[BlackGTP]

The solution isn't offering cheaper electrics, it's offering higher quality electrics. Tesla is viewed as a premium brand, beating them with cheaper products isn't going to work.

It works if GM is making a profit.

GM is a whole different type of business, it shouldn't be an issue to surpass Tesla. I think Tesla is something to aim to surpass simply because it is the biggest BEV, but otherwise I think the real goal for GM is to have Cadillac surpass Tesla - that I think GM will struggle with.

 

[BlackGTP]

It seems like GM is moving slow as molasses with getting these EVs on the market.

Rabbit and the turtle. Ford is the rabbit and GM the turtle. The turtle is getting killed today, but the turtle put more thought into their slower to market product, maybe when it get's here we will better see the wisdom of GM's ways.

 

[BlackGTP]

I hear what you're saying, big swede, and largely agree, with a slight proviso.

I actually don't mind that MB is placing GM's performance in the context of a competitor, as it has many times over the past four decades since it really ceded much of it sales, much of its reputation, much of its luster to its rising, "hungrier" competitors. I guess the concern for me in her making these statements rests in the reality that she makes them with impunity, so much so, that people within the Company likely take a more relaxed approach to these goals. I know people believe Ultium is the ultimate in EV powertrains. I know the more obsequious among us believe that the rise of GM in BEV's is inevitable. But somehow I cannot forget that similar-sounding prophesying about vehicles that sounded equally promising in their respective markets never really lived up to the hype in some important way. Hence, we have a once-glorious American automaker relegated to a somewhat forgettable regional player.

I know am not alone in this sentiment, and I think that explains in part the reasonable skepticism people experience when listening to MB speak to GM's certain domination of BEV's. We'll see.

I'm fine with the puffery, it isn't like any company is going to come out and say "we are going to come out with this expensive, new product that's just like everyone else's and maintain market share". Either way, GM, Ford and all the other auto makes are trying to show Wall St their tech is as good as Tesla's and they can be "cool" like Musk. I think that's fruitless but ok to try, Musk is Musk and no one will be able to steal his thunder, Tesla has found a niche - cutting edge beta testing type stuff. Actually, I think I just realized when Tesla's stock will come to earth - when Musk get's bored of Tesla and moves on - superstar CEO will take the stock price with him.

Unlike the past, GM/MB is truly putting the company on the line. If Ultium is a flop, then GM is pretty much done for.

But I get the skepticism, GM's history lends itself to it. I'm optomistic and see the massive changes MB has made to GM, I think today's GM is very different from GM of 20+ years ago.

 

[BlackGTP]

If General Motors were a country, it would have a GNP comparable to Albania. You may rest assured that its place on the GNP list would have been higher during Roger Smith's tenure at the helm during the 1980s. Neither Mary Barra nor Roger Smith had dictatorial powers. These are executives of public corporations. They carry-out the policies of their board of directors. This is not to say that they don't have to convince their board which policies to approve. The point is that these are not one-person decisions.

I believe that it is fair to ask questions about the success of a chairmanship. The buck stops at the top. Mary Barra was name CEO of GM after an international economic disaster followed by massive disruptions in the political and economic spaces. She is leading GM through massive technological changes that are reshaping the Globe's economic terrain. However, we are at best reaching the middle of these changes. Roger Smith took over GM following the beginning of economic upheaval characterized primarily by dramatic increases in the price of petroleum. This change dramatically widened the door for Japanese brands to exploit the North American and European markets.

Roger Smith has been called the last of GM's old time executives. However, he was significant in that he came from GM's finance side instead of the engineering side that had produced most of GM's previous top people. The test of a corporate leader is where the company ends up rather than where it starts. I am hard pressed to name any material change made during the Smith Era that is still with GM today. Mary Barra is female, but she gives me the impression that she is leading GM toward a reinterpretation of the GM of yore. As was the case of GM leaders of yore, she is a product of the engineering side of GM. The Smith Era saw horizontal integration into areas that the company has since divested. Barra is leading the company to vertically integrate supplemented by horizontal integration into markets that exploit the resources of developed as part of its vertical integration. BrightDrop comes to mind.

Force to make a choice between Roger Smith and Mary Barra, then it is Mary in a walk. However, the decisions made during the Smith Era then and the Barra Era now are corporate decisions. They have lots of peoples' fingerprints on them.

Using hindsight, Roger Smith's tenure was when GM could've turned around their path to the 2008 bankruptcy, if the right steps were taken (stop wasting money in profitless foreign operations, downsize the dealer count, get rid of unnecessary divisions, fix quality issues, turn Cadillac into something desirable for people under 60 and get the unions to see reality). But he did none of that - he clung onto the "have to be biggest" mentality which continued GM to the path of bankruptcy. Though I do have to admit I'm not sure if anyone could've turned around GM, I almost feel like GM had to be humbled by bankruptcy to jolt everyone into reality. I think if GM wanted to maintain its title of largest in the world, then the 1980's was when they had to turn it around, not 2008.

I agree - MB & team is giving GM the chance to get back to some of its grandeur and swagger GM had 50+ years ago. She's transforming GM's culture and business model - something I've not seen in my life of 53 years. I'm impressed by what she's done, I just hope the market accepts it and GM prospers.

I think it is cool that GM is going all in with Ultium vs. dragging its feet and converting ICE chassis to BEV.

 

[BlackGTP]

Agree. I still wish though that they'd find or would have found that happy medium in this incredibly shrinking gm scenario and righted the ship sooner before so much damage was done.

MB received damaged goods that can't be fixed overnight. She's set a path for GM that can help right the ship. But anyone still dreaming of a GM with 50% market share is, well, dreaming. Unless an auto company invents cold fusion to power vehicles, there is zero chance any brand of any company can get that kind of market share. The USA auto market is now so fractured that it is impossible for on make to get that share.

I think GMI is the last big holdout for 50% market share.

 

[BlackGTP]

Wish them all the luck. I hope they still build nice ICE vehicles for folks like me and the small block lives on. Teslas for a host of reasons aren’t good vehicles. Especially due to the lack of repair options, poor fit/finish, software glitches (basically owners are beta testing) and the fact they really are a software company trying to build cars.

I hope GM can straddle the line of going after Tesla while keeping ‘normal’ folks like me in the fold. If they can it will be an impressive feat.

Being that all makes have no choice but to go BEV, do you have a choice?