Jeff wrote:
> On Dec 10, 7:27 pm, Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net> wrote:
>> Oscar Finkleheimer wrote:
>>> In article <o3l0k4lh1qe5ucvnn4i1p1kp93tq5p9...@4ax.com>,
>>> me <noem...@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>> For all you GM defenders who refuse to admit that GM screwed
>>>> themselves by refusing to recognize vehicle trends and build less
>>>> SUV's and trucks and invest in other production; by building low
>>>> quality cars; by building cars no one wants; and by generally
>>>> mismanaging the company - here is it from the horse's mouth (or more
>>>> accurately, horse's ass in the case of GM):
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081208/us_nm/us_gm_ad
>>>> "... we acknowledge we have disappointed you," the ad said. "At times
>>>> we violated your trust by letting our quality fall below industry
>>>> standards and our designs became lackluster."
>>>> The unsigned open letter, entitled "GM's Commitment to the American
>>>> People" ran in the trade journal Automotive News, which is widely read
>>>> by industry executives, lobbyists and other insiders.
>>>> In the ad, GM admits to other strategic missteps analysts and critics
>>>> have said hastened its recent decline.
>>>> "We have proliferated our brands and dealer network to the point where
>>>> we lost adequate focus on the core U.S. market," the ad said. "We also
>>>> biased our product mix toward pick-up trucks and SUVs."
>>> "unsigned open letter". Maybe from the autoworkers union?
>> I heard on the radio today that Wagoner himself had apologized before
>> Congress for not investing more in electric/hybrid technologies. That
>> pisses me off... as much as I've been disappointed in GM they have done
>> more than any other company (possible exceptions Honda and Toyota, but
>> I'd still give the edge to GM) to try to make electric cars practical.
>> What a spineless wanker. Don't apologize for s**t you didn't do, that
>> just makes you look like you're begging (of course, he probably is at
>> the "begging" point now...)
>>
>> unfortunately I can't find a news link yet, but I bet it will show up
>> shortly.
>>
>> nate
>
> There is far more than GM should have done besides trying to make
> electric cars practical. They should have figured out cost-efficient
> ways to make small cars (instead of importing them from Korea),
> implemented ways to make cars more efficient, make entry level cars
> that consumers would want and that would last, and improved its
> manufacturing capability to be more flexible.

I think their costs are such that they *couldn't* rely on entry-level,
efficient cars to be profitable and had to try to move upmarket instead
(which they failed to do.) Unfortunately moving upmarket generally
means lower volume, and with their union agreements that'd be a loser
too. Importing from Korea actually seems like a smart move, although I
would have buddied up with Hyundai long before Daewoo, who don't have a
particularly stellar record of automotive excellence.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel