Bankrupt GM and disontinued 2010 Camaro

[syr74]

Were way beyond speculation regarding GM's fortunes right now. GM is in some deep ****, and that might be the understatement of the new century to this point. Whatever folks may think of their upcoming product portfolio, the reality is that GM no longer has the time to 'wait and see' if those products produce. GM is still too bloated structurally, too slow strategically, and just plain too broke fiscally to keep riding that 'wait and see' train. To add insult to injury, with our now wildly liberal government...an entity which knows about as much about running a business effectively as the average four year old no less......more or less holding GM by the stones because of the loan already granted to them the General needs nothing short of a miracle to turn around its fortunes at this point. And when I say miracle, I mean the full blown, seen once in a few thousand years, walking on water kind of miracle.

GM is acting like a company on the verge of full blown insolvency, likely because they are. Several of the brands will continue to exist in some form at the very least whatever the outcome, but GM as we now know them is almost certainly a dead company walking short of a: the government bailing them out to the tune of a hundred billion dollars or so, or b: somebody with a similar amount of money to burn deciding they just have to have a car company of their own.

[CamaroScotty]

Originally Posted by fastball

It's not bullshit when it's a legitimate concern. They even mentioned it on my local news today, and the local news I watch is never one to sensationalize or blow anything out of proportion.

It's a legit concern. GM is too big in it's current fashion to operate profitably with the amount of cars they sell. And they can't scale back as fast as they need to (and believe me I know they are trying desparately to do so) due to all the union contracts, their debts to suppliers, and the sheer size and scope of the overall company. It's like trying to get an elephant to win a 100 meter race against a cheetah. If someone doesn't hook it up to a crane, put it on the back of an 18 wheeler, and hit the gas to help it along, it's gonna loose.

That's essentially what Ch. 11 is gonna do for GM - put them on the back of that 18 wheeler.

But once they've gone the 100 meeters, it's up to GM to walk on it's own again.

It's bullshit when someone distorts the news by adding "DISONTINUED CAMARO" into a thread title.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Hylton

They can't so only one alternative CH11. Like it or not, it's going to happen.

I refuse to believe that. I've posted why for the past few months...just let me tell you I'm scared $hitless just thinking about it, and how "easy" everyone thinks it will be.................

EDIT: scared, and aggravated at all the "experts".......(not necessarily you, though)

[fastball]

Originally Posted by CamaroScotty

It's bullshit when someone distorts the news by adding "DISONTINUED CAMARO" into a thread title.

I agree with you there, but I sort of looked past that part because anyone with half a brain knows that's not happening.

The only way Camaro will be discontinued is if GM does fall into ch. 7 and had to liquidate.

[stovt001]

Even in the case of Ch. 7 its possible a buyer could buy "Camaro" as an asset and build it. As long as the public can be educated as to what Ch 11 means and could be assured warranties would still be honored and parts would still be available, Ch. 11 might produce some benefits to GM, like better dealer and supplier arrangements. This could potentially lead to industry-wide changes, perhaps even the ability to buy online direct from the manufacturer. Time will tell. As risky as Ch. 11 is, some of the possible benefits are very appealing. The big downside is the huge job losses, but the auto-industry as a whole is shrinking. Fewer cars will be bought in the future, so those jobs are questionable anyway.

[Adam]

A chapter 11 on a huge company like GM could really stall things out with the Camaro, so I hope it doesn't happen at least until I get mine :P

[fastball]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Even in the case of Ch. 7 its possible a buyer could buy "Camaro" as an asset and build it. As long as the public can be educated as to what Ch 11 means and could be assured warranties would still be honored and parts would still be available, Ch. 11 might produce some benefits to GM, like better dealer and supplier arrangements. This could potentially lead to industry-wide changes, perhaps even the ability to buy online direct from the manufacturer. Time will tell. As risky as Ch. 11 is, some of the possible benefits are very appealing. The big downside is the huge job losses, but the auto-industry as a whole is shrinking. Fewer cars will be bought in the future, so those jobs are questionable anyway.

If/when GM officially files and is legally under the ch 11 process, they desparately need to reassure the public they will still exist and they are doing this to become a stronger company in the long run. For years, I have been begging anyone at GM I could communicate with (including our Scott) to have Bob Lutz appear personally in ads, and be relentless but calm and reassuring with them. Lee Iacocca did that when Chrysler was recovering from a govt loan and it worked. Iacocca got to a personal level with Americans, appealed to them not as a CEO but as someone who genuinely wanted you to experience a new Chrysler product.

I know Bob is retireing, but people would trust and believe in him. He's a car guy, not a numbers guy.

And GM needs to show people they still make cool cars and aren't just another American company.

[fastball]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Even in the case of Ch. 7 its possible a buyer could buy "Camaro" as an asset and build it. As long as the public can be educated as to what Ch 11 means and could be assured warranties would still be honored and parts would still be available, Ch. 11 might produce some benefits to GM, like better dealer and supplier arrangements. This could potentially lead to industry-wide changes, perhaps even the ability to buy online direct from the manufacturer. Time will tell. As risky as Ch. 11 is, some of the possible benefits are very appealing. The big downside is the huge job losses, but the auto-industry as a whole is shrinking. Fewer cars will be bought in the future, so those jobs are questionable anyway.

I think you sum it up very well. Ch 11 is always risky business, and for still the largest company in America it's obviously a most risky gamble. But the potential benefits, I believe, outweigh the drawbacks of doing nothing and sinking further into insolvency.

Just imagine being able to build your own car on line and buy it directly from GM. A smaller dealer network will result in better customer service and stronger factory support. With GM making fewer vehicles and having fewer nameplates to design cars for, they can devote more time and energy to the cars they do make, therefore improving the quality of the product. And, last but not least, a smaller, tighter GM will be able to adapt to future market changes alot faster and with less hardship than the current GM uber-conglomerate.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by fastball

Just imagine being able to build your own car on line and buy it directly from GM. A smaller dealer network will result in better customer service and stronger factory support.

Honestly...what are the chances that that happens? The entire dealer network of the county, including Toyota's, Honda's, Ford's, Chysler's, etc will never let that happen. In fact, as we speak there's a sizable dealer faction working to make it tougher to kill brands off...I don't say this often; but that's a pipe dream.

Secondly, many (not all) of the things everyone wants to see happen at GM is happening already...without the risks associated with bankruptcy. In addition to it being a wild risk, I don't see the point of it.

What they need...is some time, imho.

[5th_GEN_SS]

"It's bullshit when someone distorts the news by adding "DISONTINUED CAMARO" into a thread title."

How did i distort the news? It was not ment to be taken as a statement of fact... no the article did not say that, but the "discontinued camaro" more or less is a consern that i had... after reading more of these news headlines..what is one to think when its printed in bold letters that the company producing your car is going bankrupt?
and it is not just me that associated the possible hault of the camaro production w/ this article, others who read the paper did as well...

for instance my mom whom brought the article to my attention called me syaing "They arent making your car." thats the response i got from the ppl that read it.

My purpose of the title was to gain more information and thoughts on the subject, i my self was conserned. i dont find it that misleading considering the mess our country is in. and the possibility of bankruptcy.
didnt mean to offend anyone.

[fastball]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

What they need...is some time, imho.

The unfortunate but true part of all of this is that they do not have any time. Litterally. They have already burned through the first installment of the govt. loan, and thats only a little over 2 months ago. Just to keep the lights on and the water running is costing GM more than they are making. How is time going to heal anything? Even if all of a sudden tomorrow they started selling lots of cars, every car they make, at exactly MSRP, and double their sales, it would probably take at least 6 months to get back to the break even point to where they could start paying their debts off without govt. help. During which time, their suppliers would have cut off most if not all parts and resources due to lack of payment, they would have to shut down or temporarily idle more plants to save labor and utility, and it would become a tedious balancing act of deciding what parts of the company to shut down in order to save another part.

I see what you're saying, and I think every one of us who likes GM and wants them to succeed wishes to see them do it without going through this. But, on the other hand, lets be realistic.... GM has been loosing money and had dwindling profits since 2000. They had to know they had to do something. But they never did. So, if you ask me, they've had nothing but time to fix things, and they haven't.

As far as the dealer situation goes, Ford, Honda, and Toyota are not hurting the same way GM is. Under ch 11, there are many things GM can do to reorganize under Federal protection that overrides and goes beyond what state franchise laws can do. If Honda were to try some sort of ch 11 in America, a federal judge would just laugh at them. So, those mfgs are basically stuck with their current dealer network setup.

A restructured GM under ch 11 has many, many options the others don't. Much more risk, too.... but many more options. Under Federal protection, they can:

Circumvent the array of 50 different state franchise laws
Restructure all union contracts the way they want or need them without involving UAW neggotiations
Pay their debts off with the govt. loans thus getting the ball back rolling on part suppliers who are this very second not delivering parts due to bad credit and non-payment (which was a concern about the Camaro, remember?)

Those are some very strong reasons why I'm in favor of it.

[Adam]

What's funny about this... is that they have all these camaro test fleet cars all over the place, but ours aren't being made. And they are waiting to replace old gray with cyber gray. It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.

Should have pushed the camaro forward, not backward.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Honestly...what are the chances that that happens? The entire dealer network of the county, including Toyota's, Honda's, Ford's, Chysler's, etc will never let that happen. In fact, as we speak there's a sizable dealer faction working to make it tougher to kill brands off...I don't say this often; but that's a pipe dream.

Secondly, many (not all) of the things everyone wants to see happen at GM is happening already...without the risks associated with bankruptcy. In addition to it being a wild risk, I don't see the point of it.

What they need...is some time, imho.

They reorganized already. They've forced dealers out of the network. They improved product standards in quality and design to compete better with the market. They build greener cars than the market on the whole. They have even aggressively negotiated with the UAW to change contracts. Even after cutting salaries and reducing white collar jobs, some people expect more reorganization.

Let me tell you something. You can't run a huge company with 5 employees. Just because your franchise of McDonald's can handle your load of customers doesn't mean that the world's most sizable automaker—if not in production, than in sheer variety of cars—can do it. It doesn't make sense. Does the US government operate on 3 bureaus? Does Britain's government? Find me a functional government that does. Now apply this basic logic to a car company. It needs a variety of products, brands, and designs to compete with the international market. If you want to take that away from GM, you'll return to an age of rebadging the same car for every brand, low horsepower, and long product cycles due to a lack of funding for R&D rather than having a long cycle due to a good product that sells.

Think about it with those unused brains that have been vacantly accepting the input of biased "experts" promoted by a media that has been bought by companies from overseas. If a company has just cut all the fat that has been slowing it down, then it is lean. If a company keeps cutting, it may lose an important, money-making limb. For GM, a loss of Buick ends dominance in China, a loss of Chevy or Pontiac kills the domestic enthusiast base, a loss of Opel or Holden hurts the foreign market, killing Cadillac would be like Mini killing the Cooper, and a loss of the Corvette would make GM like Toyota—not going there.

GM will not survive bankruptcy. Those of you who believe otherwise need to step out of your fairy land and look at the reality. True—the networks promoting GM survival are funded by ads from Toyota, Nissan, and Hyundai. True—deep-rooted resentment of any American brand is dangerous to all American brands. False—experts know what will happen. Actually, experts don't have to know what they're saying to say anything at all. I'm an expert in policy, so maybe I should go on CNN and spout lies about how peanuts are safe now despite having no credentials in nutrition or food at all. The so-called experts who seem to know exactly what will happen with GM have no loyalty to the brand. They drive Mercedes cars to their cushy corner offices where they get paid to embezzle for their bosses. This isn't the kind of leadership GM needs, even if it will lead to more money and sales, but it will kill all that we know GM to be. Say farewell to anything with more than 4 cylinder or less than 4 doors. Is this the GM you want? Keep believing your fairy tale, then bitch about GM not having any good cars anymore. Go ahead. It's your fault if it happens.

[fastball]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

Let me tell you something. You can't run a huge company with 5 employees. Just because your franchise of McDonald's can handle your load of customers doesn't mean that the world's most sizable automaker—if not in production, than in sheer variety of cars—can do it. It doesn't make sense. Does the US government operate on 3 bureaus? Does Britain's government? Find me a functional government that does. Now apply this basic logic to a car company. It needs a variety of products, brands, and designs to compete with the international market. If you want to take that away from GM, you'll return to an age of rebadging the same car for every brand, low horsepower, and long product cycles due to a lack of funding for R&D rather than having a long cycle due to a good product that sells.

Honda and Toyota have been doing fantastic with nothing more than the original platforms of the Camry and Corolla, and Civic and Accord. They develop them continually improve them, and use them to spread accross all of their nameplates and their lines of cars. They have 2 or 3 divisions. This is what is considered keeping things fit and trim, and still continuing to expand and grow without getting too big for their own good. Honda is especially good at this. That is one of the reasons their CEO was named Automobile Magazine's CEO of the year last year. They have the ability to quickly and efficiently "downsize" when needed, without affecting many jobs. If the market goes up in only one segment, overnight they can turn up production on that one specific vehicle. If overnight that one vehicle goes down, they can react just as quickly. Their employees are trained in many facets of the company so they can go from job to job in order to keep their jobs.

They offer a dizzying array of different cars, two and 4 door, manuals and automatics, wagons, utility vehicles, econo-boxes, and gas guzzlers, off of the two most basic platforms which have their roots 30 years ago. And the cars that those platforms are made for have been continually refined and improved each and every model cycle - which continues to be exactly 5 years, and always has been. Always will be. If GM had followed such a principle, we'd have some really great Bell Air Impalas today. With 6 speed transmissions, 300 horse 24 valve V6s, all wheel drive, features like nav, bluetooth, and power heated seats all for under 30k, available in two or 4 doors, with a manual or automatic, room for 5 or 6, and yet their roots would still be tied to the 1953 Bell Air.