driver as quickly as possible : only the Volt can do it in a meaningful way in a short time.
___________________________
If consumers don’t buy a Volt, what do they buy instead?
30 MPG cars will cancel out the benefit of Volt.
Volume is the problem. Consider what’s being offered overall. It’s easy to see the difference that the small quantity of Volt makes will be offset much easier by a far less expensive 50 MPG car instead.
Volt will optimistically use about 40 gallons of gas for 15,000 miles of travel per year. Prius will use about 300 gallons for the same distance & duration. A guzzler (30 MPG) will use 500.
Consider big picture sales, for 500,000 vehicles…
50,000 Volt + 450,000 guzzlers = 227 Million gallons
250,000 Prius + 250,000 guzzlers = 200 Million gallons
Consider big picture sales, for 5,000,000 vehicles…
200,000 Volt + 4,800,000 guzzlers = 2,408 Million gallons
1,000,000 Prius + 4,000,000 guzzlers = 2,300 Million gallons
Consider big picture sales, for 10,000,000 vehicles…
200,000 Volt + 9,800,000 guzzlers = 4,908 Million gallons
1,000,000 Prius + 9,000,000 guzzlers = 4,800 Million gallons
Notice the pattern?
Even if 1 Volt was sold for every 5 Prius, it still wouldn’t be meaningful.
That’s why I’m so persistent about GM also offering a lower priced model of Volt. To really make a difference, high-volume is essential, regardless of electric-only range.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:54 am)Really good article, but the Edmunds number and jacking up a bunch of Ford products into the top 10 ruckus does nothing for GM. They still sold only 17%. Taking out heavily discounted old brands like Pontiac, their share is more like 10 or 11 percent with the four brands they sell in 2010.
The article is a good one for Ford to use, or if you want to pull down foreign cars on the list, but GM must just want to be done with it.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:01 am)JEC,
Uncontested. Good point. AND I’m really allergic to apples.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:12 am)Corvetteguy, you touched on the real problem, one that neither Dems or GOPs seem to want to fix – jobs.
Ross Perot was right – our jobs have been steadily sucked overseas. With unemployment up, and many jobs waiting to be exported, many who would normally have health care, don’t have any. Cars that would have been sold remain unsold. With wages stagnant, the housing bubble burst. With tax receipts down, and tax outlays up, state and local governments are being forced to cut vital programs and furlough employees.
So what can we do? Encourage Obama and Congress to stop their continuing attempts to ram government health care down our throats, and start crafting the following law:
If You Sell It Here, Make It Here. Make cars in the USA – and steel, clothing, batteries, paper products – everything. Foreign companies could sell here IF they manufacture the products here – on US soil, under US law, abiding by US regulations (OSHA), paying US taxes.
Yes, prices would go up – American labor isn’t cheap. But if your job is the next one to be exported, it would be wouth the price. And the economy would roar back to life again.
It’s do-able. Honda already assembles cars here. Imagine the jobs if they built their steel refineries here, too. We NEED blue collar jobs. Some people just want to work with their hands, not a ball point pen at a desk. They are hurting right now. Contracting is down, home construction starts are down, and steel is almost dead.
Get Obama’s attention. Tell him we need jobs first, then worry about health care.
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:17 am)“A stitch in time, saves nine!”
+5
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:23 am)Gee, thanks Jason. I was worried for a minute, but now I can sleep well again.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:32 am)While the article showed some very good polish, the philosophy of it reflects displaced frustrations and a negative bias that are essentially of little or no value to constructing a positive future for us all.
And, “taxpayers”? What’s that mean? People who come to America to buy some gasoline, taxable items, are not in the same league as Americans who pay $3,000 to $6.000 or more in property taxes, Thousands in payroll taxes, Tens of thousands in total annual taxes every year, and overall, strenuously contribute to the public good of America and Americans.
“Taxpayers”?. What do I pay annually in all combined Federal/State property, sales taxes , and generated value-added taxes for the Great State of Texas in sales taxes? About $10,300 or more, just me, only me, just personally. (Someone in the past claimed I didn’t pay enough taxes for being self- employed. Wrong!! This is not at all a complaint, it’s my fair share to pay). It really irks me to hear wealthy people complain about taxes they pay. I am by NO MEANS wealthy.
Affording health insurance is too hard for me. There is not enough left.
I am a “taxpayer”. I say that this investment in GM over the long haul is what I see as the greatest wisdom our governments can bring about for the continuity of survivability for future generations with E-REV, Voltec.
Oil independence your motive? That’s perfectly fine too.
Things we decide to do are all driven by motives that change over time to better, or more accurate. or more realistic ones.
Most of what we all do is multi-motivational. That means that better (more adaptive/success prone) motives can take over for any given drive toward a goal, but, only if we are open minded to recognize those better motives…..soon enough and flexibly enough. This is more difficult the more entrenched any situation is.
The GM reorganization cleared the way for E-REV. I doubt seriously we would be all writing here without the reorganization. This is not “someone’s kitchen table budget economics”, it is an entirely new way of American life that is being properly set up BY Americans FOR Americans here.
It IS the right thing for the right reasons.
This is what I say:
“You can do the wrong thing for the wrong reason”.
and, “You can do the right thing for the wrong reason”.
and, “You can do the wrong thing for the right reason”.
and, “You can do the right thing for the right reason”.
Relentless drive to do the right thing for the right reason is self sustaining.
Timing and flexibility of open-mindedness to reappraise motive and to cause quicker redirection of both motive and effort are the principal aspects for survival in any environment.
Late timing for “the right thing for the right reason”, say, for E-REV, is better than not doing it at all.
Redirecting American taxpayer proceeds toward E-REV to help cause us a sustainable economic and environmental future is a resulting goal that is recession-prevention as well. Economically to prevent petro-bloodletting or our family budgets and stopping our involvement elsewhere militarily is right next to that.
Your order might be different, and, that is an example of motivational priorities, but we are both on the “same page”.
E-REV and GM in the form of Volt is a late redirection toward this due simply, in my technical opinion, as an insufficient technical understanding of E-REV strong feasibility by most political office holders (not their fault), and the public at large (not its fault, due to the depth of the processes).
It just could not come about that E-REV would have been initiated by Ford, Toyota, or anyone else. It had to take the exact situation with GM, at GM’s exact financial situation, at this exact time in history, with the exact timing of the advancements in battery, at the exact time that the World Economy was collapsed in part by the $4.00 gallon of gas.
So, of course there must be ongoing support of GM in all ways possible. If not, non-environmental interests will indeed be increasingly hounded by environmental interests. And, the frequency and volume, while increasing anyway, would become deafening to the non-environmental closed mind.
Are we to be no better off than a culture of live yeasts, (placed) into a closed (system) bottle of wine with some sugar ravenously-consumed (hydrocarbons/carbohydrates to make champagne), to just merrily go on and on to have a party in an increasingly toxic drunken stupor to our ultimate extinction?
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:39 am)I think they’re taking a page out of the Japanese handbook, and ironing out the inevitable bugs on a new model in a different market.
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:51 am)What people aren’t taking into account is there is a huge percent of the population with anger about the bailouts GM got. GM is getting the brunt of this bailout backlash.
Couple that with people who feel uneasy buying from a bankrupt car maker and I think you have accounted for the results we are seeing. Before you even take into account the actual cars, GM is fighting this uphill battle.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:54 am)3% of Toyota stock is traded on the New York stock exchange. 97% is “domestically owned.”
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:56 am)And I am right there with GM in their fighting it. 1,000%.
The redefining of the loans to “a bailout” was designed to make people angry for political reasons which have no merit. Some got angry in 1980 when Chrysler got a billion in loans. Loans that got paid back with interest.
That anger was unfounded, just as it is today.
I will not spend money on anything but a Volt. GM will take that to the bank.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:57 am)Most of the car compainies aren’t making profits. But they are paying taxes, salaries to workers, rent costs, materials etc in the country they are produced. Which is a bigger boost to the local economy that “profits”, which may or may not ever be realized. The profits arguement is a red herring.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:01 am)And I hated the Hyundai Elantra I rented. It had no pick-up. It didn’t have an alarm when the front seat passenger forgot to put on her seat-belt. And I had to refill the gas tank every single day. But that doesn’t seem to be impacting Hyundai sales.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:11 am)If the Corvette is a gas guzzler then what are it’s half dozen competitors that sell for at least 30% more and are also crushed by the vette’s mileage rating?
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:11 am)Hi Laura,
I scanned a rental that was sold to an auction which ended up being purchased by a used car dealer I was teaching diagnostics.
The expensive seat belt SRS computer (which might run the seat belt reminder chime), 4 expensive sensors, etc, were all stolen out of it before it went to auction, and, all this was immediately revealed when the vehicle came forward into my diagnostics Seminar. So, there was no chime when the seat belt was not fastened.
Rentals have only a 90 day warranty, since they are abused daily by anyone and everyone to “see what it’ll do”. So, it was likely already greatly abused and decimated before you rented it. I wouldn’t give any credence to any rental unit whatsoever to draw any solid conclusions. Pretty nasty things happen to just about all of them.
+3
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:27 am)All right, question, for anybody really. I tried to interpret this months sales data, and. from what I could tell, GM maintained their market share. They had a 19.4 market share last month. That’s not bad considering everything.
http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html
According to their website, they were up 30 percent month over month. Their core brands (Chevy, GMC, Buick, and Caddilac) were up 29% percent and retail sales were up 21% and Chevy alone was up 29% in retail sales. Maybe they’re cherry-picking their data, but it looks good to me. Or at least, it looks hopeful.
They said that their year-over-year sales were down 20% because they had a stellar month sales-wise in August 2008 because they offered “unbeatable incentives.” It sounds reasonable to me. Am I missing something?
http://www.gm.com/corporate/investor_information/sales_prod/
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:30 am)It looks to me a lot of manipulation.
ex: chevy sold 168,130 units and ford sold 161,369. ford managed t sell only 133,088 units last year but chevy was selling 185,080 last year.
so if chevy is at 10% loss , still it sold more than fords. I am not sure these numbers make much sence because GM closed a lot plants , closed a lot production etc.
But i have to agree that there is not much interesting products in GM portfolio and ford is doing right on a lot things including marketing, technology,products etc
Now its time for them to compare with import products and make better ones ( US became US not because they used imports, because they built products . The import users are still developing or third world countires, The country can progress only using products made locally )
no: from http://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/01/by-the-numbers-august-2009-cash-for-clunkers-edition/
+13
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:34 am)Thanks for buying an American brand Mark. I think it is the height of irresponsibility for Americans to have taken tax dollars from their fellow Americans during the ‘Cash for clunkers” program and purchased foreign brand vehicles.
The stimulus plans the government has created are meant to stimulate OUR economy first, not Japan’s or South Korea’s. They must be laughing all the way to the bank with our taxpayers dollars that should have stayed here in America.
Note: I mostly don’t care where the vehicles are made or where the parts come from – the PROFITS from any foreign car purchase go overseas. This gives the foreign car companies yet another boost, just when our American companies need our help the most. Of course, buying a mostly American made car from and American company would be the best purchase.
And I don’t blame the government for letting us buy what we want with the stimulus money. For political reasons they couldn’t limit the purchases to American brand vehicles, not to mention the fact that America is the bastion of the free market and needs to promote world trade. The trouble is with individual Americans making irresponsible decisions to buy foreign, when American brands are at least as good and often better.
When, oh when, will Americans wake up and see that we are destroying our home economy by the minute.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:35 am)Sounds like you’ve got it right to me. The only “wrong” part is that your coming from the glass has 4oz of water perspective, instead of the half full or half empty glass that many others drink from.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:36 am)This was meant as a reply to someone bashing the Ford Fusion because he didn’t like his rental. I’m not sure how it wound up as a stand-alone post. I must have messed up the reply function. I’m sorry.
I agree with you about rental cars. But I can’t see that it has anything to do with a)the tank size. Or the lack of a seat belt alarm. Or how un-user friendly the cruise control was.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:39 am)So true and your characterizations add tremendously to your point (intentionally or more so otherwise).
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:45 am)Sell Voltec to Penske.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:46 am)Well, I like apple pie…
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:49 am)I like the HHR too. I rented one for a week in Florida and really liked it. Too bad it can’t he the mysterious new 2-Mode crossover.
+4
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:50 am)No. They’re not making profits right now. But they’ve all made substantial profits in the past. And some will again when the economy recovers.
Toyota, for example, was termed a “turbocharged profit machine” by business week in 2007. 97% of those profits go to Japan.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/may2007/gb20070508_119681.htm
And they still export about half the cars they sell in the US from Japan. They said they would like the figure to be two-thirds.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/12/business/main2675122.shtml
And notice that all the cars they build here are for the US market. And we are their are their “most important market.” I don’t blame them for that. American labor is the most expensive. But it does leave us with a permanent trade deficit.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:50 am)My 2006 vette averaged 28.6 mpg round trip from the Chicago area down to the Nashville, TN area which included about 10% local city driving. Not bad for a “gas guzzler”.
How about that Expedition, or Tundra, or… well I guess I’ve made my point.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:55 am)GM can at any time jump to the top of the sales list, if they announce the Volt for sale in spring 2010 and price it at $36,000 instead of $40,000 for customers who purchased any New GM between 2007 and 2009 vehicles. Call it RCA “Resent Customer Appreciation”. Or buy one GM vehicle get the Volt for $36,000. If they don’t make these types of incentives they will be sitting on a lot of old tech cars.
NPNS!
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:56 am)No, it is absolutely not a red herring in the long run. Who does the design? Who does the engineering? Who makes up the management? Shortsighted thinking like this is what drove communities to welcome, or even encourage, Walmarts into their neighborhoods. Later, they find that lower wage jobs have been substituted for higher paying ones and small proprietership earnings. Not only are people earning less but less of the money and business stays local. Yes, the families whose income doesn’t depend on theloc economy enjoy some added buying power if they shop at Walmart. But, it is a huge price to pay so a few people can buy more Chinese made trinkets for their kids. On a national scale supporting foreign carmakers does a similar thing.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:56 am)gm did have similar results as last month, but last month was really bad too. I think everyones sales were up month over month because of the CARS program.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:57 am)gm did have similar results as last month, but last month was really bad too. I think everyones sales were up month over month because of the CARS program.
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:58 am)meant to go on 23
+6
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:59 am)Carcus,
First of all, I have enjoyed reading your comments here on this site for a long time.
Now, the trouble with the anti-socialism, anti-government help argument is that only America likes thinks this way. Foreign corporations, most notably in Japan, have had MASSIVE aid from their government for decades, and shut us out of their markets in various deceitful ways while giving lip service to free-enterprise.
See this excellent article for further details on how they do this:
http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html
So if we continue to play the free market, laissez-faire game when no one else does, we are going to lose.
But my hope is that maybe in the long run we will come out the better for it.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:04 am)Volt sales, Prius sales, 500k efficient car sales market
It is not an OR operand but rather an AND.
Embrace the Volt along with your beloved Prius.
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:09 am)That top 10 list tells the story. GM has GOT to design cars that look high quality and “cool” … inside and out. Exterior and interior design is EQUALLY important as what’s under the hood. That’s the reality of the auto industry. People buy cars based on emotion AND intellect. Left brain and right brain.
Not everyone can draw very well, but just about everyone has a bit of an artsy side and know a “cool looking vehicle” when then see one. It’s the same thing with music that manages to be in the Top 10 of sales. It becomes popular for a reason. People know a good song when they hear one. It’s the same thing when it comes to automobiles.
When an auto company can create a “high quality looking, cool car” AND that vehicle gets excellent ratings from 3rd party reviewers like the auto magazines, JD Power and Consumer Reports …. THEN you have a strong likelihood of having a “hit” … with good marketing. The vehicle then appeals to the customer’s analytical left brain AND their creative right brain.
That’s when your vehicle has a good chance of being an ongoing Top 10 bestseller … for many years. When your car company has proven they can “deliver the goods” over a long period of time, that’s when you get people coming back … again and again. Customer loyalty.
I sure hope that GM is “going back to the drawing board”. They need to figure out how to build BESTSELLING small and mid-size cars and small and mid-size SUV/Crossovers. Those are key segments. They are the cars that younger people tend to buy. It’s important to have younger people have a good opinion of your company for the time when they might can afford some of GM’s more expensive vehicles.
GM needs to find out what it takes to get good reviews from the 3rd party evaluators and then “get ‘er done”. Gotta do the marketing just right too. GM has to deal with the PR problems created in the last year and over the last 20 years.
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:09 am)Huh?
Production for the entire first year is only planned for 10,000.
To be a top-seller, a minimum of 15,000 per month are needed.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:10 am)A copier/printer company next to my company owns a small fleet of Chevrolet HHRs. They look really sharp with the graphics splashed on them. They are just about perfect for that type of “commercial” vehicle use.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:10 am)I believe that was Joe’s point.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:11 am)Hi Statik. Nice to hear from you again. A no nonsense, take no prisoner report. Typical Statik. Good job.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:12 am)______________________________________________________
Well written article Statik…thanks.
I agree w/ #20 Red HHR’s comment that you should consider writing a book…perhaps ~2012 to chronicle the GM Volt Program and the twist and turns of GM during that period. I know where you can find 49,000+ people that may want to read the book.
Some commenter’s have expressed that your above blog article is counter productive to GM and the Voltec Project…I beg to differ.
Exposing the naked facts of any situation for all to view and contemplate always provides an opportunity for all concerned (including the target of the critical review except for the case of a Despot) to more relevantly adapt to survive. Equally beneficial is not allowing known historical facts to prevent challenging old assumptions and constructing new paradigms…otherwise Man would have never left the cave to one day land on the Moon. Striking a balance of what is known vs. what is possible is the art of survival; hopefully GM finds that balance.
______________________________________________________
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:15 am)I have to agree with you, carcus1. More government aid is not going to solve GM’s problems. But it may keep GM functioning until they can turn things around. But I do worry about the time line and the amount of money being put into this recovery effort. Will GM ever be able to recover and repay all this money. They better really come out with some vehicles that will sell like hot cakes.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:15 am)Since they are NOT planning to offer a 50 MPG vehicle, there is no AND.
Without anything for the middle-market, GM is missing a huge opportunity.
All automakers must persue that product mix of 50 MPG vehicles and plug-ins. Diversity is a basic rule of good business.
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:16 am)Quick question? Perhaps someone knows the answer to this offhand.
Is Pontiac part of New GM or the old bits of GM left to die in bankruptcy?
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:18 am)I don’t agree with you at all in any way.
This was money from the American taxpayer and was intended to be used by Americans to support American auto companies , not American workers who are working in foreign auto companies who are assembling foreign cars in America , and whose profits are going to foreign countries .
Americans have to learn to look after their own first , then others when everything is going well at home . (America includes Canada) and should be regarded as North America as a single buying and marketing unit and not as two single countries .
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:22 am)I’d love to believe that, but I don’t think so. Every article I can find talks about what a disaster this is for GM. The only contrary view is GM’s own report, which is not exactly unbiased. And every article talks about how it benefits Ford. The decline in market share looks like a disaster for Ford. At least to me.
Toyota got the most sales from cash for clunkers out of it. Hyundai doubled its market share. How can that be good for GM? Or even Ford? This cash for clunkers program will probably depress sales for the next few months. And some of those sales were probably domestic sales that went to the Asian companies instead. And, more importantly, US taxpayer money went to Japanese and Korean companies. How is that a good thing?
-1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:22 am)Toyota generally does not roll over the balance on your existing car into the new loan. This is one of the reasons GMAC is on the ropes.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:25 am)Those numbers are deceiving. That’s the problem with comparing this year’s August to last year’s August. Last year, GM had a huge August because they were pushing their “employees’ discount.” Regarding the C4C sales, GM got almost the same proportion (17%) as their running market share (like 19%). So they got their share. The Japanese companies made some modest market share gains in C4C, but they did it at the expense of the premium brands (Germany) rather than the American brands.
Also, GM has been losing market share because of reduced (dropping?) fleet sales. In my book, I would like to see that fake “market share” lost.
GM is in trouble not because of its market share, per se, but because the overall NA market is at 10.5 million vehicles. That’s the killer. Market share is important, but somehow we want to start to be able to combine it with profit margins, rather than just total sales.
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:36 am)I can see hydrogen powered engines in a few years , but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for hydrogen fool cells to be cheap enough or dependable enough to be used for transportation for a long long time .
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:36 am)Hi Mike!
What does your statement even mean? Over-sized compared to what exactly? Are you suggesting they don’t know how to build a gasoline engine? What do you mean by works? We’ve seen it in motion. Was it all done on a sound stage? What other secondary power plant did you have in mind?
We know they work separately. We know batteries of more than 100-MPC range are currently very costly. We know gasoline engines are far less costly. What are your criteria for “working”?
If you mean lack of market acceptance due to a high price-point I agree that volume sales are less likely the higher the initial price.
The cost of the battery will determine the success of the Volt because the cheaper it is the more likely the Volt can compete against longer-range electrics like the Tesla Model-S. The higher the price of gas the more sense the Volt makes when compared to traditional ICE-only vehicles.
The Volt’s target audience is people whose most frequent trip is not much over 40 miles who cannot afford two cars and two insurance payments who also occasionally need the flexibility of the 300-400 on-board range. If the $40K price is before the rebate, the most affluent portion of this rather large group will be the early adopters.
They will have other choices of course. But, given the success of the Prius, I think they will sell quite well even at that price. And when the GEN 2 and GEN 3 drive-trains arrive the vehicle will become very profitable for GM. (I don’t believe they will drop from whatever the initial price is set at.)
For those of us who would not choose to pay so much for ANY car, I think new models with VOLTEC drive-trains will be offered as the Volt name-plate moves up-market and new body work and lower trim levels appear on the older platform under a different name (Spark anyone?).
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:38 am)You don’t think production will be stepped up if all Volts are sold the minute they hit the show rooms?
You don’t think production will be stepped up when dealers begin to have waiting lists of customers clamoring to get a Volt.
You don’t think production will be stepped up when no one buys a new car waiting for the Volt?
Wait and see, the madness will be unbelievable.
NPNS!
-2
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:39 am)I think you should have stopped at “height of irresponsibility for Americans to have taken tax dollars from their fellow Americans”
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:43 am)Huh? I’m confused. What comments are you replying too?
As far as CFC, yes, I do think it was a net positive in the short and long terms. Probably more so in the long term. Who knows how long people would have held on to their clunkers otherwise. Immediate sales boost may be offset by slower sales in the next couple of months. My guess is it will drag sales some but by only a minority portion of the CFC sales. Many of those would have taken place anyway in the same timeframe. Another portion would not have taken place in the near term w/o CFC. Yes, it would have been great for US auto if CFC could have cherry picked US brands but would have caused more serious backlash. I also thuink they could have pushed fuel economy more but a close look at the program details reveled was better than a lot of people were presuming.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:50 am)You have to be kidding , If you think a bicycle can be expensive at a couple of thousand dollars or so , you better stay away from looking at the price of cars for a long time unless you win the lottery .
Sep 6th, 2009 (11:55 am)Yes yes of course. But what criteria do you have for market acceptance? And and is it total petroleum displacement or per vehicle and how much? What is everyday utility? You mean does it get me to work and grocery store?
What I’m trying to get from you are more concrete criteria.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:00 pm)That is what the Chinese do , If you want to sell it here , then you make it here .
All car companies that sell cars in China make them there.
They are designed in their home countries first and the Chinese government says you can only make them here if you go on a joint venture with a Chinese company and you can’t own any more than 50% of that company either . ( There is a new Buick that has been designed in China , but that is the exception )
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:13 pm)I was replying to your comment.
My point about CFC is that sales were due for a bounce at some point. The US sales figures were were dramatically low–to the point where it was unsustainable. People need to replace old autos. Cash for clunkers raises today’s demand at tomorrow’s expense. And, unfortunately, the qualifications for cash for clunkers favored foreign auto manufacturers over domestic.
Like it not, foreign manufacturers got more than half of the money from the CFC program. That’s money given them by the US taxpayers. That’s why I always thought that CFC was a bizarre program. It made sense in places like Germany and Japan where domestic manufacturers dominate the market. But not in the US.
http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/bestselling_car_manufacturers_in_germany_2008
I agree that we would have had an international backlash if we had restricted the program to GM, Ford and Chrysler. (I would have done just GM and Ford.) But that’s all the more reason why we never should have had a cash for clunkers program in the first place.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:14 pm)The Buick version of the Cruze is a very big seller in China too , what gives with GM in America , why arn’t they assembling the Cruze and selling it in North America now .
Can anybody from GM give a good answer to that question ? What are you guys doing anyway ?
You must know that you need a high quality semi luxury car that is very good on gas that people can get for less than $350.00 a month
Get the Cruze on the road and stop playing around with our tax money and do your thing .
+4
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:17 pm)Consumer Reports is out to destroy American industry .
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:20 pm)I don’t disagree. But, Both the Malibu and Camaro represent the best what one hopes will be the last in a long line of ICE-only GM vehicles. The fact that these vehicles are introduced near the same time as the Volt suggests VOLTEC technology is not yet ready to be extended throughout the lineup.
They do have to sell SOMETHING in the mean time don’t they?
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:21 pm)Both Prii and Volts will be sold into the market at the same time. Prius sales AND Volt sales will combine to displace the equivalent number of lower mileage vehicles in the real world version of your scenario.
I only hope there will be at least 60K Volt sales in 2012, because as you pointed out this counts for the equivalent of 300K Prii in the equation. If there are also 200k Prii sold at the same time, all the better.
+4
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:26 pm)I was quite liking the look of the Cruze as well. Not flashy or sporty but way better than the Cobalt.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:27 pm)Dan ,
That was well put .
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:37 pm)I dont think the price will drop much either, GM is subcontracting a lot of the components out and everyone gets a cut of the profits.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:39 pm)Market acceptance and miles driven electric vs. petroleum ARE concrete metric. I would compare EREV proliferation vs. BEV and FCV proliferation, as they are all being rolled out simultaneously. I would NOT compare EREV’s to ICE or non-plugin gasoline / diesel hybrids on a market acceptance basis, as ICE have been market optimized for 100 years and hybrids for 10 years. The EREV’s utility combined with mileage is far superior to both ICE and hybrid.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:43 pm)GM to Crash
If having the foreign auto companies here is such a good idea then why is it that Japan and Korea do not have each others car companys building cars in their countries?
Answer
Because it would hurt their home automobile industry. Just as it has devistated ours.
Right quality or the lack of it is what did our car companys in. Well I hear you even when driving my quiet 99 Buick with 191,000 miles on it.
Sep 6th, 2009 (12:56 pm)Zen, all those drivers that backed up behind the cyclist saved gas because they slowed down.. speed kills and wastes gas.
Dont dis cyclist, they provide a lot of healthy donated organs..
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:03 pm)I doubt they are out to but they may be apt to.
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:07 pm)I think Penske may soon have buyer’s remorse as it is with Saturn. He is surely going to have his hands full with that. Time will tell I guess.
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:18 pm)Laura, a previous renter may have stolen the seatbelt chimes computer and sensors.. thus no chimes.
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:23 pm)Rapid step-up has been has a problem for all the automakers so far, including GM.
What would make this different?
Also, don’t forget how expensive rapid turn-around is. Paying overtime is not a big priority, especially for an automaker attempting to pay back government loans.
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:39 pm)GM is only retaining Chevrolete, Cadillac, Buick, and GMC. ANd possibly part of Opel. (There are a lot of ownership issues involved.)
Pontiac is part of the old GM, and, unfortunately, I think it’s gone. They sold Saturn to Robert Penske who’s apparently going to outsource all actual production. They sold Saab to a Swedish investor, but the financing is still not settled. They sold Hummer to an Chinese company, but the Chinese government is supposedly not thrilled with the idea, and the deal isn’t final. And they’re still negotiating with the Korean government over Daewoo.
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:42 pm)Really? I didn’t know that was even possible. Why in the world would anyone want to do that? And only for the front seat passenger, not the driver?
Can sabotage also affect the size of the gas tank and/or the fuel economy?
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (1:58 pm)The criticism of purchases of non-Detroit cars is off base. Instead “Cash for Clunkers” was set up to jump start local auto dealers and local economies around them, and also to improve fuel economy. It succeeded at these goals (as paid for by the federal taxpayer). The CARS program was not set up as yet another subsidy to the Detroit automakers. They and the UAW have had a lot of support already.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:01 pm)..the usual paradox between reason and the words coming out of Mark LaNeve’s mouth presents itself.
———————————————–
Mark LaNeve is the most wonderful person at gm, always upbeat and positive. He’s our very own Baghdad Bob. I love it
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:07 pm)GM is so concerned about the orphaned customers of these brands, or ‘free agents’ if you will, they have recently set up a special task force to try and rustle those costumers back into the fold.
———-
They should be. GM needs also to be concerned with the orphaned customers of the dealerships that will live no more. I am one of those orphaned customers. I am so put out with gm over the dealership issue, which to me is personal, that it is unlikely that I will shift to some other gm dealer, or even go on its car lot. GM killed the dealerships thinking of their own bottom line, but from those of us who were customers of the dead dealers there will be a loss of revenue to gm, as well as the lower expense. And we talk to each other, to our relatives, and to our friends. Word of mouth is powerful. I wonder if gm has the balance computed correctly.
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:19 pm)Dan said “So, of course there must be ongoing support of GM in all ways possible.”
———————————
That’s just not so. Times change. GM itself put many earlier companies out of business. The last years of David Buick, for whom the brand is named, were not happy ones. We here are interested in gm and what happens to it, and we are interested in the Volt, We hope things work out well, but we are not committed to “ongoing support of GM in all ways possible.” GM has to survive by means of building products that people want to buy at a price they are willing to pay, not by eternal subsidies. There is no other way.
Sep 6th, 2009 (2:29 pm)Carcus1,
I agree with you 100%. I was watching This Week with George Stephanopoulos, and Mike Pence said the following: “Alabama, 89 percent of the businesses in Alabama have to go to one health insurance company. That’s true in most states. There’s a virtual monopoly. Let’s let the American people shop across state lines and bring real competition without a government plan.” Tom Daschle’s response: “If I could just respond real quickly. That’s a race to the bottom, and a lot of people understand that. They’d all go to the state with the lowest thresholds for eligibility.”
I sat there dumbfounded. I guess one person’s “race to the bottom” is another’s “let’s shop around and get the best value we can find for our money.” What Mr. Daschle is so dead set against is the very thing that made our country prosperous.
I’m really between a rock and a hard place when it comes to the Volt. On the one hand, I really believe in the technology, and I think it will be a good thing if we can use home-grown energy (electricity) in place of imported oil. On the other hand, I loath our ever-growing federal government “camel” – it’s “nose” is well into our tent, and rest is quickly following. Rather than the marketplace, the government is determining winners and losers, and I don’t like that at all.
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:09 pm)I think you’ll see trucks & SUV sales pick up a bit when the snow flakes start falling.
-15
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:10 pm)(click to show comment)
-10
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:14 pm)(click to show comment)
-8
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:24 pm)Secondary power plant is the gas engine or if GM really wants something that makes sense financially, a 6th+ gen fuel cell.
Primary power supply is a Lithium ION battery that is bigger
than any Lithium ION battery you will ever find in a light hybrid
and yes that battery is way too big. There is limited passenger
and trunk space in the Volt because of the over sized battery.
The Volt won’t sell to the masses at $40k which pay maybe $25k
for a new car. Gas is too cheap to justify spending $40k for a gas
sipping car without a guaranteed green electricity supply to recharge from.
GM simply cannot invent a cheap battery to replace the Lithium ION
monster that is in the gas/electric Volt. Worse, there is limited to no infrastructure for plug in electric hybrids for reasons that GM has
outlined. Plug ins will strain an already strained electrical grid that
is fairly dirty at the moment.
If GM wants to make money and survive, it has to commercialize an
electric car that costs what people can pay with a range that matches current cars based on the internal combustion engine. The magic range number is 300 miles, something that can only be achieved electrically with a combination of a small battery and a fuel cell. And NO, they are not fool cells.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:27 pm)It is a little misleading to say the 2010 Prius doesn’t have a 5-star crash test rating, because it has not been tested yet.
Looking at the IIHS Crash test data shows the HHR and 2010 Prius both have a G (Good) rating for frontal impact. However the 2010 Prius has a side impact rating of G (Good) but the HHR only gets an A (Acceptable).
In any case, I would guess the HHR is an OK car and certainly a lot less expensive then the 2010 Prius.
Later
John C. Briggs
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:27 pm)It is perfectly clear that the consumer was willing to spend their hard earned money on QUALITY vehicles. Until GM makes quality a priority for their vehicles look for much the same in the coming years.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:35 pm)GM does have good core brands that have good product lineups, and many of those cars get competitve gas mileage within their class. GM’s problem (with respect to the cash for clunkers numbers) is that their strongest models are not small cars or hybrids.
GM needs to begin to consider small cars to be core products and stop outsourcing them (like they do the Toyota-made Pontiac Vibe and the Korean-made Chevy Aveo). GM’s smallest home-made car is currently the Cobalt, which I think is a bit dated. The upcomming Chevy Volt and Cruze should help this, but neither of those is truely a compact car.
Part of the problem is that GM decided long ago not to get heavily into hybrids and to outsource small cars, but the other part of the problem is that gasoline prices are cheep here in our domestic automaker’s core market. Since gas prices are higher outside the U.S., automakers based in in Asia and Europe are more concerned about fuel efficiency as a core strength. In an attempt to correct this issue our government regulates (with CAFE standards) and subsidizes (with incentives like CFC). But CAFE standards don’t change consumer demand or consumer behavior and programs like cash for clunkers are too late to affect manufacturer’s product lineups.
The U.S. needs better energy policy if the Volt and other super efficient cars are going to thrive in our country. (I plan to buy a Volt of my own as soon as I possibly can, but the masses will not go electric while gas stays cheap here.)
+4
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:39 pm)Then don’t buy from countries like Japan as they have been giving aid to their auto companys since day one and continue to have an import structure that keeps all [even Korean] car expensive in Japan.
I might add as do most all countries that manufacture cars except our country.
I hate government help for the auto industry. I would much rather see an import duty on imported cars AND PARTS to be assembled here that would balance out their import duties or multi teared import structure.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:44 pm)Well said old man!
Sep 6th, 2009 (3:45 pm)And on a lighter note:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5im0Ssyyus
-1
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:04 pm)Hooray for Herm!!!
He is going to be the FIRST SENIOR to send back all those social security checks and REFUSE to let Medicare pay for any of his medical expenses!
That’s pretty brave but we love you for it!!!
That’ll show the other Americans that it is NOT ok to use other tax payers money for your self.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:19 pm)iT looks like the US auto makers have a big problem with their dealer network.
The people who say they bought foreign brands because they “were more willing to make a deal” says that the dealer experience was more customer focused there than at a gM car dealer.
That doesn’t mean that they actually paid less than they might have at a Chevy dealer. Their impression of the dealership experience was much more positive.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:32 pm)GM needs to discontinue most of those SUV and Trucks. There blind focus on those 2 type of vehicles is what led to their Bankruptcy. They need to start focusing on the type of vehicles that Americans want to buy. Hint: Look at what is selling at Toyota, Honda, Nissan and Hyundai and start copying them ASAP. Even a caveman could figure this out.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:33 pm)Right On Bro, I agree with you 100 percent.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:36 pm)Pontiac is dead.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:36 pm)Out of the top 10 list, the only ones I would consider decent looking are the Camry & the Focus. The rest are pretty unattractive cars (to me).
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:38 pm)Saturns have always been junk. He sure got suckered on that one.
+3
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:43 pm)Great article Statik, I ended up getting my bailout during the first week. I wasn’t interested until Chrysler matched the 4500 and I was able to get a 29,500 (MSRP) Grand Caravan for 12K less. I didn’t intend to get a new vehicle without a plug but when the govt throws 9 grand back at me and there currently isn’t a single mass produced plug in available (much less a minivan) i decided to act. I wanted to just nurse my 86 Vanagon along for at least a few more years and get an EREV Orlando when the time came.
The carbuying experience with Chrysler was terrible and I will never go back to that dealer again. It is up to my new car if I’ll ever even consider buying one of their cars again. I hope GM doesn’t dealers don’t try and screw you at every bend like Cook motors in Aberdeen, MD.
In my case the govt plan worked in that they got my old car off the road and spurred me to spend my hard earned cash on something new. I also went with an American car so double bonus there. As a taxpayer I think that 3 Billion dollars should have been sent over to the Chinese to buy back our debt. I personally don’t spend what I can’t afford and don’t think my country should either. But hey, if I can’t get the government to be fiscally responsible I may as well enjoy it till the next great financial disaster.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:49 pm)see my post below. The Chrysler dealership I went with made a deal but it took 9 hours to make the sale on a car that they advertised for on the web. I didn’t even want to haggle. I was happy with the price and the car. I drove 2 hours to get there and the car they tried to give me wasn’t the one from the pictures. They then upped the price $2,000 on the bare bones car that I didn’t drive down there for. I called and verified everything before hand. It took 9 hours before they got the price back down to where they advertised. Bunch of F&*%ing crooks. I held my ground and got what I wanted. This is only the 2nd new car I’ve been apart of buying and if this is the way the American car dealers work I’ll buy Japanese in the future.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:54 pm)It seems like a “blind” statement to make, if you think people dont need trucks & 6 passenger vehicles.
Sep 6th, 2009 (4:59 pm)Many vehicles after 1997 or so have programs that can greatly reduce available power to the driver. Corvette, for example, has a Valet mode, where if a Valet is parking the Corvette, 95% of all power is reduced. This is called “Reduced Power Active/Inactive” within the datastreams.
There is another one that is not as drastic, it is called
“Abuse Management Active/Inactive”, and it reduces available power only to the extent to help prevent damage to various systems for someone who clearly abuses the vehicle very extremely.
Rental vehicles can have an activation of “Abuse Management” that is stronger than non-commercially driven vehicles, since the computer knows different people are driving the car. One way it knows different people are driving the car is via “Occupant Class Detection”, where the position of the seat, forward or backward, is available to the computer, (to adjust for SRS deployment variables in case of accident for various size people).
Also, the transmission programs are constantly adapting and relearning new shift strategies for different people, according to how they press the accelerator pedal. (Warranties tend to be voided when “Abuse Management Active/Inactive” is listed. So, don’t even think of abusing your Volt,****OR**** LENDING IT OUT OR LETTING ANYONE ELSE “PUNCH IT” WHILE YOU ARE IN IT WITH THEM, is what I advise.)
These things could have been part of the lowered power you sensed as well as lowered fuel economy you experienced.
But as likely, there probably was some malfunction of one of the system for all the trouble. These sorts of things are likely not as generalized for the entire OEM’s fleet out there.
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:15 pm)What’s good for Toyota is good for Americans. At the current rate that GM is slashing american jobs and creating thousands of new ones overseas it won’t be long before Toyota employs more Americans than GM. GM is doing the same thing IBM did years ago. IBM silently shifted hundreds of thousands of american positions to newly created overseas position in a very sneaky manner. I know the “I” in IBM stands for International and I don’t even consider them an American company any longer. IBM and GM tactics are NOT Good for America.
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:18 pm)The Camaro had an ∞% increase in sales compared to August 09.
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:20 pm)Keep dreaming. Americans are not ready to have an electric drive car as their primary vehicle. They are much more likely to purchase an EV as a secondary vehicle, and thus are not willing to pay the cost premium of a Volt. Nissan is on the correct path as the LEAF is not made to be your primary car, instead it is an extremely affordable secondary pure electric commuter.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:34 pm)Jolly well said old man! Back from near the grave Carcus 1. Mr. Death and the girls will be missed.
When we were building a certain bridge near a certain river for the Nipponese I did not think that “play fair” was in their cricket guide book.
Our Congressthings just had to remove the buy American proviso. “Free” trade is posh and is destroying the nation bit by bit yard by yard. The weepy eyed throngs that sing mantra hosannas for FREE this and that forget that there is a country here and there is not really a free lunch. Corporations are NOT concerned with Nation and borders but are more than happy to use our boys and girls to fight so they can play anyway they want to.
Regards! Higgins and the Lads
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:54 pm)Clunker sales show that Toyota and Honda have the best selection of cars at the moment. GM needs to get it in gear. For now, I would still advise everyone to drive a Toyota, Honda or Nissan BEFORE you test drive GM. Then decide.
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:56 pm)Replied to Old Man down below. Back from Dante’s Inferno. Cold coffee, they think of everything. Won’t miss Mr. Death but will his, ah, gifted aunterage.———H & Co.
Sep 6th, 2009 (5:59 pm)I just think there is some “elusive ingredient” about the exterior/interior designs of SOME of GM’s cars that’s just not working. GM needs to either come up some exterior/interior designs that are BETTER than what the competition has or simply start emulating them. Match the competition feature for feature … inside and out. I just want GM to get the best design people AND the best engineers who do the work “under the hood”. Gotta have both.
Maybe GM just needs to put more thought into their interior and exterior designs. Every little detail counts at some level. People might be picking a Toyota over a Chevy from some subconscious aesthetic reason. I’m hardly an expert on these aesthetic type things. GM should be trying to get the best people in the auto industry who DO have excellent taste when it comes to exterior/interior design. Gotta somehow get the best ones onto your team just like in the NFL. In a lot of ways you really can’t teach these art type things. You’ve either got “it” or you don’t a lot of the time … kind of like top songwriters and musicians.
Like I said previously, I also think that getting top evaluations from the car mags, JD Power, Consumer Reports and the other ones DOES make a difference. People need that reassurance that the vehicle that they likes the looks of is going to be reliable and not cause them a lot of stress while they have it. Kinda like a marriage prospect I guess.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:12 pm)ALERT!
Yet another Statik imposter!
Set your phasers to TROLL mode and let him/her have it.
Lyle, since Statiks handle seems to be so popular, maybe you could just prevent the use of by anyone else.
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:17 pm)Where is this “attempting” to payback loans.
Hey Doofus, GM IS THE GOVERNMENT ! They have no intention of paying back any sticking loans. Get a clue weirdo. GM is NOT a public traded company. They ARE the U.S. Government. Get this through your dense head.
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:20 pm)Warning Will Robinson.
GM is 61 Percent OWNED by the United States Government.
GM is NOT a public company. They are a government property that is controlled by Uncle.
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:23 pm)Mexicans maybe but Not Americans. Now get your butt back across the border.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:24 pm)Yes he does have a tendency to cherry pick pieces that fit his narrative, whatever that is (I actually don’t know what it is, not being sarcastic). As some have noted, rather than looking at small cars, where GM doesn’t compete well, you could look at the market share for pony cars, where GM’s market share is up sharply over last year. Equally dumb exercise but it might have entertainment value.
Truth is, with SARS going from 17M to 10M he could have written an equally negative piece about Ford or Toyota or any number of other companies. I mean, Porshe just went under didn’t they? As far as market share is concerned, that GM’s market share had dropped shouldn’t come as much of a surprise given that restructuring was designed to divest the unprofitable parts, and when you divest parts you invariably lose market share. That’s how it works. Seriously, when was the last time a company came out of Chapter 11 with a larger market share than they had when they went in?
GM is actually fairly well positioned. Very clean balance sheet. Costs now under control. Decent product in the pipeline. Some very good produce in the market already. Strikes me as an reasonable investment — we’ll know more about next year, eh?
But it’s all good fun. What I find objectionable are the personal attacks. Attacking the head of sales for positive spin is so absurd and uncalled for that it reflects poorly both on him and to some extent this site for providing a platform for this type of antic. Are we to find it shocking that a leader accentuates the positive in order to keep morale up? Next we’ll be complaining about Churchill’s and Roosevelt’s cheery outlooks during WWII. Staying positive is part of Neve’s job. If he didn’t spin things positively he should, and probably would, be replaced. The personal attacks just leave a bad taste.
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:25 pm)Penske bought the Saturn dealerships, not the manufacturing facilities. No telling what will be sold from those dealerships, once the short-term Saturn sales agreement ends.
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:27 pm)Dan,
Are you seriously telling us, that if you take in your vehicle for warranty work, and they determined that the Abuse management system said they violated some “unknown” limitation on the vehicle, that they would NOT cover it under warranty?
This would hold ZERO water in a court setting, unless the buyer was made aware of all the limits and they signed a contract to never exceed these abuse limits.
I have never heard of such a thing.
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:29 pm)The average American family has 1.2 children. So assuming those kids have Both parents (that is a big assumption these days) that would mean a 4 seater would be Maximum required.
Get out of your man cave and do your math before making discombobulated statements that don’t add up taco breath.
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:29 pm)Wonderful things happen with a divide by zero
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:32 pm)/peace out
Sep 6th, 2009 (6:55 pm)You forgot his gravatar troll.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:18 pm)Where we are today is the culmination of Reaganism, who (accidentally) made the stunning discovery that the richest country in the world could borrow enormous amounts of money—let the party begin.
+1
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:21 pm)Not to mention the fact that most (all?) the R&D and design work go on in Japan. Being able to turn a screwdriver does not mean you know how to ‘make’ things. I think we are in serious trouble when our ‘innovative’ products are collateralized debt obligations. China is now where the US was in 1920—the worlds workshop.
Sep 6th, 2009 (7:23 pm)Should have read your reply, before posting.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:08 pm)Today Bloomberg published a report again citing those infernal anonymous sources (hope they’re better than mine!), who indicate that GM is planning to produce 60,000 Chevy Volts for it’s inaugural year (2010). This is four times the number of Priuses that came out it’s first year. The sources note that this level of production would be required to keep the car below it’s $30,000 price point. I guess they know how much the battery will cost by now.
—————————-
Above from Lyle’s post on gm-volt of Aug 22, 2007.
Just 2 years ago, but it seems pre-historic now.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:17 pm)I believe Lyle has offered up posting from other GM-Volt.com bloggers.
I am sure Lyle would be open to your posting, if you have something worth posting on Lyles site.
This is not a GM censored site, as far as I am aware. If your looking for GM censored material, I would suggest visiting the GM owned site.
Sep 6th, 2009 (8:48 pm)That’s what I thought. So, are Pontiac’s sales included in GM’s 17.6%?
If so, Statik’s logic also seems off here because the shouldn’t be included in LaNeve’s future production numbers:
“Inside the same press release, the the usual paradox between reason and the words coming out of Mark LaNeve’s mouth presents itself. Mark announces that current production of cars for the quarter is set at 535,000 vehicles, and will be 655,000 for Q4 2009. Which of course means to any of us that are good at math, (and/or own a calculator), if GM sells every car they make, they will still average about 40,000 less than they sold this month.”
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:08 pm)Unfortunately, by and large, that is how they work. You have to show them you are willing to walk to get their attention.
+2
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:17 pm)We have a Prius and an HHR, I like the Prius and Love the HHR.
The Prius has a better sound system, the HHR has better seats and a real shifter. The Prius is faster…? With that funny CVT the thing just keeps going faster with the throttle at a constant position?? Not hard to do 80 without really trying. I think the lack of wind noise may have something to do with it also. It does have cruise control, something that I am not used to using. Think I may have to use it. I like the shape of the HHR, friends call the Prius a space ship and prefer it over the HHR. If you took fuel out of the picture I like the HHR better.
/So call me old fashioned.
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:36 pm)The Unions received the “Bailout” GM received the “Loan” which I think was forgiven. Anyway Union workers(and retired workers) made out much better than most anybody else.
IMHO
Sep 6th, 2009 (9:58 pm)Zen,
Good point. I like to build things, it is hard to find a job..
I how can I afford a Volt? The economic conundrum…
/OHHMMM
Sep 6th, 2009 (10:30 pm)I will bet you that your state’s vehicle code says something along the lines of “Bicycle users are allowed full use of the lane” and that you may only pass when it’s safe.
You don’t have to like your law, but as the operator of a motor vehicle you are expected to know it. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Sep 7th, 2009 (5:13 am)That’s just painful to read now
Sep 7th, 2009 (5:59 am)Now that the Obama administration owns a large piece of NGMCO…
There is “hope” that the $7500 tax refund may be “changed” to an instant rebate. We may see an out-the-door price of around $35k.
We know how tenacious Obama is with carrying out his plans. And last I heard he is aiming at getting millions of EV on the road.
=D~
Sep 7th, 2009 (10:54 am)Sorry, I misread your question–my original point was that it seems strange to me that every article says the cfc was a winner for Ford, and a loser for GM, when the market share figures said the exact opposite.
To me, that says I’m missing part of the story. Maybe profit per vehicle? Maybe Ford didn’t have to use as many incentives? Statik’s point about Pontiac makes me thing that’s probably the case. But, according to GM’s own figures, their “core brand” sales were also up. Basically, I want numbers, and I can’t find a source that goes into the details.
Sep 7th, 2009 (11:00 am)Yes. Pontiac sales are included in GM’s 17.6%.
And I think that was Statik’s point. Mark LaNeve sounds optimistic about GM’s future market share, and claims that they’re well positioned to do well with their core brands. Meanwhile GM’s planned future production numbers are anything but optimistic.
Sep 7th, 2009 (12:47 pm)When you were a child you must have been the 0.2
Sep 7th, 2009 (1:50 pm)“Saving” GM is all about a controlled collapse allowing its market share to deflate over the next few years rather than a collapse that would spill over into parts manufacturer’s etc. This is all going according to “plan” and while it may be awful the government is willing to write it off as a necessary loss, just like AIG, FM &FM etc. They just can’t spin it like that to the public.
+2
Sep 7th, 2009 (6:52 pm)Wow.
First off, the secondary power plant in the Volt *is* a gas engine. Second, you can’t complain about the $40k price tag, then claim that the non-existent 6th generation fuel cell makes financial sense– even the recently announced 5th gen isn’t quite there, nor is the fueling infrastructure.
As for the battery taking up space, apparently you aren’t aware that it occupies the space between the seats and under the two rear seats– You might be able to argue that the Volt could seat 5 (although I’ve always felt calling compact cars “5 passenger” is silly), but I can’t see how it’s reducing the trunk space.
Your argument about straining the power grid is invalidated twice– once because you claim that plug-in electric hybrids won’t sell, and secondly because there are numerous studies that debunk that particular claim– it’s even more ridiculous that you think hydrogen fuel-cells are the answer, when you say that PHEV’s are doomed because of the lack of infrastructure.
At the moment, if you want 300 miles, you’re looking at petroleum. Even the vaunted Clarity FCX only gets 240 miles.