Quote:
Originally Posted by goblue
Another bad idea.
Lets look at this logically for a second. In the past, GM tried to support 6 or so brands all designed and sold in NA. They had a 60% marketshare, so it worked out. So - the argument to cut brands with the loss in marketshare makes sense, but GM has another way.
Basically, GM needs to make the lineups identical with each brand's foreign counterparts and minimize exceptions. Chevrolet and Cadillac are the home brands, so, its OK for not all of the Chevys to be exported everywhere, but for all the other brands, GM should not be designing anything just to be sold in NA.
In other words, you can have all these brands, and profit from consumer choice - provided GM minimizes the cost.
Think of it this way. With GM's current marketshare - it can support Cadillac and Chevy realistically in the US market. If it has to pay development costs for more brands, its a loss. So, all the other brands need to come for free.
How do you do this? Overseas rebadges. Think Saturn VUE for exactly how it should be done. People get a little ticked with domestic rebadges, they get analyzed against one another - and it only works when you have a ton of marketshare. Overseas rebadges do not have these problems.
Here's how this would work. No Lambda Saturn unless GM europe can design and sell it for a profit. Lambda Cadillac and Chevy - fine. Those brands get to design for NA, for all the other brands, the NA execs pick which vehicles from their home markets that will sell - spend the minimum to bring them here, and sell them.
Now, there's a catch - the other markets must develop cars to be easily (read cheaply) exported. No costly safety redesign is acceptable. Engines must be swappable between markets.
What does that leave? If GM can't profitably sell a brand it designs in NA for NA customers - its gone. Hummer and GMC come to mind. GMC made sense when trucks sold well. That era is over. Hummer? Needs to go the way of Land Rover, elite vehicles for people who are not conscious to the cost of fuel. Thats not something GM can handle right now. Sell it.
Oh, an easy way to dump GMC - simple. GMC dealerships become Chevy Truck stores. Acadia was a ridiculous idea when Chevy didn't have a decent crossover. Kill it.
Frankly, I think this is exactly what GM is doing and should do. I didn't come up with any of this. The Monday Morning QB routine is getting old on this site. Its easy to say what GM should have done looking at what didn't work. Why don't many of you ask yourself in the year 2000, could you predict the month gas would finally hit the price that would shutdown the SUV market? I didn't think so. These problems are much more complicated than we realize, and the options available are few.
|
Yes, I agree that GM's problems are complicated but Toyota debuted the Prius during low gas prices. Yearly they continued to upgrade the vehicle and it's hybrid technology.
Now Toyota is in a sweet spot.
Did Toyota look into a crystal ball for the future and figured that gas prices was going to go through the roof? No.
Toyota simply believed in the hybrid technology and it's future.
GM doesn't seem willing to do that and that why they are yet again behind the powercurve and is losing money.
The Volt is a reaction to the Prius and now GM is gambling the house to get it to market.