GM goes off the deep end
Writing for this blog every day, and hopefully by reading it too,
it has been easy to chart the downward spiral that GM has encountered. As recently as the Detroit Auto Show, the
company didn't seem to be doing so bad. The new Saturn
Sky and
Aura were promising case studies of what the company
could do if given the chance. But all that good will has quickly evaporated and the sharks are circling.
Or so GM wants us to believe.
The news that came up today saying GM was pulling ads from the Los Angeles Times because of a Dan Neil article is the latest in a long line of disasters for the company. I am so happy that it is Neil and The Times GM has picked for this ridiculous fight. Dan Neil is the only automotive journalist to win a Pulitzer and the Times wins more awards then I can count. Its not like GM is pulling ads from our pages because were silly bloggers. This is a long standing publication and terrific writer theyre aiming their retaliation against. And it will backfire.
The only good pulling the ads will do for GM is that they probably could use the money somewhere else. Neil simply points out what pundits like us, Autoextremist.com, The Truth About Cars and countless others are saying: GM is in trouble. And Wall Street is agreeing with us. GM is saying were wrong, the analysts are wrong and worst of all, the people buying the competition is wrong.
Take a look at the extreme reaction GM is taking to Neils article. The company is reacting to someone that is telling it straight, something that doesnt often happen in mainstream auto coverage. As blogs like this one and other publications are providing unfiltered reviews, car companies are probably scrambling that the old guard of writers theyve wooed over the years is losing influence. But Neil is not one of us. He is not a blogger. He is a Pulitzer Prize-winning writer for one of the largest newspapers in the country. This could be the end of GM saying theyre being attacked unfairly. That argument was already stale and this action actually makes GM look worse and without cause. If Neil had been the first to utter these words maybe GM would have more ammunition, but the writing has literally been on the wall for weeks.
I expect to see a full retraction and GM buying their ads back to cover their backsides after the dust up that will follow this move. Our advice to GM? America loves those that can admit their mistakes and sometimes loves them more for their faults (even presidents). While it may not raise the spirit of stockholders, it is time for GM to admit their problems, reshuffle the deck and focus on the products. Its not like they could be in a worse place than they are right now anyway.
Were still going to drive GM cars and evaluate them as we always have. Give us a new Corvette or Cadillac Im sure it will get some kind words. Provide us with an automatic Saab 9-2X
Note: We are not anti-GM and there are many positive reviews of GM products on this site. That doesnt mean we shouldnt comment on this developing story and that there are more than a few GM products that deserve criticism just as there are plenty of Ford, Chrysler, Honda et al products that deserve to have their flaws pointed out. We provide the same unfiltered treatment to everyone.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Mike 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
Wake up GM, you are loosing market share because of your inferior product. Honda, Toyota are kicking your rear.
Don't be so sensitive about what people write about your product, instead build something that actually works and works well, and you won't have to worry about all of this other stuff.
Reply
required 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
if anything, you guys are a little too kind to GM sometimes. GM is exactly like Sony or Disney - a company that once used to innovate that has sat on it's laurels for too long, made dumb decisions and lackluster products and is now in need of a drastic overhaul. unfortunately, i don't think the Old Guard at GM (Lutz & Wagoner) are up to it. The board needs to kick them to the curb, ala Michael Eisner, and get some fresh blood in there.
Reply
Lo 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
Telling the truth hurts sometimes - GM needs to get their act together and produce vehicles that are worth spending $ on. My family has some people that bought GM recently (cadillac) and no one is going to be recommending those cars to any of their friends. Product, product, product!
Reply
Travis 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
pulling ads b/c of bad reviews is like firing the coach of the team has a horrible record; can't blame the actual players or the general management, so make the coach a scapegoat, and then act surprised when the team doesn't improve.
The G6 is nothing special, and sales have plummetted from the Grand Am numbers. But of course, its the newspaper's fault...
Reply
KT 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
You guys weren't around (at least I didn't know about you) back when Ford (2001-2) began their restructuring. There wasn't a day without a negative headline regarding Ford's situation. There weren't many (if any)analyst, writers or car pundits that gave the company a slim chance of pulling out of the spiral. However, through it all, the company leaders fully admitted to emplyoees and the media there were serious problems.
Ford then put together a "plan" and made that plan public to anyone who wanted to know. They didn't sugar-coat it either. Now, three years later, the plan is starting to show some improvement in the outlined areas. There is much more needed to be done to get out of the woods and as recently as this week those plans were made public. It may look bad for the company from a public perspective but it's a necessary evil.
I guess my point is I'm not sure why GM is going on the defensive regarding their current problems. It almost make it look like they're trying to hide something internally (or save themselves from the eminent axe).
In retrospect I have to commend Ford for admitting their mistakes and taking their lumps in the media. Things are looking better for them because they are sticking to the "plan" and not making excuses, blaming others or taking it out on columnists.
Reply
M Hells 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
comparing GM to Sony or Disney is also too kind.
Sony makes great quality products that although are slightly more expensive than competitors last longer and provide better sound with less. They're not Ferrari, but rather Honda (more power with less engine) with the Accord and Civic getting a little long in the tooth.
GM only wishes they had a product as hot as the PSP or Desperate Housewives (Disney). Those companies don't have the MAJOR MAJOR structural issues preventing them from even coming CLOSE to competing in their industry.
GM survives on incentives ONLY. I could care less, until i see the '53 corvette's lines and realize what a waste of a company GM truly is.
The Dodge Charger is a statement car.
The G6 is a snooze.
The 911 Carrera S is like heaven with air conditioning. (what?)
Reply
Sid Ghosh 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
If the G6 is a snooze, then the Camry is a coma.
Reply
Brian 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
In some ways I applaud GM's move. While the Times might have been a bad choice to make this move against, in some ways it needs to be done to send a message.
I am not saying the automakers [or any other company that makes products] should pull their ads because they may have negative reviews of their products. However, there is clearly a bias against the "Big 3" that the media constantly projects and they need to do something. Good product doesn't always work. For every good product GM will make, the "analysts" will point to an old model [which hasn't been refreshed yet] or constantly talk bad about the old model even while reviewing the new one.
One example of this is the WSJ review of the Cobalt where they blasted GM for giving it drum brakes on the lower models. When GM [or Ford] does something like putting drums on a car, it's reported as a negative. When Toyota or Honda does it, it's reported but just as a passing comment. Remember here was Lutz's comments regarding this article.
http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/archives/2005/03/issues_manageme_1.html
Anyway, I really don't blame GM. Many of their decisions and public comments are twisted into so many directions by the media [always negative] at some point you have throw down the gloves and start swinging.
Reply
Lawrence 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
I'm going to be up front, my family has purchased 20 years worth of GM crap for loyalty reasons. GM, your loyalty is over. You have fail miserably in upholding your end of the deal. My S-10 w/ 40K miles on it...is leaking coolant from the cylinder head, I get a nice wiff of antifreeze each time I enter and exit the thing, and it will blow a gasket shortly, just like my last one did. That's just one example of several I can go on about. GM, you need to take a good look at what the Korean's are doing...they are not bragging, they are not being overly extravagent, in fact they are doing just the oposite...they do what is right, year after year, and guess what...one day someone wakes up and says "Hey, this is a nice little vehicle!" Look where they stand now with regard to quality. How did they get there? By doing what GM has has the same amount of time and more to do(Korea started importing in '85...GM has had much longer than that to get it's act together), but completely Failed to do. Sorry GM, this is America, where hard work and sweat bring the results...not a lackluster sitting-on-one's-ass.
Reply
David Thomas 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
http://www.forbes.com/2005/04/04/cz_jf_0404flint.html
flint sticks up for GM
Reply
David Thomas 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
Brian,
What message does it send? Write something bad say goodbye to our ad dollars?
I guess no one remembers the terrific review of the corvette Neil did?
http://www.autoblog.com/entry/1234000200028162/
Was that inaccurate too GM?
The fact is GM can't do everything right, no one can. But don't overreact to it.
We've seen public sentiment change moves before in the auto industry and it could do so again. Flint may be right about not killing pontiac and buick. i certainly don't want to lose the solstice before I even get to drive it. We're just saying the cross breeding is getting old. Keep it to trucks and chevy GMC. but we don't need the pontiac torrent etc. I'd rather they all stick to less models and focus on brand identity.
Reply
Finishing.Law.School 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
I agree with the Disney comparison, you have a number of out of touch execs who are clueless as to the simplest and best ways to improve their brand despite many options sitting right in front of their faces. Granted, Disney may be on the right track now that Eisner is out, but GM is acting like a tantrum throwing child by pulling ads just because someone is not kissing their but.
For these I reasons I look forward to the continuing fall of GM and I hope the blame is placed where it belongs...
Reply
Slippery Pete 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
I agree with all these comments and have a few of my own I'd like to add - and then I will point out a pretty serious problem with Dan Neil's article.
First, GM does build a lot of crap. A lot. It has done so for decades, and some bizarre sense of brand loyalty (plus a little xenophobia, plus tarriffs on truck imports) is the only thing keeping it alive.
It has three times as many brands as it needs, all cannibalizing each other and making specious distinctions between themselves that don't actually exist.
Its marketing program is just dreadful. A full thirty years after the Germans invented the proper sports sedan, GM finally got around to making one, and its kickoff TV commercial attempted to take credit for inventing the CONCEPT of the sports sedan. This is below stupid.
Worst of all, the company itself isn't even a brand. There are no GM-branded products. There used to be the GM EV1, the electric car, and boy what a market winner that was. So not only is GM saddled with redundant brands, it's never even gotten around to branding itself. Ford builds Fords (and some other brands). GM builds...crap. With a few notable exceptions (Cobalt, Corvette, some of its SUVs).
Now on to Dan Neil. My feeling is that it's juvenile and usually inappropriate for automotive journalists to say that this or that executive should be fired (or "shot") based on one car review. Or even several reviews. If the journalist DOES want to make this point, he should make it seriously and with substantial evidence, and not from the hip. Dan Neil's calling for heads doesn't pass this test in my opinion.
As it happens, I too think Rick Wagoner is probably the worst thing going for GM right now, but if I'm going to write an article calling for his head I better do my research first and present more than rabid opinions.
Reply
David Seymour 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
The last sentence of the "Note" paragraph is odd to me. It suggests that there is a group of cars that DO in fact deserve "filtered" treatment!
"...just as there are plenty of Ford, Chrysler, Honda et al products that deserve the same unfiltered treatment."
I would think that ALL Ford, Chrysler and Honda etc. products would get truly unfiltered treatment and reporting, especially on an excellent site such as this one.
Reply
laserwizard 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
The GM pulling ads from the LA Times is further evidence that GM is losing it and in serious trouble. If one examines human institutions, whether for profit or not, one of the means used to try to stem the tide of the truth is to blame the messengers - the LA Times should be thankful they are only dealing with GM. At least the author won't be summarily executed.
GMphiles are always the last to see the Titanic is sinking. You really cannot blame them. GM used to control so much that it is hard to believe that GM is in the shape it is in. Right now GM is holding less marketshare than Ford Motor Company used to control when it was just Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury.
GM now has so many brands that it should be benefiting from shared platforms to reduce production costs. Unfortuantely for GM they decided to shove low-class automaker platforms onto high priced marques resulting in the Saabaru, the GMaab SUV, and other examples of low class cross breeding.
Of course Ford has done this to Jaguar, but they have finally seen the light. Ford saw that they had a good thing in Volvo and used those platforms to uplift recent Ford models instead of taking a Taurus and making a Volvo out of it. Too bad GM is still clueless.
Even Daimler-Chrysler is finally getting their act together by sending good bits to Chrysler and adding them to the best that Chrysler has to offer. Thankfully DCX hasn't turned a Dodge into a Mercedes. Yet. (looking around to make sure lightning doesn't strike me).
When a company is so intent upon controlling the spin of the coverage instead of simply giving the public better cars and trucks, you know that the problems are worse than being noted by the press.
The Lutz era will best be remembered by removing plastic cladding and performance from Pontiac, the euthanization of Oldsmobile, and the muddying of Buick and the near abandonment of substantial products for Chevrolet. Saturn may be resurrected, but this strategy should have done five years ago - not now. Cadillac went bold and ugly and found that the blind drivers of the world will excuse bad taste and poor interior materials so long as they can go fast doing it.
Kudos for the LA Times and its journalists for not telling the story like Lutz does on his blog. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can tell that Lutz is a liar and the truth isn't found on his blog.
Maybe someone will be so kind as to remove the feeding tube from GM. Or, at least, send Lutz packing.
Reply
David Thomas 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
David S,
Yes it should read all cars GET the same unfiltered treatment no matter what the brand.
Thanks,
Dave
Reply
Brocktoon 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
More evidence that traditional media in the US is beholden to corporate interests. Cancel your newspaper subscription, don't set foot in a GM showroom. Instead surf the web, and take the bus a couple times a week.
Neil is right to criticize GM. They can't seem to do anything right but sell bloated milk trucks with 1950's technology to rap stars and NBA players. What have they done to improve the lot of their average car buyer lately? Zero.
...But maybe GM is right. There is no such thing as smog, global warming or a dependance on overseas oil in America. Yeah, that's it, Liberals and reporters cause smog buy talking too much and thinking too critically. That must be it! Good one GM, you are number one!
Reply
William Warder 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
As a non-American observing the comments, it seems that US guru's do "down" American built products, and especially the cars.
Having owned mainly Toyota's and BMW's prior to coming to the US, and comparing these to the GM cars (which I now own) I find GM vehicles much better value for money than the Imports. The imports are better in some aspects - but there is a price to pay for that. This needs to be taken into account when making comparisons.
This is a generalization and not directed at any specific journalist.
Reply
Glenn Laycock 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
Oh no ... don't say Journalist should point out flaws in Honda or Toyota's. We want evolutionary and not revolutionary change ...
Actually, your blog is excellent because you are so balanced and fair ... ie you recent VW Jetta report. I would say that many magazines are not "objective" when doing reviews. The imports are not as good as the press implies (except the top Lexus, Acura, etc); and the American-Canadian made cars are much better then the general public knows -- it goes back to perception as your Consumer Reports article showed. We also have to remember the "big 3" have always had a large impact on the US-Canada Economies whereas the imports build factories here but do not have a "large" impact (guess where the profits go).
So I have to say the mainline press basically do not report news so much as put on a show (it is all about readers and customer ratings with them too). They tend to kick the dog and coddle the puppy. If the boss (customers) like weekends; you play up how terrific weekends are and how terrible workdays are.
BTW ... the best auto-magazines I have found is Canada's WHEELS magazine; and I also like Automobile magazine in the States.
Anyway, I enjoy your Blog a lot. A key source of quality information. Keep up the good work!
Reply
Sid Ghosh 11:00PM (12/18/2005)
The way people talk on these forums, you'd think GM was all but dead. Everytime I drive here in Toronto...all over the place I see new G6s, Cadillacs, tons of Hummers, the GM SUVs and minivans a plenty etc etc...I mean people ARE spending money on GM products. I see more Grand Prixs than Camrys for pete's sakes.
Do GM cars have issues? Sure. Are they as bad as people here make them out to be? HELL NO. Look at the JD Power ratings. The Germans and English are both below GM.
Reply