Swiss-born GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz was asked by a Swiss newspaper Sunday if his company would go it alone or seek a merger with Ford. Lutz answered, "We are open to alliances. But we can also be successful alone."Does this mean GM and Ford are talking merger? Not likely, but it could mean more cooperation in the future, like the co-developed 6-speed transmission being used in Ford's Edge and Saturn's Aura.
Lutz also said GM was still open to working with Renault-Nissan despite a recent report saying Renault-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn was no longer interested in talking to U.S. automakers about possible alliances.
[Source: SonntagsZeitung via Reuters]
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
laserwizard @ Nov 20th 2006 7:44AM
Forget it, Putz!
If Ford needs someone to design awful vehicles, they know where you work. They've had you once. That was quite enough, resume padder.
Now run along and continue doing that great job you are doing running GM into the ground.
Mr_Oak @ Nov 20th 2006 9:09AM
Last time I checked, GM was doing much better than Ford. GM actually made money selling cars this year. Can't say the same about Ford.
What is Ford doing about the Asian market? not hearing much on that front. Cadillac and Buick (yes Buick) are doing rather well over there.
A funny thing happened at Ford in the past couple of years, back in 2000 they launched the Lincoln LS, a rather nice automobile, I bought one. Instead evolving an already excellent platform to make it better, they reigned it in so that it doesn't overrun the Jaguar S-Type with which it shared a platform and some drivetrain components. This practice choked the life out of what could have grown into something good.
Then brought you the Zephyr, nice on the outside, but the El Cheapo Leggo look interior makes me gag every time I see it. After one year, they've screwed with the exterior that didn't need it, left that ugly interior untouched. My bet is they won't sell many more that they did last year.
What do you think would have happened to Toyota if the took the highly successful Camry or Corolla and changed the name every few years, then blow a wad of cash informing the public that they changed the name.
I once sold Toyotas, I sold Camrys to people who brought their car that they were perfectly happy with in for service, decided to take a peek at the new "Camry" and bought it. Because it was a "Camry", even if it was an ugly piece.
It's called name recognition. Once you've established a brand and model name, you stick with it. Quit blowing bundles of cash establishing new models.
That my friend is Ford's rendition of the old classic: "A dog chases it's tail".
GM has been somewhat guilty of this practice too, but less so than Ford. It's as if they're ashamed or afraid of their past.
Avinash Machado @ Nov 20th 2006 10:21AM
Perhaps we can expect the new Chevrolet Fusion,Ford Malibu, Mercury Lucerne,Buick Montego,Cadillac MKZ,Lincoln STS. Not to forget the SAAB S40,Volvo 9-3,Holden Falcon etc.
Richard Warren @ Nov 20th 2006 11:01AM
"It's called name recognition. Once you've established a brand and model name, you stick with it. Quit blowing bundles of cash establishing new models."
Exactly.
It costs a fortune to get the public to recognize a new name, all the brand equity you had with the old name is gone. Even if you have some bad years, that does not mean that the name is damaged forever
Corey W. @ Nov 20th 2006 11:42AM
IMO: A merger between Ford and GM will never happen unless one of them is in a unrecoverable state. GM seems to be better off than Ford right but neither is that close to folding.
Merger and collaboration are two different things...
JON C @ Nov 20th 2006 1:09PM
Perhaps collaboration on technology .like those new brakes seimens are developing for example.
Bill Maher is an Idiot @ Nov 20th 2006 2:47PM
Uh...it's an alliance, not a merger. Mitsibishi has an alliance with Daimler-Chrysler. That doesn't mean Daimler owns it. That just means two companies share components and conduct select joint operations; not exist as one corporation.
Andy @ Nov 20th 2006 3:09PM
A Ford/General partnership would not happen. It's like a Soviet-American partnership in the 1950s. GM has been faring better than Ford. I remember auto "analysts" a couple years back predicting GM would be in worse straits and Ford would be stable by this time. Ford and GM have too many competing products to work together productively.
I like the Holden Falcon. Funny idea.
whofan @ Nov 20th 2006 4:31PM
It's called name recognition. Once you've established a brand and model name, you stick with it. Quit blowing bundles of cash establishing new models."
Exactly.
It costs a fortune to get the public to recognize a new name, all the brand equity you had with the old name is gone. Even if you have some bad years, that does not mean that the name is damaged forever
See Ford! Why not Design a nice new Taurus??????????
GENERALMOTORSMAN4LIFE @ Nov 20th 2006 5:10PM
Here again this ridiculous possibile merger news has reared it's ugly head again. I have felt from the begining and still feel strongly AGAINST a merger between Ford and GM. Ford can only blame Ford for it's woes. Ford still seems lost even at a time of financial and existence based on products that people will want to buy. The latest example of this would the Lincoln MKX (Yet another retro-fitted front wheel drive vehicle) that is nothing more than a warmed over Escape/Mariner with a slated $55,000 asking price! Every week there is yet another version of the Mustang no Cougar. The Mustang was built on the now defunct Thunderbird chassis, so consequently major after market suspension parts have to be puirchased by the customer to make the thing handle like a performance vehicle-these are just additional nails in Ford's coffin. Ford has $75,000 Jags with nothing more than Ford engines in them. Range Rover has serious reliability issues needing costly parts and labor to resolve. GM has innovative hot products that are selling well both now and awesome forth-coming products on the way to market within the next year or 2. GM is revamping their flagship sedans by converting them to rear wheel drive to compete aggressively with Lexus and BMW-BMW of which has never adopted the front wheel drive format except for the Mini-cooper. Like a bacterial infection Ford should remain quarantined away from the other American auto makers and should only be considered for a merger with Toyota or Honda. Both Toyota and Honda will replace most of the cancerous Ford management and force the delivery of appealing and profitable products. Yes this is tough love but it is what is necessary for Ford to exist period.
Bill @ Nov 20th 2006 5:45PM
People are talking like it's all or nothing.
Automakers cooperate with each other all the time.
Mitsubishi and Dodge on the Avenger/Galant
Mitsubishi / Chrysler world engine
Ford, GM using Aisin (Toyota) transmissions, Toyota batteries
Pontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix
Saturn Vue / Honda
Nissan Altima Hybrid / Toyota
Dodge Caliber using Nissan CVT
yada yada.
All the car companies trade/share/sell lots of stuff with each other.
GhostDoggy @ Nov 21st 2006 5:47AM
Its not a question as to whether or not you 'can' be successful, but 'will' you be successful. Also, please provide the General Motor's definition of successful. I'm sure more than one stockholder would like to know it.