Posted on 02/22/2009 1:38:20 PM PST by Libloather
GMs Problem always was that they never cared about the local distinctions of the markets. As with Opel one of the best examples is SAAB in sweden. This carmaker had real loyal customers and they build cars that were somehow special and not build for the masses. Typical Cars for Artists, Freelancers, Architects and so on...lateral thinkers.
Since GM took SAAB over in 1995 the cars became more and more boring and common and now SAAB goes down the drain.
Total opposite of reality.
You don't see GM trying to push GMC Yukon's in Germany. On the other hand, they don't try to sell an Astra in a market like the US either. Look at the product line up. What Opel sells in Germany (Where they are one of the big ones competing with VW) is very different then what is offered in the US, or even in China where GM has the greatest market shares of any import BECAUSE they “market” their products. (Marketing is NO synonym for advertising, it's an approach that spans product design & development, distribution channels, financing, advertising etc.) Realize. that in total revenue and volume of vehicles sold, not a single German brand comes even close to the sales of GM either in N. America or globally, and that's not because of some conspiracy forcing people in Australia to buy a GM car. GM builds what they want.
GM for a German is like McDonald's, Wal Mart or Exxon; It's more than a firm, it's a symbol, which is also the real driving force behind many of the opinions (emotional feelings) they have. It's ignorant, prejudicial, and provincial thinking that is behind these feelings. German fast food (Das Schnitzel von der Fritteuse) is of course healthy, but McDonald's is always in the crosshairs, just like Exxon, Wal Mart or GM, because in reality these firms represent globalization, free market activity and private ownership, individualism and opulence, for profit operations, large corporations, as well as the US; things some German Green has little appreciation for. The Smart car is nothing more than a modern day Trabant, and those with their PLO scarfs, wool sweaters and birkenstock shoes love this car, because it's the complete antitheses of luxury and opulence and it's a minimalist approach, which is what they are all about.
If you want to see companies that sell the same thing no matter where or are slow to adapt, then look at Mercedes, BMW, or even VW/Audi/Porsche. These firms were slow to begin moving overseas, and they do EXACTLY what you accuse GM wrongfully of doing. They were the ones slow to realize the market opportunities with the Minivan, SUV and truck. GM has beat every single one of them in China for the exact opposite reason you seem to believe, GM actually read the market and delivered what they want.
The US market has taken a down turn. As a consequence, GM which has the largest market share in the US and makes much of their revenue here has taken a beating. GM is also a major financial institution involved in mortgages etc. and as that market took a turn down they took a beating there too. Finally the jump in fuel prices did a firm heavy in the high end (Cadillac, Hummer), high performance (Corvette), SUV and truck niches no good either. The trouble GM faces is mostly a simple function of a shrinking economy, mortgage crisis (Example: Ditech), and mini oil shocks all compounded together. A mature firm in a mature market, GM is largely in the high end, expensive, luxury, and high fuel consuming vehicle niches, and these get hit hardest when things start going South in an economy and fuel prices jump. The money when an economy is booming is in the high end product line up, nearly always. GM years past closed down many of their lower end product lines such as Geo ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geo_(automobile) ), and even Saturn cars have gotten heavier, larger and more expensive over time. That is what people wanted! This is not unique. Even Toyota (Tundra), Nissan (Armada, Titan), Mercedes (ML), BMW (X5), Porsche (Cayenne) and VW (Toureg) were rushing in to get a piece of that pie, although later.
I understand the contradiction in rescuing capitalism - it’s better to speak of a regulated capitalism.
But the core idea of socialism - not to reward entrepreneurship and responisbility any more - has to be prevented by putting up the new rules.
Nevertheless - it can’t work if it’s all about taking debt and using that debt to manipulate stock options. (Wich is what happened - hedge fonds took amount x from the bank y and bought options - came back with the same options to the same bank as a security to raise more debt and buy more options - so they moved the value of certain assets without having any capital not to speak of the intention to invest into something)
So at the moment we are in the shit - debt isn’t trusted any more so the ammount of money is imploding - this IS healthy but if we let it happen undampened people will start to strave and riot. So we need to come to justice but WITH some regulations.
International business is not a proper scape goat - there’s a lot of real benefit in globalization.
This is after you have distributed the debt. China owns you guys - and that’s not the democratic partys fault.
these cheeky bastards from abroad - just build things better and cheaper... who could possibly have estimated that this is on the long term outperforming against a society of bankers and lawyers ???
It was a good thing while it meant you can have a good product for half the price and still let the bank pay for it - but now it seems like you’d have to WORK for the stuff ? That’s cheating lol.
I’ll tell you Americans have been naive,but with a complicit media the fraud that is “free trade” was hidden from most.
It was NEVER a good thing, and we are paying the price of european style socialist destruction of our economy.
Found this article about GMs mismanagement at SAAB
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.