AND 
GM Wins* October Sales Race; Decides to Keep Opel Citing Improved Financial Health
Monthly Sales:
Alright, who lost the script? GM is supposed to finish last in these things aren’t they? (I mean after Chrysler of course) Yet, the numbers are in, and GM stands as the only manufacturer of the ‘top 5′ to record a gain:
GM +.4% (177,603 vehicles sold)
Toyota -3.5% (152,165 vehicles)
Ford -.6% (136,920 vehicles)
Honda – .4% (85,502 vehicles)
Chrysler -33% (65,803 vehicles)
–adjusted for sales days
Naturally there is a (*) asterisk in the title, but lets dwell on the good things for awhile.
For the first time in 22 months, since January of 2008, General Motors sales increased year over year. Retail sales were up 15%. And Pontiac-less dealers found that Buick and GMC were both up 14.2% and 16.1% respectively. An impressive showing to be sure.
Somewhere ex-GM marketing guru/thesaurus owner Mark LaNeve must wonder if the universe is playing a cruel joke on him, as new head of US Sales, Susan Docherty has the easy task of spinning the month’s results:
“We’re very pleased with consumer acceptance to our newest cars, crossovers and trucks. While we have more work to do, we are making progress and will continue our focus on delivering vehicles and a sales and service experience that brings consumers to Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac – and keeps them coming back”
Asterisk moments:
(*) These are year over year numbers…and the comparison to the other automakers is not a fair one. October of 2008 found GM reeling in a bad economy and under the threat of bankruptcy…off a staggering 45%. The rest of the pack, (except for the albatross named Chrysler) were all up against much better set of worse numbers, ranging from -23 to -29%
(*) GM bought these numbers/this month. GM is no stranger to putting ‘cash on the hood’ to make a sale, but it has never been more true than it was in October. Fearful of losing customers because of the closure of brands, GM looked to regain these newly found ‘free agents’ by lining their pockets with cash…to the tune of about $4,277. With new 2010s finding there way onto dealer lots, every other manufacturer lowered their month over month incentive spending. Leading that charge, Honda offered only $508 in incentives per car, while Toyota came in second at $1,338.
Overall however, GM had a pretty good month all things considered. Sure they were up against some bad comps, sure they bought these results…but they did so with a plan, and that was to retain and/or increase market share. In this regard, they were a raging success, taking in a estimated 21% of all light vehicles sold.
/now if GM could only get the SAAR (Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate) for auto sales back up over 16 million (currently around 10 million), ‘new’ GM will be a thing to behold
GM Retains Opel
Fresh from announcing this month’s positive sales results, GM also announced late Tuesday, that it would not be selling Opel to a group lead by Magna International.
Despite having just disclosed in a SEC filing that only 13.6 billion remained in their escrow account from the government funded bankruptcy, GM cited its own improving financial condition and a more favorable environment in Europe as the reason it would be retaining Opel.
GM CEO Fritz Henderson had this to say on announcement, “While strained, the business environment in Europe has improved. At the same time, GM’s overall financial health and stability have improved significantly over the past few months, giving us confidence that the European business can be successfully restructured.”
GM had been very leery of relinquishing control of Opel to the Magna group, for fear that one of the financial backers, namely Sberbank (a Russian bank), would flip its interest in Opel to Russian carmaker Gaz, who would then gain access to GM’s platforms/technology, and use that position to ruin GM’s own business in Russia.
GM must now convince the European governments (namely Germany) to continue to provide the interm support it says it needs to stay healthy, around €3 billion ($4.43 billion). Germany had previously offered a €4.5 billion Euro loan under the Magna deal. They also must seek new concessions with the strong labor unions throughout the region…and pray they don’t ever need to infuse capital received from the US government to prop up a international division.
In a statement from Magna on the happenings, Siegfried Wolf, (Magna’s co-chief) said that Magna understands GM’s board’s decision on the matter, and vowed to continue supporting Opel and GM.”
148 Responses to “GM Wins* October Sales Race; Decides to Keep Opel Citing Improved Financial Health”
Recent Posts
- Ford Unveils Transit Connect Electric Cargo Van, Will Enter Production This Year
- Chevrolet Chief on Volt Supply and Demand
- Jaguar Says Only ‘Self Charging’ Extended Range Electric Cars Make Sense
- Op-Ed: Prius Halo Damaged; Toyota Pressured to Announce Recall on 270,000 Units Already Sold, as CEO President Finally Breaks Cover
- GM Sends Dealers 2011 Model Year Ordering Guide: Includes Volt
- GM Partners with NASA to Build Next Generation Robots
- If Electronics are to Blame for Toyota’s Vehicle Failures, What Does this Mean for the Volt?
- The Chevy Volt Fuel Tank will be Sized to Deliver 300 Miles of Gas Range
- Video: How the Volt Works
- GM CEO: Volt Will Roll out Simultaneously in US, and a Billion Dollars Couldn’t Bring it Sooner
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Volt Test Drive by Vancouver EV Association February 8, 2010VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA -- General Motors issued a very special invitation to the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association last week to drive the... […]WopOnTour
- gasoline cars are like smoking . . . . February 8, 2010interesting article, better presenting what I've had a hard time putting into words (which is why HE's a writer and I'M... […]prowler
- A common European strategy for electric vehicles February 8, 2010I coudn't resist to cut and paste the next excerpt : Link :... […]Jean-Charles Jacquemin
- Run flat option or standard? February 8, 2010I suspect that run flats might be standard because they get rid of the space and weight taken by a spare tire and may result in less fatal accidents... […]1nk
- Engine Thermal Management in a Series Hybrid February 8, 2010I've just recently discovered how different the environments under which a conventional (even parallel hybrid) ICE and series hybrid ICE are... […]XGC75
- electric car with wind generator February 7, 2010My design of ELECTRIC CAR WITH WIND GENERATOR: http://velkovelkov.blogspot.com/ I think this conception is original and realistic. The low position... […]Velko Velkov
- Please provide complete home solar systems. February 6, 2010Please provide both a volt charging solar system and a complete whole house solar system that takes the user completely off the grid and stays on... […]1nk
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2010 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
This is great. Opel has some great stuff!
On the sales though, if you sold one car last year and two this year it’s a 100% sales increase. GM has a long way to go to recover.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Deciding to keep Opel is the best decision GM has made in a while. Way to go!
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
http://gm-volt.com/2009/10/30/volt-chief-frank-weber-going-to-opel/
Here I was discussing this with friends in light of the “imminent” Magna takeover.
Maybe Frank Weber was asked to return to Opel before this news broke.
Maybe, huh?
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Almost $4300 in incentives??!!
Sadly, I don’t think this would be a record level for GM.
Statik, where did you find that figure? Did they admit it on the conference call? I rarely can listen live but I usually catch the replay.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:54 pm
While I’m thinking about it, on last month’s conference call, Mark La Neve (remember him?) said that the year-on-year comps would look very good “starting in October.” La Never promised this. Although I was initially impressed that La Neve would go out on a limb like that, I did look back at last October and realized that, to get year-on-year improvements, they’d simply be winning a race against a dead horse.
Still, I didn’t rain on anybody’s parade… I figured I’d wait and see how things went. These results are not at all impressive… especially in light of the $4300 in incentives. They beat the dead horse but just barely.
TTAC.COM posted an interesting article within the last 48-72 hours on GM’s cash position. I don’t remember the precise figures from last year but a glance suggests that their cash reserves look to be about where they were just 6 or 7 months prior to their bankruptcy.
I’d also say that GM’s results don’t bode well for the Volt… GM sold a lot of trucks last month. If gas prices hold at $2.50/gallon for long, Americans seem to forget that gas prices can rise dramatically and suddenly.
Of course, if trucks are what you have to sell; you sell trucks. GM’s making hay while the sun shines but if gas rises to $3/gallon, look for some long faces in the RenCen.
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:09 pm
statik left off:
Hyundai – up 47%
Subaru – up 41%
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Year on year numbers for a given month doesn’t mean very much. It is a single data point, and does not reflect either a trend, nor is it an indicator of profitability. The real question is (and I notice that the issue is carefully skirted here), how much money did GM lose this past month? How much did the other automakers?
And what does the five-year trend in auto sales, year over year by month, look like?
Respectfully,
Dr. Ibringdoh
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:13 pm
(click to show comment)
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:24 pm
I agree.. .its just playing w/the numbers, something fun for the Wall St. bean counters.
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:32 pm
I was hoping GM would keep Opel.
My advice to GM now: import and sell Opels here to fill the void from losing Saturn and Pontiac. Keep their German identity intact and keep their identity separate from GM’s american brands. Focus their appeal on buyers of imports…… it’s a double-barreled strategy against the leading imports for GM: with their American brands GM would be bringing buyers back home; with Opel GM would still be a choice for buyers who continue to insist imports are better. Win/win for GM.
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:53 pm
So this sheds a whole bunch of light on Weber returning to Opel. If we don’t see a renewed push to make more Amperas in Europe I’ll eat my hat. Weber seems like he absolutely loves driving electric and truly believes people will find it an irresistible experience. I always liked how he brought a different perspective to the table from all the rest of us who are primarily concerned about energy efficiency/oil/etc. His love for EV driving reminds me of Chelsea Sexton, although with a little more cold reason and a little less activism in the mix. Driveability is gonna be important to sell this tech to more “average” consumers if oil doesn’t go up fast enough, and to differentiate the Volt from hybrids.
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Go GM go! Such great news and so needed for the launch of the Volt! I better start saving up, it really is starting to look like it might hit the dealerships
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:58 pm
/good call
…actually, my ‘original’ piece had another asterisk/disclaimer about just that, but when the Opel news broke, Lyle and I figured that it should be added into the thread. ‘All things financial I suppose,’ and I decided to trim the monthly sales report to add the Opel news as well, to make sure this piece didn’t set the all-time record for long-winded posts, it was cut down.
I present asterisk number 3 (of 4) from the cutting room floor:
(*) Don’t look past the top five…because Nissan clocked in with a 2% gain in the next spot, and Hyundai/Kia is a beast at number 7, once again making everyone else look like a house on the side of the road as they fly past…up 44%/40% on combined sales of 53,495)
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:08 pm
Actually, Edmunds estimates these numbers industry wide. GM has actually since come out with a number about a $100 lower, but 6 of one…half dozen of another.
http://www.edmunds.com/help/about/press/159666/article.html
Susan Docherty actually commented on it, saying that the company had to bring the numbers down, and they ‘plan’ to reduce incentives as it sells down older models and ships more newly launched vehicles.
Sidenote: Chrysler is going the other way for November and will be throwing the kitchen sink at moving metal this month…look for them to take the lead back from GM in the short term.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:48 pm
So this is more “we lose money on every car we sell, but make it up in volume” mentality that GM is so famous for?
I don’t get it.
Really. . . who cares how many cars GM can sell? I want to know how my “investment” is doing on returns.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:52 pm
Nobody’s skirting the issue… except GM. Somehow, they haven’t managed to pull together a financial report for anybody to look at. Given their propensity to restate earnings time and again, this probably shouldn’t come as a surprise.
And, as I noted, TTAC.COM has got a note going about GM’s cash situation, if you’re interested.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:01 am
Well, I guess my statement the other day about Frank Weber raising up the GM corporate ladder wasn’t wrong! I wish Frank all the success at Opel to continue doing what he did here for the Volt but now the Opel EV.
Happy trails to you, Frank Weber, ’til we meet again.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:04 am
very very good.come this 2011 or 2012 GM will successfully be on top regaining its original place at no.1 from toyota.THIS is a good news.GM volt cars will skyrocket in second half of 2011 where toyota and jap automakers will have little innovation and a rising yen will make their exports less competetive
November 4th, 2009 at 1:25 am
Way to go GM!
I’m sure the 60 day return policy had something to do with their year-over-year improvement. Great move on their part.
Hopefully they can sustain a position trend until the Volt goes into production.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:34 am
Good to see GM back where they should be. Hopefully the union won’t screw things up for them again, I see the union is trying to put Ford into bankruptcy court.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:43 am
I didn’t know that you were such a wealthy man that you could bankroll GM. At anyrate your money is better spent on GM who actually make something rather than giving to the bankers.
Large volume will eventually turn into GM profits. Maybe GM has to move to South Carolina to get rid of the labor volatility of Detroit. Boing is working towards leaving Seattle because of the same poor labor situation and GM, Ford and Chrysler need to consider leaving those northern states for the same reason.
November 4th, 2009 at 5:03 am
No maybes here, this is a definite.
November 4th, 2009 at 5:18 am
What do the market share numbers look like for the surviving brands for each of the last 4 months? for the same 4 months last year? What are current dealer inventory levels for surviving brands and what where they this time last year?
This will tell a bit about the health of their sales.
November 4th, 2009 at 5:32 am
Great news about Opel! This makes total sense.
Go GM!
Go Volt!
November 4th, 2009 at 5:45 am
pssssttt …..(whispers) ‘I’m’ actually not that wealthy, but ‘I’ do have a printing press in my garage that feeds ‘my’ bankroll…. shhhhh…….
November 4th, 2009 at 6:35 am
That dirty money.
Anyone notice that Apple had a very good quarter? And today China has reported a robust economy with future growth ahead.
Seems the world population is cutting back spending on everything except for food and personal entertainment. This bodes well for battery makers. And maybe for electric cars?
AONE briefly dipped below $18 per share this week after reaching the mid 20’s last week. Asian lithium suppliers are well positioned.
=D~
November 4th, 2009 at 6:35 am
I love good news. Let’s hope we get more good news on GM, and on the economy in general…
November 4th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Doesn’t look like the Opel decision is going over well in Europe.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i0YnWm-6GyvaTyy9KmJrD75JH6OQD9BOL6E80
November 4th, 2009 at 7:24 am
So… does this mean there will be an Opel Ampera after all?
November 4th, 2009 at 7:33 am
(click to show comment)
November 4th, 2009 at 7:40 am
Despite having just disclosed in a SEC filing that only 13.6 billion remained in their escrow account from the government funded bankruptcy,
That’s ominous. One counts in terms of how many months.
Hope the Volt makes it.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:59 am
Even though GM bought their good news this month, it was probably a good investment at this time. They need to start showing some positives on the road to changing perceptions. I’m happy for this little bit of good news even though a grain of salt is needed to go with it. All four of the core brands showed positive gains year over year–sweet.
The Opel soap opera has my head spinning. Bottom line question is can GM afford Opel?
November 4th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Welcome back Frank Weber !
November 4th, 2009 at 8:09 am
Amen! GM decides to keep Opel – that’s a good thing. I can’t imagine all the good work on the Volt being bled to a potential competitor via the Ampera!
November 4th, 2009 at 8:23 am
I for one would like to see GM rescind its decision to shut Saturn & to continue importing rebadged Opels like the Vue/Antera & Astra thru the remaining Saturn dealers. If this were feasible, perhaps the Volt/Ampera would be one of the “resurrected” Saturn’s models!
November 4th, 2009 at 8:26 am
#9 Michael, the problem with fuel cell cars is that the hydrogen has to come from someplace. There is a huge cost in energy to produce hydrogen gas, and the only major power sources around to produce hydrogen are power plants, and most power plants in the US are powered by fossil fuels. All a fuel cell car is doing is transferring its pollution (including CO2) from multiple point sources to a much smaller number of point sources, similar to what an electric car will do. The CO2 will still be produced, and electricity costs will skyrocket because of the amount of power that will have to be switched from home use to industrial use to produce said hydrogen.
There is no easy solution for this issue yet. The first part is to get Americans less dependent upon foreign oil, then find ways to make renewable energy more economic, then see where the new tech can take you. Fuel cell cars are another way of helping out, but to put all of our focus on one type of car – whose tech is at least another 5-6 years away – is not very responsible.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:27 am
177,603 vehicles sold in one month by GM. It sure makes the 1,000 per month Volts they will build in 2011 seem like a drop in the bucket. I can’t wait till the day I see numbers posted that say the combined sales for all OEMs exceed 100,000 electric vehicles per month. Unfortunately that is a ways off.
We just had an election yesterday and most people in this country know we have serious problems. Our government is clueless and our economy is a house of cards. Debt and trade imbalances are ticking time bombs that will explode when inflation and interest rates rise.
As Oil reaches and starts heading north of $80 a barrel our economy will be seriously hampered and the outflow of cash for Oil will mean more jobs lost.
http://www.fcnp.com/commentary/national/5177-the-peak-oil-crisis-80-a-barrel.html
There is a plan in congress to start moving 18 wheelers to natural gas which more people need to be aware of and push. Using natural gas for trucking is a great idea, but that will drive up electrical rates because eventually nat gas prices will head up also.
http://m.naplesnews.com/news/2009/nov/03/t-boone-pickens-weening-us-foreign-oil-security-is/
Because we’ll need natural gas for trucking, we need to invest like yesterday in more nuclear power plants and more wind farms and tying in these new sources of power to the GRID. Right now cheap natural gas has been a factor slowing the push for new wind farms which over 30 years average 3 cents a KWH.
Electric cars need cheap electricity (especially cheaper overnight charging).
Over the next year folks need to be aware and push their representatives and get rid of those representatives in the next congress that hamper these efforts.
Building a cheap renewable and nuclear domestic energy economy to power electric mobility and replace importing oil is really the only thing that will save our economy. And we need to drill more oil in Alaska and the Gulf. Our economy is dead and the only way out is to invest in energy to stop the outflow of money for energy.
I’m afraid there will be no jobs recovery without dealing with these issues. Hopefully Obama can figure out how to do this without government takeovers. We don’t need cap and trade but we do need a bigger gas and diesel tax to pay for credits for electric cars and 18 wheeler conversion to nat gas.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:28 am
ccombs.
You’re the only one who got it right from all the content above. From what I see, your commentary is the true “News of the Day”, big time.
The big story, (and I thank Statik for answering my question from yesterday), the big story is all about Frank Weber.
If everyone goes back a few days in context for what has been going on, interwoven within the official commentaries has been this decision to retain Opel that had been apparently made weeks ago.
The story as I see it, is just not at all about the GM financial situation, the story is about the “GM and Opel future” to bring Volt to the US and as well Volt/Ampera to Europe. (Higher production reducing costs).
It will be Mr. Weber who will handle the acceleration of Ampera to the market within Opel in Europe.
The various EU investing parties would be insane to not fully fund both these highly proprietary and highly prized technologies for the productive environmental and economic futures they all desire.
We shall see if the wise members of the European Union have been paying close attention to this thread, which is unique for its insights to the practicalities and advancements for Volt/Ampera, and thus, a compelling of investment into Opel.
It would be a true partnership between the US and Europe in the very highest spirit of renewing the planet that all of us could somehow participate in (a little bit of stock), as well as understand.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:32 am
This scenario is why I’ve always said same month year to year comparisons are a waste of time. Market share comparisons are always king in my book. If the market is depressed and one company gets the lion share of that depressed market, they win. Simple as that. In November 2010, when GM can’t make enough Volts and all car buyers wait for production to ramp up I’d like to see some market share comparisons.
NPNS!
November 4th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Honestly so what that GM out sold the other car manufacturers. I thought the point was to make money. So NGM lost money so they could gain a stat on the Tax Payer dime. Way to go NGM or should I say GM cause it doesn’t sound like much has changed.
Change your ancient ways and start to become profitable again and repay the money you borrowed from the taxpayer or just close your doors.
Angry and Upset Lifetime GM vehicle Owner.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Hello, Dagwood:
When I said that the issue was “carefully skirted here,” I was referring to GM’s report, not to what you or others posted. I should have worded it more carefully.
BTW, thank you for the TTAC note. I also notice that the reported -0.6% sales regarding Ford’s year-on-year sales differs from Ford’s claim of a 3% gain:
http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=31283
Obviously, there are some differences in how the numbers are being tallied/compared.
Respectfully,
Dr. Ibringdoh
November 4th, 2009 at 9:08 am
Unfortunately GMs future is bleak if they don’t get in front of the curve with their voltec platform. Oil prices are heading up and their SUV and truck sales will slow again. Their survival is dependant on getting that GEN 2 volt production volume up and price down.
America needs transportation that is free of oil and affordable, GM is in the best position to fulfil this need but only if they push the envelope. That requires larger production volumes to bring down the cost in GEN 2.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Good link for Greeniacs. Get some integrity and read it.
http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html
Volt is about foreign oil independence.
Nuclear power for US.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:38 am
Shawn;
In your little post you’ve displayed more common sense then the combined Congress and White house.
Though in addition to Nuclear I think we should drill more oil and wind farms are a great long term value because we can build them now and in 30 years after hyper inflation that will probably come the energy will be free.
-Voltec and BEVs for personal mobility.
-Nat gas for truckers
-Nuclear, Wind, Geothermal and Domestic drilling to replace oil imports
Not the forum for it but I have a plan for national healthcare that would cover everyone, get the government ‘mostly’ out of the picture (compared to now), cost less, and improve quality. Unfortunately it means getting rid of all the insurance companies.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:43 am
They have to burn thru that money before the midterm elections, once the democrats lose control of the house they wont get another bailout. Big rebates are coming.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:44 am
The number is tricky, you really can’t make a judgement call on it yet, to attempt it would be to do so partially blind. GM is essentially working with two cash piles, the escrow account and their ‘own’ balance sheet figure.
What we need, (and GM has promised to do so), is to see some up to date financials. Even after they release the last quarter’s numbers, we likely need another quarter to establish some kind of baseline and estimate what the burn is, because of the ‘hot mess’ that was GM coming out of C11. (We’d also have to estimate a new base operating cash level for ‘new’ GM)
When talking about the SEC filing, Henderson did state that no operating expenses had been used out of the fund, meaning its use has been ‘as intended’ when the government set it up…sorta.
What we can track is the hiccups and there have been two big ones thus far. The forced resurrection of Delphi by GM, that cost them 2.8B, and the stealth bailout of Daewoo, which amounted to around 400 million…probably more to come there too. (GM has not decided how to account for this transaction…but does it really matter?)
Yesterday/today’s Opel news could certainly turn into another one, and the biggest one at that. GM has a virtual mountain to climb here, first with the Euro governments, then the unions…neither of which will be doing them any favors, certainly nowhere near the extent of goodwill/assistance Magna was going to receive. If you get past all that, you still have the sticky business of selling cars for a profit.
Special added un-bonus: Every dollar GM is forced to spend on Opel is going to have some serious US backlash…as it will be perceived as US bailout money to international interests.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:51 am
So finally GM retains Opel. That’s kind of a relief for all Ampera-waiting-europeans like me after Magna said it intended not to produce the Ampera at Ellesmere Port… This could have impacted Volt-waiters as Ampera and Volt would have been build on the same production line.
LJGTAWOTR!!
November 4th, 2009 at 9:51 am
Dr. Ibringdoh,
I see I misunderstood you. The point you intended is well taken.
I hadn’t looked at Ford but I’m thinking the -.6% to 3% difference would be the difference between reporting simple month-on-month as opposed to Daily Selling Rate figures. Ford picked the one that looked better, I guess.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:59 am
This is a perception issue.
The exercise here is comparing year over year results and expressing them as a percentage to see relative strength against historical performance…so it has to be a ‘apples to apples’ comparison to mean anything. (imo) In 2009 there was 28 selling days, in 2008…only 27.
The accounting (or not accounting) for the extra day is why you are seeing the difference in some reports giving the +2.6% and others the -.6%.
As FYI: Ford itself gives the unadjusted number, GM reports the net first, but the adjusted value also. Other companies, like Toyota and Honda always put out the adjusted numbers…so either way you want to do it, you have to establish a common playing field between all the companies if you are looking to make a comparison.
I think adjusting for selling days is best if you are trying to get a accurate read on progress. Otherwise it would be like Lyle comparing his time this year in the NYC marathon to last year, but while running a mile less…not a realistic gauge of performance.
/just my opinion though
November 4th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Naturally.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:37 am
As much as I wish the financial situation was off the table, realistically I think it is a major story, though certainly not the only story. Unless there is a strong rebound in the total vnumber of auto sales, gm is in deep trouble in about a year and seriously constrained between now and then.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:39 am
“for fear that one of the financial backers, namely Sberbank (a Russian bank), would flip its interest in Opel to Russian carmaker Gaz, who would then gain access to GM’s platforms/technology, and use that position to ruin GM’s own business in Russia.”
lol lol lol
November 4th, 2009 at 10:42 am
I like the idea of Opel brands being sold under the Saturn dealerships. I have been on the Opel site many times in the past months and Believe these cars would sell in North America.
For those of you who need to bash the numbers – would you be happier if the year over year numbers were down? It is only a single data point – but it is the correct direction – even with incentives. This keeps the factories working and people off the unemployment lines.
Now the redesign of the hood of the Volt just doesn’t sit well with me. With the crease visable from the side view it looks like an old Saturn VUE which = cheap to my eye.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Yes, I agree completely.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:48 am
The GM sales figures would be much higher if they were in the leasing business again. These are purchases.
I would like to see numbers compared sales to sales no leasing included.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:58 am
“for fear that one of the financial backers, namely Sberbank (a Russian bank), would flip its interest in Opel to Russian carmaker Gaz, who would then gain access to GM’s platforms/technology, and use that position to ruin GM’s own business in Russia.”
First it’s Vaz, not Gaz (it’s too different companies).
Second, rofl lol
Only reason why Vaz is not being bankrupted – because more than 40% of Vaz shares belongs to Russian government, and government is making everything to protect Vaz. This mean raising taxes for imported cars, especially for used ones (customs tax for used cars is something close to 100% of price of used car now). Few weeks ago government banned right-wheeled cars – even with 100% tax for used cars, people continued to by used japaneese cars.
Only advantage Vaz have is its price (car on the picture – new one – costs 5000$)
http://www.google.ru/imglanding?imgurl=http://autobazar.od.ua/brands_marki/2107.jpg&imgrefurl=http://catalog.autobazar.od.ua/vaz/2107/7&h=400&w=800&sz=74&tbnid=DIEuozNNghKSfM:&tbnh=72&tbnw=143&prev=/images%3Fq%3D%25D0%25B2%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B7%2B2107&hl=ru&usg=__p4KyBDofVi5YCZqOXdIvitTzxmw%3D&ei=g6TxSuWJJ5ej_AbD6aUx&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=4&ct=image&ved=0CBYQ9QEwAw&q=%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%B7+2107&start=0#
November 4th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Now Opel bankruptcy is inevitable, since Germans will recall their 1.5 Billion Euro bridge loan to Opel. Unless the US government injects $6.6 billion into Opel itself, that is.
The only thing this decision changed is who gets to own Opel; from Magna/Sberbank to hungry Chinese bidders at bankruptcy court auction.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:02 am
November 4th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Two thumbs up on the decision to keep Opel.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:08 am
#16
The most important thing I’ve seen here so far today. It’s the same old question. Will the Volt hit the street before they run out of cash again? And if not, what will they do to get more cash? If the Obama administration tries to pump any more cash into GM, I fear that it will face a massive backlash. An I’m an Obama supporter, LOL.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Wow, Hyundai is just killing this market. There’s no doubt they are on track to become the worlds largest car maker. I watched a documentary on their future plans and corporate culture, they are really driven.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:12 am
#20
If I was a UAW member at Ford watching Mr. Mulally getting paid $28 MILLION/year and commuting to Seattle every weekend on the corporate jet, I would find it pretty tough to swallow any more givebacks myself. I really fail to understand what makes these jerks feel entitled to live like Medici princes when the companies they supposedly serve struggle for survival.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:14 am
#21
Well we’re all bankrolling GM, in case you didn’t notice.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:17 am
Herein is where my concern with the Opel situation lies…can GM afford the costs of restructuring Opel? Will the European Atuo Unions let them close the overcapacity (plants) that is needed to be competitive, and so forth? I like the idea of GM holding on to Opel, but not if it drags the rest of the Company down the drain with it. Just arm-chair quarterbacking here, but maybe the better plan would be to let Opel die, and throw their muscle behind their Chinese operations? Awful to even contemplate that, but maybe it’s an idea whose time has come, especially when it is pretty unclear how much it would cost to restructure Opel into a profitable brand, or even “if” that could be accomplished at all.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Recover – Hahahaha – THAT gm doesn’t even exist any more!!!!
November 4th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Sorry, its Gaz….it is pretty well known, unfortunately you have some facts mixed up.
The deal would have put a ton of pressure on Vaz however. You are right about some of the pressures/support propping up Vaz still.
—-
Random points of reference:
“Magna International’s bid for Adam Opel, along with partner Russian auto manufacturer OAZ Gaz, is likely to place even more competitive pressure on Avto VAZ as it begins importing or even building Opel models in Russia. ”
http://www.autonewswire.net/article.php?id=7902
http://blogs.motortrend.com/6580791/corporate/everybodys-happy-gm-gets-magna-and-gaz-to-save-opel/index.html
November 4th, 2009 at 11:40 am
They have also announced a contest to name this signature exclusive Volt paint color.
To enter the contest you create a unique name for the color and submit it.
The contest will run until November 4th at 8:00 AM .
A public consumer vote will take place and from the three finalists a winner will be chosen. That vote will take place from November 16th at 8 AM to December 1 at 8AM also on this site.
=D~
November 4th, 2009 at 11:41 am
#53 Dale said: “Now the redesign of the hood of the Volt just doesn’t sit well with me. With the crease visable from the side view it looks like an old Saturn VUE which = cheap to my eye.”
——————————————–
I cannot agree more. I do not like the look of the crease showing on the hood. When I see the Vue and its siblings on the highway, the first thing I notice is that crease of the hood line. It looks terrible. It needs to be changed back. If European crash standards require the hood to be designed that way, great. Let GM sell its cars in Europe looking like that, but not here in the U.S. and Canada.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Good point–look at Toyota in south Texas
November 4th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Hmmm….
I’m lookin’ to the left….
I’m lookin’ to the right….
I don’t see any customers around here….
Not for October anyway….
What I would give for a lot filled with
$35,000 Chevy VOLT’s
$30,000 Chevy Orlando’s
$26,000 Chevy Cruze’s
$21,000 Chevy Spark’s
and a half dozen Corvette Grand Sports….
Then I’ll show you what “Sales Increase” really means.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Germany is going to be in trouble with the EU over recalling that loan. That’s why GM is retaining Opel. They always wanted to. But Germany wouldn’t give them the aid necessary. And the Opel unions wouldn’t give them the necessary concessions. (Opel unions hate GM–they blame them for Opel’s financial problems.) But the EU said that that assistance has to be made available to any potential purchaser.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aHHqMmHN7_5Y
Basically, the German government isn’t supposed to save German jobs at the expense of Polish, Belgian, Spanish and British jobs. The Vauxhall unions are happy about this.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8341870.stm
November 4th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Nothing to do with the price of soup…or this thread, but if you want to listen in and watch the slide show on Fiat-Chrysler’s six hour,’ 5-year plan’ fiesta…it is on now.
You can access it here:
http://www.chryslergroupllc.com/
/bring a comfy cushion to sit on
November 4th, 2009 at 11:57 am
#6
Does that mean that people are buying a lot of small, cheap cars? Who would have thought?
November 4th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Dude, in six years we’ll be living in a different world, you’ll be a decade wiser, battery electric cars from major OEM’s will have been on the road for five years, battreries for the few BEVs that have non-usables will have been sold or recycled and fuel cells as range extenders “may” be available for those living near the few hydrogen refueling centers, which will still be getting their stocks from reformed natural gas.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Naaahhh, I think I’d rather just sit here and hit myself on the thumb with a hammer.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
#62
First of all, Mulally doesn’t get $27 million. He got 13.5 million last year. But most of it was in stock options. He got 2 million cash.
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS201809+24-Mar-2009+PRN20090324
And he’s worth every penny of the 2 million cash. Basically, there aren’t too many Alan Mulally’s around. If you want talent, you have to pay for it. He didn’t have to come to Ford. He could have stayed at Boeing where he is also credited with a turnaround.
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1894410_1893837_1894182,00.html
He’s doing an amazing job at Ford. Before he showed up, Ford was in the worst position of any of the three Detriot companies before he took over. And now? Because of him, Ford didn’t have to get bailout money from the US taxpayer. And Ford actually turned a profit last quarter. He’s doing an amazing job, and Ford (and we taxpayers) are lucky to have him.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/ford-returns-to-profit-for-first-time-in-four-years-20091103-hv8l.html
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/11/news/companies/mulally_ford.fortune/
I agree that CEOs, in general, make too much money. But Mulally is the last person I’d attack on that basis. It’s worth a great deal to Ford, to Michigan, to the American taxpayer, and the entire American economy that Ford be a sucessful company. And 2 million dollars a year is peanuts if he can make that happen. At least IMHO.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
I can tell you first hand it is not a dissimilar experience. Hour and a half in…I’ve learned practically nothing.
/fortunately I’m just listening/watching it in the background and have other things to do to pass the time
November 4th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Not to be a conspiracy theorist or anything–but Sberbank, who was bankrolling the deal, is owned by the Russian government. The Russian economy is dependent on Oil (and natural gas) exports. The Russian government had every incentive to reduce and/or eliminate any potential alterantive.
So this is good news for the Ampera. And good news for people who want reduced oil comsumption all over the world.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
lol…
http://bit.ly/ejs9g
November 4th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
You’re thinking the Cruze and Spark will sell well for $26K and $21k respectively? Those numbers seem pretty high to me.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
None of the detriot three are in a financial position to do that. Or in a strong enough position to risk ticking of Washington.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Maybe it would be best if GM goes out of business, and someone with more cash and intelligence takes the voltec and runs with it.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Well I have to confess that I find today’s developments pretty discouraging. I found the very diplomatic comment of the Magna executive in the post quite interesting. Maybe Magna has figured out that GM just did them a huge favor.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
SPOT on girl–as ALWAYS!!!! Excellent rebuttle…….
November 4th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
“Naturally there is a (*) asterisk in the title, but lets dwell on the good things for awhile.”
OK, who are you, and what have you done with the REAL Statik?
November 4th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
You don’t seem to understand; Germans already RECALLED their loan, and GM has to pay back by the end of this month or Opel defaults on its loan. Further, German government isn’t obligated to make the bailout loan to anyone. If they find that Opel under GM ownership isn’t worth saving, then let it go bankrupt and settle this through bankruptcy court proceedings. If a bankruptcy is what it takes to remove GM from Opel’s board, then so be it.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
About the incentives–what matters to GM isn’t the incentive level. It’s the margin per car and the number sold. Basically, if you manufacture a widget at $1000, and offer it at $2000, and then reduce the price by $500, you still make the same $500 as someone who priced it at $1500 to begin with.
The margins on trucks are a lot higher than the margins on cars. So, they have a lot more room to discount them. That said, I don’t know what GM’s margin per car was after the incentives. Ford’s went up, which is why they posted a profit. I wish someone would publish that that information..
November 4th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
No I would take that as very positive. In an horrendous year for auto sales, GM has ceased to burn cash, for an entire year, despite all the one time costs of bankruptcy, discontinuation of four brands, dealer buyouts, the capital investment in Daewoo et cetera.
The second business plan of Feb 2009, shrank the breakeven to 10 million annual SAAR with GM losing its sales percentage to 17% or so. For the last few months the SAAR is approaching 11 million, and GMs market share is growing to over 20%.
Few recognize that these automakers are very highly leveraged. Once breakeven is achieved, only a small increment of additional volume is a literal license to print money.
The only way the capital burn is zero is if GM is approaching or has reached profitability. I would guess that GM will be profitable this quarter; and perhaps was for the last quarter as well.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Just as general information, about the loan specifically. It is commonly referenced as Opel owing 1.5 billion Euros…that was actually the max cap draw down from the government.
Opel only drew 1.1 billion of that, and has paid back around 200 of that…so there is 900 million still outstanding.
Doesn’t materially change the fact German Economy Minister Rainer Bruederle said they are expecting payment in full by month’s end, or that apparently GM has agreed to do so (what choice do they have?)…but the amount is quite a bit less.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
The real reason we won’t see pure fuel cell cars is not cost nor lack of being ready. It is just plain efficiency. The baseline “fuel” for the future will be electricity. Regardless of what it comes from, wind, solar, nuclear , coal, natural gas, it will go to electricity. Hydrogen will come from electricity. The maximum theoretical limit of efficiency for conversion of electricity to hydrogen by hydrolysis of water is about 70%. The efficiency of a PEM hydrogen fuel cell is about 50%. So you are down to 35% before you even begin to pressurize, transport, and refuel with the hydrogen. Those steps will result in even more losses. For BEV, electric transmission efficiency is above 90%, switching chargers are around 90%, and Li batteries are about 90% efficient. So about 70% efficiency before going to the motor and controller versus less than 35% for the hydrogen fuel cell. So who wants to use twice as much electricity as they have to? BEVs and PHEVs will predominate in the future with fuel cells perhaps providing the “hybrid” part of the equation. Though I still think renewable liquid synfuels are likely to beat out the hydrogen option, depending on future developments.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Inflation takes its toll.. the Cruze is replacing the $15k Cobalt..
http://www.chevrolet.com/pages/open/default/family/cobalt.do
November 4th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
#86 HyperMiler
I know that. But I don’t think the EU will be happy about it. That’s why this whole thing happened. It was a done deal until the EU intervened. No. Germany doesn’t have to save the company. But they are not allowed to save German jobs at the expense of British and Polish jobs. The EU forced Germany to clarify that the aid would be available to whoever restructured the company. Well, obviously, it wasn’t.
http://www.reuters.com/article/BANKSL/idUSL412787220091104
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=a7jzGU3JxNS0
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703816204574481272272971490.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection
The British and Polish workers are happy about this.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aPq6xxv1bUaY
Opel has already paid back part of the loan.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mergersNews/idUSL459006620091104
And the British government is already talking about possible funding…
http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSL356135520091103
November 4th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Statik..
A question for you. Do you think new GM will have an initial stock offering based on governement desire / timetable, or will they be allowed to wait until they can show a positive financial outlook to get maximum money?
November 4th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?p=32281#post32281
Chrysler not burning cash, sees savings: Fiat CEO
“Some of you have been (presuming) that we are losing money … this is not true,” Marchionne said during a day-long presentation. “Most of you underestimated the substantial reduction in fixed costs that was carried out by the old Chrysler. The new Chrysler is being incredibly parsimonious.”
November 4th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
EU cannot do anything about the loan recall.
Germany is allowed to not bail out Opel and send it to bankruptcy court. There is nothing illegal about not bailing out Opel to force a change of ownership at the bankruptcy court.
The 4.5 billion Euro loan guarantee is for the new owner, not for GM. It doesn’t make any sense to extend the loan guarantee to GM since it was GM’s mismanagement of Opel that got them into this trouble in the first place.
Germans, both labor union and politicians alike, do not want GM ownership of Opel, period. Afterall, it is GM that needs Opel to survive, not the other way around.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
The way Germans see it, Opel’s like a fair maiden and GM’s like a vampire sucking on her blood. Now that fair maiden is about to die from blood loss, the vampire is demanding a blood transfusion on the fair maiden to keep her alive and continue sucking blood out of her when she awakens.
Of course Germans are outraged by the demand of the vampire and wants to drive the vampire out. You can’t blame Germans.
If GM cannot engineer its own cars with American engineering talent, maybe it doesn’t deserve to stay in automotive business.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
I don’t know what they will go for. But now that I’m thinking about it, those numbers might have been a bit high. I’ll take anything right now. It’s mighty quiet around these parts lately.
November 4th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Michael Robinson.
I’m not sure how you’d stack up the efficiency of methane reforming against hydrolysis, but at this point it is much cheaper than making the electricity first, then splitting water with it.
Of course, reforming natural gas does release CO2 (if you’re one of those who care), but so does hydrolysis (unless your electricity comes from hydro, wind, solar or nuclear; which together are still in the minority by volume when it comes to electricity-making in America).
It seems like it would be a good interim step to make fuel cells that run on CNG in the first place (if not a complete solution).
At this point, one almost has to see hydrogen in cars as a peculiar techno-religion. It’s hard to see a path to H2-mobiles in less than 3 – 5 decades (…and what happens to battery technology during that time? Lithium Ion chemistry is just beginning; there’s lots of research-room for improved performance left. Who knows what other electricity-storage technologies might emerge in 20 years, never mind 50. Hydrogen doesn’t so much have an uphill road to climb, it’s more like a sheer cliff).
November 4th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
I knew you’d chime in on the Opel. I hope that GM van do just as you suggest!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
November 4th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
GM isn’t a low-cost manufacturer, even after they threw the UAW, the retirees, the bondholders and the stockholders under a bus. The probability that their margins on trucks are high enough to offset their losses on cars is very, very low. Their manufacturing costs are certainly higher than Toyota’s for comparable vehicles and they probably have to give up about $1K/vehicle vs Toyota on actual transaction price (that’s after incentives, holdbacks and all the other finagling that goes on behind the scenes). Then there’s warranty costs… GM’s is twice Toyota’s (something like $2K vs $1K). Vehicle for vehicle, under normal circumstances, Toyota probably has at least a $3K edge on GM in terms of contribution to EBIT. Honda’s edge probably isn’t quite as good but still substantial.
If GM thought their first quarter’s financial results were anything to write home about, they would have already published them, they’ve had all the relevant figures on their desks for a couple of weeks. Henerson was hanging crepe on expectations just the other day.
They might not book a lot of “loss” and they might actually waterboard the figures into showing a “profit” but I’ll bet the cash burn amounts to at least $1billion per month. At that rate, they’ve got about a year to live.
One of the curious things about the auto industry is that we see a lot of attention focussed on unit volume. I don’t know of any other business that does this. Around here, it’s revenue that gets the attention and then gross margin and then the nitty-gritty of various costings.
It would be far more interesting – and useful – for automakers to report units and net revenue (gross revenue minus per-vehicle expenses).
November 4th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
No, GM does not need Opel. Opel needs GM or some other partner. Opel is too small to operate on its own. And GM owns 100% of the intellectual property…Yes. GM can use Opel engineering, but it has other design centers.
Yes. I know how Opel workers and, therefore, the German government, feel about GM. It’s the same way Chrysler workers feel about Daimler. And I suspect that has more to do with it than any opinions about GM’s new management’s abilities or lack thereof. One of the German government’s own board members on the Opel trust said that GM is the better option for Opel.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSL459006620091104
But there are other governments with a stake in this. The British government is already talking about funding. And so is the Austrian government. Poland definately prefers GM to anything involving Russia.
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200911040445DOWJONESDJONLINE000432_FORTUNE5.htm
http://blogs.wsj.com/new-europe/2009/11/04/loud-sigh-of-relief-in-poland-as-gm-backs-out-of-opel-deal/
Regardless, GM has nothing to lose by trying to hold onto Opel. And everything to gain.
November 4th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
omg- the thing from another dimension is back
November 4th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
I agree with these huge bonuses that corporations pay themselves but there small peanuts compared to the overall costs of making cars. BTW-Did you work on the line, If so what did you do and for how much ?
November 4th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Blah, Blah, Blah…..
Show me a Volt available for sale. Then we will have something real to talk about…..
Glad to see you back online Tag!!!
November 4th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
I agree with you on these huge bonuses that corporations pay themselves but they’re small peanuts compared to the overall costs of making cars. BTW-Did you work on the line, If so. what did you do and for how much ?
November 4th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Yes, it does, as the source of passenger car engineering. If GM didn’t need Opel, then it would have dropped it just like it did with Saab, Hummer, Saturn, and Pontiac.
Opel’s work would be 100% owned by Opel once GM’s gone. This is what Germans want, for Opel engineering to benefit Germans, not Americans.
It was Daimler that provided Chrysler with engineering. It’s the other way with Opel.
And none of them have 4.5 billion Euros to rescue Opel. Whatever UK could provide, it’s well less than 1 billion Euro.
What’s the point of attempting the impossible. There is no one but German government to bail out Opel. And Germans are refusing to bail out Opel as long as it’s controlled by GM. Germans had it enough with GM and want GM gone for good.
If you are a German government official, why should you bail out Opel so that GM could fire 10,000 German workers and continue to make a fat profit off Opel engineering around the world, namely in China?
November 4th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Hey Tag.
Glad to see you back. Did you have a vacation?
I’m just now getting caught up from that 3 days off back at the end of Sept. with the Renewable Energy Roundup in Texas.
(12 hour days and no days off. But business is record-breaking for me, so, it’s a really happy 12 hour day.)
November 4th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
#103
No, I’ve never worked on the line. I just know bad psychology when I see it. The way I read it, he was making $28 MILLION. If that’s wrong, and it’s actually $2 million cash + $11.5 million in stock options, or whatever it is, it still looks like naked greed in the face of the downsizing and givebacks demanded from the workers. So, if you try to put yourself in their places, I wouldn’t expect them to be feeling too cooperative.
November 4th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
So basically, it’s America bad. Germany good. Got it. Americans are, in general, completely incompetant, and unable to engineer anything for ourselves without German engineers holding our hands. How did we ever exist without you?
And I think that American engineering should benefit Americans. That means we should do all the manufacturing for all the things Americans invent. That includes computers. Airplanes. Pharmaceuticals. TVs. Thin film solar panels. Etc. And, in regard to the auto manufacturing center, auto manufacturing, the “toyota way” was invented by American consultant Edward Deming. I think we should get dibs on that too.
FYI–Chrysler was a extremely profitable successful company with its own engineering center before Daimler bought them. Daimler closed it in order to “reduce costs,” (after forcing them to use German parts that didn’t really fit into their designs) and, in so doing, destroyed Chrysler’s uniqueness and future value.
I believe they opened a new engineering center in China. No. I’m not happy about it. I’d rather they hired more engineers here in the US. Since I believe that American engineers are as capable as anyone else. But most of the engineering for the Chinese market was done in South Korea. Not Germany.
And, by the way, Magna and Sberbank were going to lay off the same number of workers in Europe. The only difference is that GM’s layoffs will probably concentrate less on Poland and the UK. And trying to prevent that violates EU regulations.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8343517.stm
And what do they have to lose? GM is better off with Opel liquidated than in Russian hands.
November 4th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
#94
Yeah, looks like we were all worried about nothing. Everything’s hunky-dory over there in Auburn Hills. Next case.
November 4th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
That was actually my main point. I completely agree that if GM were making money at this point, they would have reported already. It’s just hard to know what’s going on without net revenue becuase there are so many variables.
November 4th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
The computer industry was forced over to that business model years ago.
Apparently, that shift went so well, it didn’t even get noticed.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I’m not sure I understand you… the computer industry reports revenue.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
The way it is reported has nothing to do with the $$$ itself. It’s the selling.
In ages past, the computer industry relied on selling a modest number of high-profit products. Over time, per-product profit dropped (for a variety of reasons). To maintain that same level of overall revenue, volume was increased.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Do you mean gravity was not there till Newton invented it ? Man I wonder how things were happening till that time
and what would have happened if Newton didn’t invent gravity.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
They need them as their entre into European market. Engineering resources are a plus.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Thanks, Jim I.
Financial stuff is definitely my weak(est) suit, but I know nasaman has been drooling about a European Voltec since Voltnation I.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
November 4th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Just thought I would mention the ‘EV parts’ of the 6 hour Fiat-Chrysler presentation…and how it relates to the ENVI program.
Pretty bleak, they mentioned a fleet of plug-in minivans (which is basically some vans to the US governemnt IF the DoE App goes through)…and ‘maybe’ a BEV in 2012-ish.
Nada on ENVI, and Paolo Ferrero (powertrain guy) said something like we will expand electrics “once they become a cost-effective proposition” for people to buy.
We did get a slide representing this ‘5 year’ electrification plan, and we can look forward to ‘cloud bubbles’ touting ‘Additional Applications’ somewhere between 2013 and 2016.
I’d say ENVI is pretty much dead, and we should hold our breath waiting for a EV out of Chrysler.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Chrysler’s EV information sure doesn’t sound at all definitive.
It sounds like there isn’t any commitment or deeper incentive other than something external agencies might be interested in buying.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
No buyers, no merchandise, or both? It’s quite a shame if American consumers can’t see value in the Equinox, Malibu, Impala, and Traverse.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Doesn’t something have to be alive first before it can die?
November 4th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Don’t know how the numbers work but Saturn dealers selling Opels seems like a good match.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
A little of both. Mostly it’s just the economic climate of Southern California. I just got word today that the Acura dealer down the street is having their troubles too. Who knows who will survive to 2011…? If GM is cranking out more sales, it’s not around here. The midwest region must be doing better, that’s all I can say.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
I wonder how many cars and truck GM would sell if they had fair trade around the world?
November 4th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
I think GM should keep Pontiac and Saturn and sell Opel.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Towards the end, Saturn was virtually “American Opel.”
What would a reincarnated Saturn sell without Opel?
nasaman: I for one would like to see GM rescind its decision to shut Saturn & to continue importing rebadged Opels like the Vue/Antera & Astra thru the remaining Saturn dealers. If this were feasible, perhaps the Volt/Ampera would be one of the “resurrected” Saturn’s models!
It’s hard to imagine a way to bring Saturn back from double-extinction; but this wouldn’t necessarily prevent Opel models from turning up as Chevrolets (though not an alternative to the Volt, obviously).
November 4th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
I was being sarcastic. I apologize if that didn’t come through.
To clarify, I think the very idea that a country “owns” whatever is invented by one of his or her countrymen is bizarre. But apparently, the Opel workers feel that the German manufacturing unions own their engineers. And here I thought Germany was a free country…
November 4th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
#108
I understand what you mean about psychology. But that’s what happens when you hire someone with no “skin” in the game. I admire Lee Iaccoca for working for $1 a year. But he had been fired from Ford, and had a vested interest in Chrysler.
Mulally, by contrast, had a perfectly good job at Boeing where he was probably making at least $2 million a year. (The CEO of Boeing made 23 million in 2005 including stock options.) Probably part of that was stock options. But given Boeing’s financial condition versus Ford’s–Boeing stock options were actually worth something. With Ford there’s a better than even chance that they will expire worthless.
Additionally, at Boeing, he got to work in Seattle, where he lives. He could see his family during the week. The company was on solid footing. And I’m pretty sure the hours were better. And there was less public scrutiny. And he was tackling probably one of the hardest jobs in the entire US. With the odds stacked heavily against him. Why should he accept lower pay for that?
Yes. It would be great if Ford could get someone who had a vested interest in the US auto industry. Unfortunately, there aren’t too many people around as capable as Mulally. And a lot of them don’t want to work for a company like Ford. And, at this point, it would be literally insane to switch. Like i said, Mulally’s doing an incredible job.
The UAW workers by contrast? If Ford liquidated, they would be out of their jobs tomorrow. And there’s no way they could get anything remotely comparable. And they know it. But they expect the US taxpayer to prevent that from happening.
But the really sad part is that real victim isn’t Ford. They’ll just move production to Mexico. And the current UAW workers probably will keep their jobs. Paid for by the US taxpayer if necessary. It’s the unemployed workers who Ford would have hired if the UAW had ratified the changes. And the US really needs the jobs IMHO.
And it’s not like Ford was asking for that much. They wanted to combine some work classifications. In other words, they didn’t want ot have to hire an electrician to change a light bulb. Shocking. They wanted to freeze entry level wages until 2015. And they wanted the UAW workers to promise not to strike until then. SInce it will take at least that long for Ford to fully repair its balance sheet, I think that’s more than reasonable…
November 5th, 2009 at 1:37 am
Game On:
November 5th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Me too apologize. I didn’t wrote it intentionally but it looked much funny to write.
In my view Globalization is not that great. The worst part is it very badly affected USA already, Europe and other countries always tries to protect the interest. The Major advantage players are India and China. In the final time or final stage of globalization, the living standard of US will be same as Aftrica because if something cheap is available anywhere in the world , production and business will move to that place and rest of the world will be sourced from there.
I don’t know how rest of the world will live ( only sales business ) but people need money to buy also.
Typical example is GM says we rock in China, But ask him whether how much profit they can take out of the country bring to US back, they have to reinvest in the same country and finally if GOVT feels take the business GM will come empty handed. Same with Opel – ask how much money they already spend and how much they brought back ? Same with Holden or Dewoo.
Atlest in software you are getting the software back but in car business , you spend your money,time and serve other nations and ask more money again from us and spend it global.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Noel;
I have drastically reduced my posting rate but thought it was time to comment.
We have a 2002 Subaru Impreza wagon with 220000 km on it.
Besides normal maintenance all I’ve ever had to do to it is replace the plug wires (@ 170000 km) and the rear struts (@ 190000 km).
It is a solid excellent handling absolutely reliable AWD any weather car.
I certainly do not consider it to be a ‘cheap’ car and it’s interior passenger space is not much different than my Malibu.
My brother retired his ‘95 Accent just a few months ago with just under 400000km on the clock.
(To be fair the car was done, but it lasted a long time and cost under $10k new.)
I’m not trying to be nasty, just keeping the balance.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
#128
Well clearly we’re doomed to disagree on this. On the other hand I think you know that I value 99% of your comments here very highly. I could go on about my theories on this, but I am going to shut up now and stop arguing. Best regards.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
#129
2 wheels in the back? What’s up with that?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
#130
Alas too true, IMHO.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
135.
Guy Incognito Says:
November 5th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Speaking of Opel, this is interesting:
GM to cut 10,000 Jobs Across Europe After Sudden U-Turn on Opel Deal
” … General Motors cut ten thousand jobs across Europe at its Opel unit in favor of Christmas bonuses.”
-Max Keiser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Jpb1e32KRY
=D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
November 5th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
No, actually you are right. When I saw Hyundai my poor mind just registered the certainty that the other one must be Kia. About the time I hit the submit button, the penny finally dropped that it was Subaru. Obviously, Subaru is a much different proposition from Hyundai or Kia. If they can make an attractive car at a reasonable price and continue to expand their market, who can argue with that?
Anyway, I meant it more as a criticism of GM’s historic “You can’t make money on small cars” mantra, and not so much a criticism of Hyundai and Kia, come to that. Although, given my history, I can see how it might come out that way, LOL.
Anyway, if I got you to break cover, it was worth it, even if it was to correct me, LOL. How are you coming along? Captain Jack and I have missed you, along with many others, I have no doubt. Don’t be a stranger.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
#135
That’ll teach those !@#$% German autoworker union members to mouth off.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hHEvhjqGkRnVvsCpvhR79cX0LOOgD9BPIL6G1
GM says they would use US bailout fund to restructure Opel if necessary. Your tax dollar at work, bailing out Opel.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
#138
OK, I read the article, but i have to admit that I am too dumb to understand the tactics of the Opel workers. They fear that their jobs are in jeopardy, so they walk off of said jobs.
I have been as sympathetic toward organized labor and the UAW as most anybody on this blog. Just look at my comments above about M. Mulally, and the response I got to that.
So forgive me if I say that, if I was Fritz Henderson and faced with 10,000 plus redundant workers, and they all walked off the job, I might just say, “Thanks for your help guys. Don’t bother coming back.” H**l, I might just send security out there and padlock the plant doors. What can they be thinking?
November 5th, 2009 at 10:46 pm
Another brilliant economist. GM is moving more of its production to China, and closing more plants here. I love the rah rah GM BS that this site is so prevalent with.
The argument that they have to give their products away, but that it will work out in the future because they will gain market share sort of sounds like the stupidity that helped get them into pretend bankruptcy the first time. I can only hope that they will go to big boy bankruptcy next time and there won’t be a New New GM.
Also, to clarify, I wish GM a speedy death that something else may take its former place not because I’m a terrorist. I believe that if they would die, something better would come along. I think rewarding failure on the backs of the taxpayers and Chinese gov is a losing proposition.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:31 am
#130 Unni
ICAM about globalization. And ICAM about China and the Chinese government. Right or wrong, the rest of the world is protectionist. And we need to protect our own interests. And we need to keep our worker’s interest in mind. Not just the welfare of our large corporations.
But that’s completely different than saying that Americans are entitled to benefit from the inventions of other Americans. I believe that everyone is entitled to the value of her or her work. And to receive that compensation from whoever is willing to employ them. Assuming, of course, that there’s no crime involved. It’s called freedom.
I still find the idea that Germans resent that GM is employing their engineers mind boggling. It’s not like GM is forcing those engineers to work there. They’re free to take their resumes to Daimler or Volkswagon.
Memo to self. Scratch Germany from the countries to visit list. Apparently, I could be lynched if I hire a tour guide or go to a restaurant. Germans don’t like it when Americans hire their citizens.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:52 am
I can answer that. Auto companies have high fixed costs. (Which, by the way, is why increasing volume reduces the cost of production of each individual vehicles.) When workers go out on strike, GM is still responsible for all those costs. But they have no production, and, therefore, no revenue coming in to offset those costs.
Yes. GM wants to lay off workers and reduce capacity. But when the Opel union strikes, they eliminate production across the board. I think Opel workers are hoping that if they cost GM enough money, GM will give in and sell the company.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:04 am
German autoworkers were expecting Magna to take over and they were expecting better job protection than they’re going to get from GM. They felt Magna had a better commitment to keeping German operations going.
Combined with the shock and surprise, a strike is not unexpected.
Others mentioned using US bailout dollars to revive Opel. Let’s not be narrow-minded about this. The intent of the bailout is to strengthen GM. If building up GM’s German (or Korean) operations strengthens GM, then it’s a good thing. More or less. If this improves GM’s chances over the long haul, it means that the government’s part ownership may be worth something and that’s a good thing. More or less.
November 6th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Did you see HyperMiler’s posts at #96 and 106?
HyperMiler: Opel’s work would be 100% owned by Opel once GM’s gone. This is what Germans want, for Opel engineering to benefit Germans, not Americans.
How would you interpret his comments?
November 6th, 2009 at 11:34 am
#143 Dagwood
I forgot to add–and it was too late to edit–did you catch Hypermiler’s defense of Daimler for the Chrysler fiasco? Apparently Daimler was the one wronged because Daimler provided the engineering. Yeah. Because they fired all the American engineers who made Chrysler successful before they came along!
November 6th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
#142
Or, if they cost GM enough money, GM might liquidate the comapny and they’re all out of a job. I was thinking that GM might just GIVE Opel to the German government and the autoworkers union. See how they do with it.
November 6th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
LauraM,
No, I didn’t catch HyperMiler’s comments. They’re rarely worth reading.
He was defending Daimler? I rest my case.
In any event (trusing your summaries), the ownership of Opel’s intellectual capital would be an interesting question. Opel is certainly using GM-US designs and patents and GM-Daewoo designs and patents. This has nothing to do with whether or not GM-US can engineer a car without Opel’s help… clearly they can. This has to do with logistics, sourcing, talent pooling, leverage and market share. Is GM better off having a wholly-owned European subsidiary? Probably.
And, as long as GM was making money (or could pretend they were), Opel’s employees were perfectly happy with the relationship and the sharing of intellectual property. I’ll bet many were very proud to be GM’s worldwide center for some platforms.
What has changed is that they’re now working for a (rapidly and radically?) downsizing GM and they felt they had better job security with Magna as owner. I can’t say I necessariliy agree with their assessment but I do understand the difference it makes. And it was a surprise and shock.
November 6th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
I would love to believe that that’s all there is to it. I don’t blame Opel workers for being upset about the situation. I don’t even blame them for not being happy with GM. Or blaming them for bad management.
But I do think there’s some anti-americanism there that plays into this. HyperMiler may be extreme, but I’ve heard the engineering complaints before. (I tried to find it again, but there are a million articles to wade through..) Opel workers have been unhappy with GM for quite a while. I’ve read complaints ranging from mismanagement. To locating the headquarters of GM Europe in Zurich.
I wasn’t serious about not visiting Germany, by the way. It would be a little bit late for that anyway. I’ve already been there twice. Most of the people there are very nice. At least they were to me…