From the NY Times of 22 Nov 2008:
Quote:
G.M. Pins Hopes on a Plug-In Car, 2 Years Off
Executives at General Motors, the largest and apparently the most imperiled of the three American car companies, are using the Volt as the centerpiece of their case to a skeptical Congress that their business plan for a turnaround is strong, and that a federal bailout would be a good investment in G.M.’s future.
In ads that ran this week, the company said of the Volt: “This is not just a car. It’s a vision of our future.” Another claimed that the vehicle would “completely reinvent the automotive industry.”
|
Hardly. The Volt is a hybrid with a battery charger. This is revolutionary? Even GM built a hybrid in the 1990s, and then killed it when George Jr advocated no innovation. GM will not innovate unless required by government regulation. Still cannot get a hybrid right after spending how many years developing a car that is still two years away? Anybody see that PBS show where GM tried to demonstrate the Volt - and the car would not move?
Quote:
There is a long tradition in Detroit of relying on a single new model or technology as a silver bullet to quickly solve bigger problems. ... It is expected to cost about $40,000. ...
It plans to sell only 10,000 Volts in the car’s first year, or less than the number Prius cars sold by Toyota in October alone. And the Volt, roughly the size of a small family sedan, will cost around $15,000 more than a Prius.
|
One car that costs $15,000 more, that will not be sold everywhere in America, and will only sell a paltry 10,000 in the first years? This will save GM? Yes, GM executives are still living in a mythical world. No wonder Rick Wagoner said in mid November on Detroit TV, "GM is in the best shape it has been in 20 or 30 years."
Does anyone still foolishly think unions, Japanese competition, unfair trade, market conditions, or MBA created legacy costs are GM's problem? Those are only symptoms. GM's
only solution to save GM is the Volt.
Quote:
G.M. reportedly spent about $1 billion in the 1990s to develop the EV1, which it dropped after saying it could not make money on the cars. The EV1, which was available only in lease deals, sold for the equivalent of up to $44,000 but cost G.M. about $80,000 apiece to make. ... Only two years ago, G.M. promoted flexible fuel cars that run on E85, a blend of ethanol and gasoline, as the way to wean Americans off gasoline. ... In 2004, G.M. displayed a hydrogen-powered concept vehicle, the Hy-wire, at the Paris Motor Show, making similar promises that it would revolutionize the industry.
|
And 1999 GM Precept - their hybrid paid for by Clinton's government? All typical of management that does not drive.
Some years ago, newspapers would be under financial attack for reporting so honestly. Slowly, facts of total and complete mismanagement, especially in the last decade, are coming to light. Name a new and successful GM model or innovation in the past decade? None. MBAs spent massively. And every product was a flop: classic symptom of MBA management that believes innovation is created by throwing money at it ... like a grenade.
To show efforts to save the company, GM announced a sale of two corporate luxurious private jets. Why not all three? Rick Wagoner needs luxury, his high salary, and those bonuses that he is still scheduled to receive.
Why does GM need numerous private jets? GM corporate rules require all executives to fly in private planes because commercial airplanes are deemed too dangerous. Heaven forbid they should sit next to someone who drives a car.
If this was written in a novel, nobody would believe any MBAs could be this dumb. How to spell it: "employe".
