Good god, no kidding. Anyone, anyone, anyone, anyone will tell you that you cannot market crap. It is all about the PRODUCT, and GM put out, and still puts out, a lot of crappy product. They make some great cars, but they also make far too many rebadged piles of junk.

 

You're worse than a Christian preaching to Atheists.

 

Buickman listen very carefully.

This is the creditability you are getting from this site for just ranting about how great you and your plan are and not responding directly to anyone’s comments or inquires.

 

Ask away.

 

De ja vu? I think this thread is stuck in a logic loop.

 

Kind of like a meeting at VSSM.

 

 

I don't know...I've seen some concerns raised here and no answers to them. Specifically, which points have been identified as not being allowable by law?

 

Apparently a few states disallow payments of "birddog fees". In Michigan such a practice is illegal in Real Estate but perfectly fine in autos. No major "flaw" here. Simply provide exception as where prohibited. Next?

 

Buickman:

I like your plan and I think that a new focus on marketing and branding would go a long way toward helping GM regain market share. My only caveat would be to place an emphasis on profitability and cash flow ahead of market share. Profitability and positive cash flow drive a company's share price, not its level of market share. I have read more than one analyst state that GM would be very profitable with a market share closer to 20% vs. the current 25%. I would offer that a smaller GM is a better GM for stockholders and employees alike. If GM could impress Wall-Street with decent earnings for change, it would go a long way toward changing the public' s perception of GM as a dinosaur company not worthy of investment.

I also like your idea about offering common stock to all employees instead of a cash bonus. Wal-Mart used to do something similar to this in the early '90's and it worked like gold. GM shares have been in the crapper for some time. It is no secret that GM investors would have been better off putting thier $$$ under a mattress than continuing to hold thier stock over the past decade or so. Anything to boost the stock price would be a good thing.

On a final note, you might want to think about taking it easy on MBA's. As a fellow B-school grad, most of my classmates were very intelligent and hardworking individuals. I would suggest that the beauracracy and the business model under which those MBA's (or any executive for that matter) are made to operate is the true culprit for many of GM's woes. GM's basic business model isn't that complicated, so the answers to it problems, while legion, should be equally lacking in complexity. I think that your plan is a start.

 

I got one for you: Buickman, how does this plan affect me, prospective BMW buyer in Los Angeles? How will this plan increase market share in urban markets? How will this affect elitists who care about style, panache, and substance? How will you change the mind of Angelenos, Chicagoans, and New Yorkers who think American cars are for the lower class? How will this steal market share from BMW, Honda, Toyota, LExus, and Mercedes-Benz, the fastest growing brands of the last decade? What will this do to topple their dominance.

Answer these questions fairly, concisely, and validly and you will win my respect.

 

GM's market share IS only 20% (or less) now if you remove true employee and fleet sales. Further reduction in models, divisions, plants, employees, etc...will only hurt this company long term. The key is making each productive and profitable.

My apologies to those hard working MBA's out there. You are correct, it's the business model, not the individual's level of education.

We begin attracting conquest customers and new buyers by immediately altering our advertising. New policy forbidding the promotion of any rebate, price or payment. All marketing should focus on the product and it's related benefits to lifestyle through quality, safety, reliability, fuel economy, and style. By changing our image in the market, our products will become far more desirable than they are currently as portrayed in a distress fashion.

Next, we allow our dealers to operate in their own most productive way by leaving them alone. As rational businessmen they will organize their operations in the most effecitve and productive manner. Less emphasis on constantly shifting and confusing incentives will give retail personnel the timne they need to focus on product knowledge and the most rewarding techniques in customer service. No more end of the month "slam dunking". take the time to build a relationship and better understand the needs and desires of the customer as opposed to rushing through to get the next one before it ends. Planning a business model and daily routine is near impossible with the relentless interference from the factory.

Customers here, appointments and deliveries the next few hours, more on this later. Thank you for the direct question, very valid and to the point. This is how we should proceed and most likely will find ourselves not that far apart in our thinking and realize although our approaches may differ, we can work toward the common goal of a renewed GM.

 

Yes we do if she is not increasing total corporate sales, but only taking sales away from local competitors. Which are you doing?

 

Excuse me, are you going to answer my question? POST 42