The Incredible Shrinking General Motors

[bust]

I'll agree if I lived somewhere where I needed a car and I had space for parking I'd prefer to own my own. But nothing beats the convenience of a vibrant walkable neighborhood so that is by far my highest priority. I'm really happy for subways, other mass transit, taxis, car services, zipcar, car2go, uber, lyft, bike shares, and soon hopefully driverless cars like many have imagined.

PS. Parking lots, parking garages, and wide streets clogged with traffic are scourges to walkable communities. Government regulation will play a big part determining what effect driverless cars have on those things. Absent bad regulation I imagine driverless cars will reduce parking needs and congestion. But that's speculative, and we certainly can't predict politics that far into the future.

[Bigdd]

Parents with small children, I'll concede would probably need a personal car. However, they wouldn't need a car for every adult in the house as is the case now.

Hauling and shopping trips are minor logistical issues that are easily overcome as people who live in walking cities do everyday.

I.E., people that live in tiny apartments,.. usually high-rise buildings. Own a house and it's nearly an impossibly.

Besides no homeowners and no one with children,.. you also have to eliminate business owners, salesmen,.. golfers, etc, etc, etc.

Go to the park or the beach and leave valuable stuff in your car? Not with a taxi or Uber. Scratch them off the list too.

Go into a bar, sports stadium, movie theater, police station, school etc and leave your gun in the glove-box? Not in a taxi or Uber. So scratch off the list anyone that caries a gun.

I have a car-based SUV. I have children. Hauled 24 bags of mulch in the last 2 days. Drywall and plywood in the last week. Two flatbeds of stuff to work from Sam's Club last Friday, 1/2 dozen dorm sized refrigerators the week before.

It's VERY RARE that I could use a taxi 2 days in a row.

Would I want to go to lunch if I had to Uber both directions? Probably not.

Owning a car is cheap. Especially if you buy used and pay cash.

Then you have to consider your time. My car is instant. Jump in the second I want to leave and go. And I can put things in it the night before in my attached garage. How many seconds does one have to wait for an Uber? 3 seconds? 2 minutes? 10 minutes? Time is money.

[p1acebo]

Can you imagine hacking into 10,000 computerized cars at once and force them to do something ill advised?

To me half of the fun of owning a car is actually driving it,the down side is when others get in the way.

This all day. I think the best part about owning a car is driving it. Taking road trips, shifting gears... I would not be a fan of a driverless car.

[313WX]

Thanks, but I was asking how other automakers, i.e. VW and Toyota, are doing in these markets where GM is struggling i.e. Australia, Russia, South America and Europe.

Ford, VW and Toyota are not fleeing these markets [[which are relatively big).

They were money losers for them at one point, but now [[in spite of Brexit or whatever as GM wants to place blame on), they're making money in these regions. Instead of cutting and running, they stuck things out and implement the necessary changes to ensure profitability.

The thing is, when NA / China has its downturn [[and better pray it's nothing like what we saw in 2008) and these other markets cycle back upward, it's only going to be GM left holding the bag.

[Bham1982]

Owning a car is cheap. Especially if you buy used and pay cash.

Owning a car is only cheap because the U.S. subsidizes car usage. Drivers in the U.S. are huge welfare moochers [[myself included). Free roads, free parking, dirt cheap gas, govt. backed financing, no tariffs, etc.

In almost every other first world nation car ownership is far more expensive. Why do you think Europeans have mostly tiny diesel cars?

[Bham1982]

Ford, VW and Toyota are not fleeing these markets [[which are relatively big).

They were money losers for them at one point, but now [[in spite of Brexit or whatever as GM wants to place blame on), they're making money in these regions. Instead of cutting and running, they stuck things out and implement the necessary changes to ensure profitability.

The thing is, when NA / China has its downturn [[and better pray it's nothing like what we saw in 2008) and these other markets cycle back upward, it's only going to be GM left holding the bag.

This is what I'm worried about. China will have a fall at some point. And when it happens it will be very ugly, like Japan, which has had a quarter-century of stagnation.

GM has basically exited the rest of the world. The EU's economy is as big as that of the U.S. [[and Europe's economy is bigger than North America). You really want to permanently ignore that buying power?

[Cincinnati_Kid]

Owning a car is only cheap because the U.S. subsidizes car usage. Drivers in the U.S. are huge welfare moochers [[myself included). Free roads, free parking, dirt cheap gas, govt. backed financing, no tariffs, etc.

In almost every other first world nation car ownership is far more expensive. Why do you think Europeans have mostly tiny diesel cars?

Don't the small narrow roads and streets have something to do with it also? That's what I've been told by someone I know that lives in France. Outside the Autobahn, they don't have a Interstate Hwy system like we do, correct?

[sirrealone]

Unfortunately, that will make the roads almost twice as congested. A car will need to make the trip twice to drop off and pickup a person at work.

Computer operated cars will drive more efficiently than people do. Many backups today are caused by human behaviors.

[ndavies]

Computer operated cars will drive more efficiently than people do. Many backups today are caused by human behaviors.

Too many cars on the road will cause congestion, even if they do drive perfect. You're going to have to build more roads for the huge number of extra trips by empty cars.

[Richard]

Too many cars on the road will cause congestion, even if they do drive perfect. You're going to have to build more roads for the huge number of extra trips by empty cars.

I guess that is the whole objective.
If auto manufacturers got into mass transit there would be less cars on the road,for future survival they need to spend billions figuring out how to keep selling more cars under varies pump and hype campaigns.

I am thinking this is all getting ready to either stall out or leap forward,furloughs are starting to happen across the board which is kinda a warning sign,it will leap forward with Gov monies to replace sagging sales,needed or not it will be a revenue stream.

[313WX]

Are they profiting in the markets they are exiting?

If they're unable to make a profit, it may make sense to scale back and concentrate on markets they understand better.

See my example of HP with respect to sacrificing long term prospects for short-term profits [[which is essentially what's happening right now at GM). Is Mary Barra the Mark Hurd of GM?

Meanwhile, Ford looks poised to overtake them as the largest US automaker within the next decade the way things are going.

[Johnnny5]

Computer operated cars will drive more efficiently than people do. Many backups today are caused by human behaviors.

In normal driving conditions on well traveled roads I agree, but what will happen when the unexpected occurs?

As a human I can see the deer [[Or child) ten feet from the road and tell by their stance if they are considering entering my lane. I can slow down and give myself time to react. If there's a wreck ahead and I'm being flagged over into another lane by the police I can react. How will a autonomous car determine whether the child near the road is patiently waiting for traffic to clear, or if they're about to jump into the lane to save their lost baseball? Or if a wreck has a lane temporarily closed? And then there's the small issue of icy roads.

I'm sure these problems will eventually be solved, but IMO we're a whole lot further away from completely autonomous cars than many people think. That last 1% that requires human ability to react to the unexpected is going to hold this up for a very long time.

[GMan]

Too many cars on the road will cause congestion, even if they do drive perfect. You're going to have to build more roads for the huge number of extra trips by empty cars.

I believe the model with driverless cars also takes car sharing into the quotient. Fewer cars because the resource is being shared by multiple users.

[Hermod]

Don't the small narrow roads and streets have something to do with it also? That's what I've been told by someone I know that lives in France. Outside the Autobahn, they don't have a Interstate Hwy system like we do, correct?

True, but driving distances are much, much shorter and driver/passenger comfort is less of a consideration. Few people have one hour commutes and driving 200 miles to see grandma with the wife and kids is much less common.

[Cliffy]

The other big thing GM is going through is re-aligning/imaging itself as a 'mobility company' vs. an automaker. Other companies are gravitating in the same direction. The game is about how many miles you move people, rather than how many cars you sell. Its about riders not drivers.

A revolution in transportation has taken place [it just hasn't fully hit yet] and motor vehicles are becoming computers with wheels. Advances in robotics, ride-sharing apps and internet connectivity will equate to fewer personal cars.

When I think of my situation with my wife, in the coming world do we really need two cars that sit idle probably 95% of the time? If I have quick access to a ride shared vehicle, human or robot driven, the savings become very attractive.

As for GM ditching Europe, it makes sense. Opel has been a loser and drag on their bottom line for a long time. Better to sell and put the money in the new directions - mobility and clean energy transportation.

But there won't be more savings. Corporations always want to increase profits every year. So if a car lease or payment costs $300 a month right now, that's how much this service will cost. Plus then they will add features like "priority pickup" where cars arrive within x amount of time during peak etc... and it won't be any difference than it is now price wise.

[313WX]

And it continues...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/general...dia-1495092601

[313WX]

Cut-and-run Mary's at it again with another short-sighted potential decision.

I'd be worry if I were an employee at Detroit-Hamtramck right now.

GM may kill 6 car models as it works with UAW to tackle sales slump






https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-ma...131700016.html

[313WX]

While Ford and Chrysler have actively taken steps to run their plants efficiently, the utilization at all of GM's plants [[except Spring Hill, TN) is a basket case...

But hey, as long as Wall Street's happy now and we're getting $30K bonuses, who caress about the negative long-term consequences of operating this way, right?

After all, I'm sure it'll be the Wall Street shareholders that bail us out like be...oh wait...?

9 Plants running severely under capacity, with an average of 45%
1 Plant running in a healthy range at 89% [[Spring Hill)
8 Plants running severely over capacity, with an average of 154%

Arlington - 157%
Bowling Green - 38%
Fairfax - 62%
Flint 1 - 143%
Fort Wayne - 144%
Hamtramck - 56%
Ingersoll - 134%
Lansing Delta - 136%
Lansing Grand River - 44%
Lordstown - 41%
Orion - 44%
Oshawa 1 - 38%
Oshawa 2 - 44%
Ramos Arizpe - 40%
San Luis Potosi - 174%
Silao - 185%
Spring Hill - 89%
Wentzville - 156%

[Cincinnati_Kid]

We all knew that growth following the recession was unsustainable. Most people who bought cars after the downturn, are probably still paying for them, and have no plans to purchase again, in the near future. Cars sales also are losing ground to trucks, crossovers and SUV's, because of lower gas prices. But when gas prices increase which is bound to happen, the cycle will revert back to cars again.

[401don]

We all knew that growth following the recession was unsustainable. Most people who bought cars after the downturn, are probably still paying for them, and have no plans to purchase again, in the near future. Cars sales also are losing ground to trucks, crossovers and SUV's, because of lower gas prices. But when gas prices increase which is bound to happen, the cycle will revert back to cars again.

It appears to be a style demand as much as gas prices that may not change back. I don't understand the desire for small & medium crossovers [[other than women apparently like to sit up high to see the road better) but they have definitely taken a large permanent share of the market.

[shovelhead]

General Motors is repeating the mistakes of the past.

Selling off of Electro Motive, heavy heavy truck and Terex [[construction equipment). The money spent in the late 90's to early 2000's to establish GM as a medium duty truck firm later discontinued post bankruptcy [[which last I heard they were to re-enter next year with Navistar), the selloff of the partial ownership of Isuzu with it's truck products.

China was the only reason that the Buick name survived, luxury product in their perception, more than Cadillac.

The launch of Saturn. The waste of dismantling Oldsmobile in that time frame also. Oldsmobile per the marketing gurus connotated "old". Oldsmobile was the innovation division at one time. The V-8 came from "Boss" Kettering in 1949 and the basic design was shared with Cadillac. Cadillac in 1948 was still using flathead engines, where was the innovation there? First automatic transmission albeit problematic came from Oldsmobile in the late 1930's. Buick did not have an automatic, the Dynaflow until 1948.

What I'm getting at, GM, a large and divest manufacturer of global transportation methods shrinks to a small core manufacturer of personal transportation vehicles. Putting all your eggs in one basket is risky, better hope the basket does not fall over.

[Cincinnati_Kid]

Good points, Olds made some great cars, with the Cutlass Supreme one of the most popular in GM history. Also, still don't understand why they kept Buick over Pontiac, the so called performance division. I loved Pontiac's, and owned a few over the years, and now they are talking about dropping the Impala. Go figure.

[Shai_Hulud]

While Ford and Chrysler have actively taken steps to run their plants efficiently, the utilization at all of GM's plants [[except Spring Hill, TN) is a basket case...

9 Plants running severely under capacity, with an average of 45%
1 Plant running in a healthy range at 89% [[Spring Hill)
8 Plants running severely over capacity, with an average of 154%

Wow, that's quite a mess.

[Zacha341]

The Impala is a shell of its former self. How can it and many of the other rather pedestrian models go on? Too many other cars out there, better styled, better performance. Sad really.

...I loved Pontiac's, and owned a few over the years, and now they are talking about dropping the Impala. Go figure.

[shovelhead]

Good points, Olds made some great cars, with the Cutlass Supreme one of the most popular in GM history. Also, still don't understand why they kept Buick over Pontiac, the so called performance division. I loved Pontiac's, and owned a few over the years, and now they are talking about dropping the Impala. Go figure.

The reason escapes me now but since the 1930's Buick was established as a true luxury car in China, more so than Cadillac. In the coffee table book "70 Years of Buick" long out of print the author by Damman [[first name escapes me now) he has some reasons for it.

From what I gathered, the government bailout originally wanted only two GM divisions, Cadillac and Chevrolet. GMC came in as a step between Chevy trucks and the Escalade. Pontiac got washed out quickly. Hummer and Saturn, well selloffs both failed on those, Hummer to the Chinese and Saturn to Roger Penske.

Personally I thought that Pontiac should have been spun off as GM's Performance Division, give them limited niche products like the Solstice, the G8 and the G6 convertible. Free reign within the confines of the car platforms assigned to do what they could within budget to establish themselves. I also thought of the scenario to allow them to develop the G8 into a true police performance package instead of Chevrolet's poor [[IMO) marketing of the Caprice police [[9C1) package. What a disaster that has been, Chrysler has walked away with the RWD platform police sedans, only a handfull of GM's around. The Pontiac Division should have been given "X" amount of years to make a go of it, sink or swim. But now since Holden is going away and they were producing the G8 and the Caprice this would be a moot point.

The Medium Duty Truck fiasco really made no sense. In the late 1980's to early 1990's GM started to get serious about the commercial truck market. The allegiance with Isuzu, their Low Cab Forward and the larger F Series trucks and combined with the introduction of the Top Kick series said "we are serious". There were rumblings in the mid 2000's of GM and Isuzu parting ways and GM wanting to stop manufacturing the Top Kick, this only being about three years after the introduction of the 4500-5500 series of light medium duty trucks, bigger than a one ton pickup but smaller that the 6500-7500 Series.

In 2007 a deal to sell off the larger Medium Duty business to Navistar fell through, GM then divested of it's percentage ownership of Isuzu while continuing to buy the Duramax line of V8 for pickups and the 4500-5500 series and straight 6 7.8L engines for the larger trucks. That is until post bankruptcy that GM finally shut down the 4500 thru 7500 lines. Isuzu established their own dealer network for the Low Cab Forward trucks and discontinued the F Series trucks after that probably due to the fact that the FTR's were built using Japanese cabs on GM American chassis with the Isuzu Diesel engines.

It just amazes me that they would dismantle the whole truck dealer network then after the Medium Dealer network of repair and parts service centers were sunsetted they now announce a "new" truck program through Chevrolet to market a truck manufactured by International. How many millions or billions will this cost?

I was not on the corporate side in my previous career but in the dealership side, these are just my observations on being in the business close to a half century, gave it up this year. Had enough........