Losing faith, patience and cool.

[jrboyd_1980]

Originally Posted by islandwiz

It's not really the wait that is getting me, it is the lack of movement. I totally get that the factory is backlogged, but where I have an issue is that there are many people who have been waiting for quite some time and people who have ordered their cars later are getting build dates faster. Now I understand the concept of allocation, but it really seems ridiculous to me, as a consumer, I shouldn't have to run around to find a dealership that can place my order faster, it should be the same regardless of what dealership I order from. GM should be happy that we want to do business with them and produce our orders in the order that they were placed. If they need to take care of a big corporate client such as Avis first, then so be it, I can wait for that, but I don't want to wait for someone's car to be produced ahead of mine that ordered 2 months after me. It seems like GM is punishing the dealerships that sell more cars and punishing the consumer for being unaware that this is the way that they run their business. I can see why GM is in trouble as a corporation and unless they change their ways, they don't have a hope in hell of making it. I will patiently wait for my Camaro as all of you have because I love the car, but I will seriously think about giving GM any extra business simply because of the way they run their business. Which is really a shame, because the people that work there at the dealership, customer service and factory have all been great and are doing their best. It really not their fault that this system is in place, they are just set up for failure.

You have to look at this from a business side as well. Imagine if they did first come first serve basis. We all have seen that not all dealers are honest. How many of this dealers do you think would place ghost orders and then say the customer backed out of deal just to have them in the inventory. You think the system is back-logged now.. imagine if dealers could place as many orders as they wanted. The allocation system is a proven system that does work. If GM sees that you are selling vehicles fast you get more allocations. There are 9 dealerships in my region. We were only ones to not mark-up the prices on the vehicles, there-for we sold our units faster, there-for GM has given us double the allocations than any of the other dealerships in the region. Simple math.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

That's a contract between GM and it's different franchise stores.... NOT a Government mandate how to allocate sales....

It is a government mandate that you follow your contracts.

This procedure has not changed with the Camaro. The only reason that there is a problem is the fact that the Camaro is popular. If it weren't such a high-demand product, then it would not be a problem. For all of GM's other cars, the procedure works, but you're advocating changing a system that has been in place for a very long time because it is suddenly a personal inconvenience for you for the 1 time that you have to use it for this 1 product. I think there are more variables to this problem than the fact that it might not work. Maybe the problem is that people are demanding the new hot product in their garage before their neighbor gets it; maybe the problem is not the system.

[jrboyd_1980]

:flag2:

[NotAnInsider]

Major respect for you here, Mr. The_Blur.

I had decided to not post anymore in this thread and get back to answering the questions of people who actually want help, but I feel the need to commend you for your most recent post. You obviously can articulate better than I in this case.

Maybe it's time for antsy customers to call the waaaambulance.

[jrboyd_1980]

[carguy50]

Check EBAY, lots to choose from, fair pricing, immediate possession, fly in, drive home, or you can have it delivered to your front door for under a grand. You will regret not buying the Camaro.All owners seem to be in love with theirs.

[SlingShot]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

It is a government mandate that you follow your contracts.

This procedure has not changed with the Camaro. The only reason that there is a problem is the fact that the Camaro is popular. If it weren't such a high-demand product, then it would not be a problem. For all of GM's other cars, the procedure works, but you're advocating changing a system that has been in place for a very long time because it is suddenly a personal inconvenience for you for the 1 time that you have to use it for this 1 product. I think there are more variables to this problem than the fact that it might not work. Maybe the problem is that people are demanding the new hot product in their garage before their neighbor gets it; maybe the problem is not the system.

False: Those are contracts between GM and their franchise stores. The statement was concerning Government mandates on sales allocations. It's GM that sets the allocation policy between them and their contractual franchises, NOT the Government. The ONLY mandates the Governments has and it's on the State level, it that GM can't force their franchise stores to design and or decorate their stores in a certain fashion. Same thing with McDonalds, the stores are allowed to decide what type of theme they want to use. Yes they both use the logos, and use the marketing but that's it. Also the Government doesn't mandate or control the contracts between manufactures and retail franchises. The only thing the Government has any say in is EXPORT of goods ......

[jrboyd_1980]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

False: Those are contracts between GM and their franchise stores. The statement was concerning Government mandates on sales allocations. It's GM that sets the allocation policy between them and their contractual franchises, NOT the Government. The ONLY mandates the Governments has and it's on the State level, it that GM can't force their franchise stores to design and or decorate their stores in a certain fashion. Same thing with McDonalds, the stores are allowed to decide what type of theme they want to use. Yes they both use the logos, and use the marketing but that's it. Also the Government doesn't mandate or control the contracts between manufactures and retail franchises. The only thing the Government has any say in is EXPORT of goods ......

Well if you want to get real technical, there is a contract with the goverment on how many vehicles GM can produce. Or did we forget about the GM bail-out from the goverment, where they had to produce a viable plan to become profitable? Where GM actually committed to producing a little over Half of what they usually produced to help maintain profit margins? Hmm now how would GM actually be able to control the number of vehicles, they produce and keep a consistant supply throught a fiscal year? Allocations sound like a good idea!! Honestly, the allocation system works. Is it inconvience sometimes? Yes, but guess what, GM had the pre-order process Open from October of last year to almost February of this year. If you were so desperate to get your Camaro, you could have ordered then. Now as far as not decorating the store in a certain manner, not sure where your getting that information. GM actually pays for the remodeling. And I can promise you that a majority of the CHEVY dealers right now have two blue pillars with a gray connection on top that says Chevrolet.
Think your trolling. I am following Insider's led and washing my hands of this conversation.
:troll::troll:

[SlingShot]

Originally Posted by jrboyd_1980

Well if you want to get real technical, there is a contract with the goverment on how many vehicles GM can produce. Or did we forget about the GM bail-out from the goverment, where they had to produce a viable plan to become profitable? Where GM actually committed to producing a little over Half of what they usually produced to help maintain profit margins? Hmm now how would GM actually be able to control the number of vehicles, they produce and keep a consistant supply throught a fiscal year? Allocations sound like a good idea!! Honestly, the allocation system works. Is it inconvience sometimes? Yes, but guess what, GM had the pre-order process Open from October of last year to almost February of this year. If you were so desperate to get your Camaro, you could have ordered then. Now as far as not decorating the store in a certain manner, not sure where your getting that information. GM actually pays for the remodeling. And I can promise you that a majority of the CHEVY dealers right now have two blue pillars with a gray connection on top that says Chevrolet.
Think your trolling. I am following Insider's led and washing my hands of this conversation.
:troll::troll:

Trolling ? Having an adult conversation ..... They only thing I was saying is the Allocation system is GM's policy not a Government mandate... There is a huge difference between a policy and mandate. And as far as the Pillars, that's a part of logo and marketing... Just like the golden arches .... For what it's worth do some research on Government mandates about franchises, you may just surprise yourself.....And yes the New GM has streamlined them selves in order to cut overhead... That's part of them regrouping, and why they canceled contracts with low volume franchises. Also why they are selling off and discontinuing brands.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

Trolling ? Having an adult conversation ..... They only thing I was saying is the Allocation system is GM's policy not a Government mandate... There is a huge difference between a policy and mandate. And as far as the Pillars, that's a part of logo and marketing... Just like the golden arches .... For what it's worth do some research on Government mandates about franchises, you may just surprise yourself.....And yes the New GM has streamlined them selves in order to cut overhead... That's part of them regrouping, and why they canceled contracts with low volume franchises. Also why they are selling off and discontinuing brands.

I don't think that you're trolling. I think you have some really sharp points, but the key thing here is that we sign contracts in our lives for a reason: enforcement. When we put our name on a loan, lease, or contract of any kind, we are committing to that contract. GM is the same way with its franchised dealerships. Those independent small businesses are responsible on their end for keeping GM profitable by prioritizing GM sales. That is why GM was able to cancel those contracts; those dealers were either unable to sell GM cars or were investing in non-GM brands; alternatively, those dealers were just costing GM more than GM was making from those dealers. As you know, many dealers have multiple types of cars that they sell. Here in Lawrence, Kansas, there's a Chrysler-VW dealer, for instance. GM has an obligation to establish and obey a standard method of delivering cars based on the ability of a dealer to sell GM cars. GM can't distribute cars to dealers who don't tend to sell when those high-profit or high-demand products could be more profitable elsewhere. There are more deserving dealers. If your dealer isn't one of them, it is because the owner was too foolish to pick a good location for business or too incompetent to hire salespeople who promote the cars that get them their commissions. If GM does not live up to those contracts, the lawsuits against them will be overwhelming, costly, and result in the end of our Camaro, the beloved Chevrolet brand, and all that is good in General Motors.

[SlingShot]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

I don't think that you're trolling. I think you have some really sharp points, but the key thing here is that we sign contracts in our lives for a reason: enforcement. When we put our name on a loan, lease, or contract of any kind, we are committing to that contract. GM is the same way with its franchised dealerships. Those independent small businesses are responsible on their end for keeping GM profitable by prioritizing GM sales. That is why GM was able to cancel those contracts; those dealers were either unable to sell GM cars or were investing in non-GM brands; alternatively, those dealers were just costing GM more than GM was making from those dealers. As you know, many dealers have multiple types of cars that they sell. Here in Lawrence, Kansas, there's a Chrysler-VW dealer, for instance. GM has an obligation to establish and obey a standard method of delivering cars based on the ability of a dealer to sell GM cars. GM can't distribute cars to dealers who don't tend to sell when those high-profit or high-demand products could be more profitable elsewhere. There are more deserving dealers. If your dealer isn't one of them, it is because the owner was too foolish to pick a good location for business or too incompetent to hire salespeople who promote the cars that get them their commissions. If GM does not live up to those contracts, the lawsuits against them will be overwhelming, costly, and result in the end of our Camaro, the beloved Chevrolet brand, and all that is good in General Motors.

First off Thank You, I appreciate the conversation... Secondly I totally agree with everything in your statement. It all comes down to the contractual agreement between franchisor and franchisee. The FTC controls the Federal end of the rules, which is nothing more than a definition and the mandating of full disclosure between all parties. The rest of the laws are on a State level. That's the reason GM has to close stores on a state by state basis, because the laws differ from one place to another. And yes it is a good practice to close stores with low volume sales and co-branding stores that may hamper sales with a single branded store....

Dang man... We agree on something....