Michelle Krebs: Bumped from CNBC: I would have said …

[Robert G]

That’s show biz! I was bumped from CNBC’s Money Talks segment today -- too much news happening to squeeze me in.
So here’s what I would have said if had I appeared and if I had been asked these made-up questions.

Interviewer: In which Big Three automaker would you invest now?

Krebs: I’d put my personal money on General Motors right now. I’m not alone. In a vote of confidence this week, Goldman Sachs raised its stake in GM, and Merrill Lynch raised GM’s rating to a “buy” from a “sell,” on the heels of some other firms boosting GM's rating as well.

Interviewer: Why GM?

...

Interviewer: Talk more about GM’s products.

Krebs: Promising new products from GM are arriving in dealer showrooms as we speak . . .

http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/02/..._cnb.html#more

[mkaresh]

Pretty easy question. The alternatives are Ford and DCX, after all.

[56 Starchief]

i hate krebs. if anyone has ever read her NYTimes auto section reviews she is a moron. if i saw her on the interview list at CNBC i would have rather interviewed the Kool Aid pitcher on his long-standing rivalry with the Hawaiian Punch guy.

[DanCBJMS1988]

mkaresh, you seem to be everywhere!

[rsbaker]

Its a shame she didn't get to say some of those things on the air. Comments like those are more effective than any Ad campaign could ever be.

[nadepalma]

Originally Posted by 56 Starchief

i hate krebs. if anyone has ever read her NYTimes auto section reviews she is a moron. if i saw her on the interview list at CNBC i would have rather interviewed the Kool Aid pitcher on his long-standing rivalry with the Hawaiian Punch guy.

Perhaps, I never read her stuff.

Her comments were pretty positive though and seems to sum things up well.

Oh, well ---- too bad stuff like this doesn't make it into the more mainstream stuff.

[DanCBJMS1988]

I wonder why she got bumped though? Maybe because she didn't kowtow to Toyota?

[56 Starchief]

Originally Posted by nadepalma

Perhaps, I never read her stuff.

Her comments were pretty positive though and seems to sum things up well.

Oh, well ---- too bad stuff like this doesn't make it into the more mainstream stuff.

what she said here was fine, and maybe she is just catering to her Friedman-loving audience over at NYT, but I remember each time a GM car was reviewed she would rip into it like no other on how rotten this knob felt in her hand, and those imperceptible things like "the engine just didn't feel right". on the other hand, when any Toyota came her way she wrote poetry on how heavenly it was. she is also very, very partial to Lexus (i think she said she owns one).

[likearock00]

Originally Posted by DanCBJMS1988

I wonder why she got bumped though? Maybe because she didn't kowtow to Toyota?

You are correct....it's all a big conspiracy!

[mikesright]

It was a decent opinion, one that was pretty fair. As for Krebs being harsh in the past, whatever. This is an example of GM starting to turn the perception corner, and hopefully more start to crawl on the bandwagon. Friedman will probably be next, probably because the next cool thing to do will be to bash those inefficient, lousy, poorly made Japanese cars.

[JonathanRohr]

Originally Posted by 56 Starchief

i hate krebs. if anyone has ever read her NYTimes auto section reviews she is a moron. if i saw her on the interview list at CNBC i would have rather interviewed the Kool Aid pitcher on his long-standing rivalry with the Hawaiian Punch guy.

OHHHH YEAAAH!!!

[carscomblogger]

classic!

Originally Posted by JonathanRohr

OHHHH YEAAAH!!!

[carscomblogger]

I'm also thinking eventually every automotive journalist will end up at Edmunds at some point.

[Lichtronamo]

I'm not so sure of her endorsement of RW. I think all he gets is that he doesn't know that much about cars and for this reason brought in Maximum Bob. Maximum Bob is the guy who has reorganized GM's product development operations to better draw on its global resources. RW's just given his blessing and written the checks.

Also, MK missed an opportunity to torch Ford. She said only GM had a headstart in its recovery plan and that Ford is in the throes of it. What she could have said, which would have supported her earlier Clinton-esqe comment about "its the product stupid" is that GMs recovery seems to be working, whereas Ford is missing its targets based on internal analysis and appears pretty much hopeless (even to their own employees).

[editor]

Originally Posted by Lichtronamo

Also, MK missed an opportunity to torch Ford. She said only GM had a headstart in its recovery plan and that Ford is in the throes of it. What she could have said, which would have supported her earlier Clinton-esqe comment about "its the product stupid" is that GMs recovery seems to be working, whereas Ford is missing its targets based on internal analysis and appears pretty much hopeless (even to their own employees).

I would agree with that point of view - in my opinion GM is merely at the end of the beginning in terms of the rehabilitation with the public. They now have people ignoring the many good cars they have. It will probably be a few more years before most consumers will actually buy those cars in large numbers. GM, however, is definitely on its way - there is no doubt of that at this point.

Ford, on the other hand, is at least 18-24 months away from where GM is now; that is, having good product that consumers will ignore. Ford has very little good product out now, and as opposed to GM, almost nothing in the pipe for the next couple of years. Ford is in desperate, desperate need of product now AND product for the future. I hope Alan Mulally doesn't need 8 hours of sleep every night, because it's going to be a very tough environment over at Ford for quite awhile.