GM CEO Drives a Chevy Volt to Washington...Sort Of

EPA stated range is 227 miles. the Tesla has 3 different mode, economy standard and performance. in economy, the range will be greater so 244 or more is VERY LIKELY

Tesla 1.5 test drive | The Car Tech blog - CNET Reviews

 

Two thirds of the American public say "NO" to the bailout. But congress is NOT listening. They are going to tax us by taking our hard earned money and give it to failing companies. Just look at the market trends of the "Big 3" over the past several years. Why, why would you throw good money after bad.

From what I saw on Cspan, they could take $125Billion USD and still go bankrupt. That's what one of the "Experts" on the panel stated.

Just say "NO".

 

$34 billion if like taking $100 from every man, woman and child in America.

How's that for redistributing wealth.

 

Way to pic and choose. Every witness that presented before Congress recommended that Congress approve the funds required.

I believe it is Dr. Mark Zandi, Chief Economist and Co-Founder of Moody's you are misquoting.

Dr. Zandi's first point was that Congress should absolutely give the big 3 the money that they requested. Governments around the world are aiding their automotive companies in this downturn because they are very important part of the manufacturing base.

His second point was if congress didn't help and one of the automakers failed, the US economy would be severely damaged and undo any benefit from the trillion dollars we have given the financial sector.

His third point was that the plans put forth to congress could be successful IF the automakers stick to the plans. He said this was highly unlikely because without bankruptcy, or a congressional oversite board, the stakeholders would not be forced to make concessions needed in the plans

His fourth point was that, in his opinion, it would take between $75 billion and $125 Billion to return all 3 automaker to strong position in the market. That range is for the different scenarios put forth by congress. (So far the automakers have asked for $59 billion ($25 billion already authorized and $34 billion this week)

His recommendation was, in the very short term, congress give GM and Chrysler the $18 Billion needed to keep them in operation until March 1st. That would give the government time to put together a oversight board with the power to rewrite contracts. This oversight board would be needed to force the changes need in a reorganization. (This is essentially a repeat of what was done successfully with Chrysler back in the late 70's)

He also very quickly shut down a senator that asked by they should go against the will of the people to save the automakers. His reply was that though Americans may be temporarily angered by a bailout; this anger would be but a fraction of the anger if Congress allows the auto industry to fail and unemployment jumps to 12%. She didn't have a response to that.

 

"Show me the vehicles!!!!" (to GM)

Since thus is impossible, show me the detailed plans to produce vehicles with EREV (and their other hybrid designs) in volume. If no plans exist, it would be best if they did not mention them in their proposal for the bailout.

Low volume unprofitable vehicles are of little concern...unless the buyers are spontaneously swayed to believe that the company is "moving forward" in the right direction. And just buy anything to save the company.

Most people put a little more thought into a passenger vehicle purchase...than most other items. GM has not proven their commitment to hybrid vehicles. Remember phrases like "stop gap" and "not economically viable"...so the threat of bankruptcy does not change anything. The CEOs of the Big 3 even say their problems are due to the recession...not their vehicle lineup.

It would be difficult to purchase a hybrid from a company that shows no long term committment to the tech. It would be slightly similar to purchasing a Betamax VCR or HD DVD. The resale value on unsupported or discontinued tech is scary.

 

anyone ever hear of the "AFS Infinity?"

its supposed to be an "extreme hybrid" makeover of a ... you guessed it, a GM product AND SUV to boot. supposed to get 150 mpg...its actually a WORKING SUV PLUG IN HYBRID kinda like the "so far off in the future that delivery is yet to be determined" Chevy Volt...

now granted the AFS is an aftermarket company, and although they have a few working, its not a production build, and being the LARGE MASSIVE CORPORATE GIANT (who HASN'T HEARD OF AFS???) like GM, they were able to get one working with GM's help???

well of course they had GM's help... after all, the AFS vehicle is nothing but a stock Saturn Vue SUV.

now AFS wants to big 3 bailout to include financing help for other companies who have high mileage auto tech available... now, here we are again!!!

another major corporate giant like AFS asking for a handout?... but at least they have something to show us!!! (talking does not count... its like Jerry Maguire SHOW ME THE CAR!!! )

anyway, for those of you that have been living in a cave and have not heard about AFS, i provide a "well known" link

AFS Trinity Power – A revolution in Fast Energy Storage™ featuring the Extreme Hybrid™.

IF GM WERE SERIOUS ABOUT THEIR PLANS THEY SHOULD OF HADE AFS BUILD THEM ONE OF "THEIR" CARS, THEN TAPE OVER THE AFS LOGO, PUT THEIRS ON IT, AND DRIVE THAT TO D.C.

after all, would be no worse than their actions over the last 20 years

 

Ok, so why not put it to a direct vote by the tax payers, in a way that
won't even require any additional expenditures:

Have the IRS put one of those little check boxes at the end of the 2008
tax forms asking every taxpayer if they'd like to have $100 applied to the
Big Three Bailout.

 

Here is why Congress and the Big 3 auto makers are all part of the dog and pony show.

1 Big 3 CEO's ride into DC in autos that aren't ready for prime time, aren't production models but should have been manufactured and ready to go years ago...so consumers could buy the products that WE want...not what Detroit wants us to buy (ahem...can you say SUV's?).

2 Read the following and the associated link regarding how Washington DC pols are in on this. This describes the impending compromise to giving the Big 3 some sort of bailout:

The breakthrough came when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said $25 billion in Energy Department funds for the development of fuel-efficient vehicles could be used to keep the automakers operating if there is a “guarantee that those funds will be replenished in a matter of weeks so as not to delay that crucial initiative.”

Here is the complete article:

http://priuschat.com/forums/prius-hybrid-news/56311-gm-ceo-drives-chevy-volt-washington-sort-5.html

So, Congress will give the Big 3 25 billion of our tax dollars that was targeted for...get this..."development of fuel efficient vehicles" and use that to bail them out.

When, in fact, the Big 3 should have been developing fuel efficient vehicles on their own years ago, brought them to market (like Toyota and Honda) and actually competed on the global market.

What is wrong with this whole picture? No wonder the Big 3 is just about broke. And then the dumbass Congress takes money that should improve the auto industry...earmarked for developing fuel efficient vehicles...and then ulimately aids and abets the Big 3 by handing them money and turning around to continue "business as usual". Dopes...both of them!

I say let the Big 3 declare bankruptcy like the airline industry...let them reorganize, cutting the waste and then allow them to succeed or fail on their own. And...the Dept of Transportation will still give them the 25 billion anyways, but only to develop fuel efficient vehicles.

Geez, it's not rocket science anymore. Hybrid technology is widespread...Toyota, Honda, Ford, Nissan, Cadillac, Chevy all have production hybrid vehicles. By evidence, Jeep has a hybrid/EV type of vehicle. Geez, use the technology, get the mpgs to add anywhere from 20-50% more mpgs and then you have something.

Go from there. Create full electric vehicles with liveable range (not 2-5 miles on EV mode). Create alternative fuels vehicles. It's not hard...gas/electric hybrid technology is proven and used in lots of vehicles already.

So, what's the big delay in implementing this widespread? Every gallon of gas that we save is one less gallon we are buying from outside sources. Just do it already!

 

That is odd, the Japanese broadcaster NHK broadcasted a news with a film
showing the PHEV driven by GM;s Honcho Wagner ? and reported _It took about
10 hours journey from Detroit to Washington..?

 

Dodd speaks: Wagoner should move on - BusinessWeek

On CBS’ “Face the Nation” today, Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) said that General Motors Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner should “move on.” That could mean that Dodd and other members of Congress will ask for Wagoner’s resignation before voting on a loan package for GM and Chrysler next week.

In other words, Dodd could be setting up Wagoner as the scalp that Congress can show voters before inking this proposed bridge loan. Well, that certainly tees up a question that has been burning for several years. Should Wagoner be fired? The problem with Dodd bringing this up is that Washington doesn’t really know anything about the auto industry. And we really don’t want politicians running car companies or anything else. Dodd isn’t qualified to make that decision. Nor is anyone else in Congress.

At the same time, Wagoner’s record is almost impossible to defend. Since he became CEO, the company blew money on things like a $1.3 billion stake in Subaru parent Fuji Heavy Industries, which yielded no cars or technology worth mentioning. He spent $2.4 billion to get into Fiat Auto and another $2 billion to get out. GM has also paid more than $4 billion in dividends. That’s almost $10 billion wasted. While squandering that money, GM borrowed some $18 billion to shore up its pension fund.

At the same time, Wagoner cut capital spending early in the decade while many product lines—except the trucks and suvs—went too long without a refresh. Brands like Saturn and even Chevrolet labored on with inadequate marketing budgets. Hybrids were stiff armed and the EV1 electric car was killed. Like his predecessor Jack Smith, he made sure he took care of shareholders while the company often lagged in product and technology.

 

DETROIT (Reuters) – General Motors Corp on Monday unveiled an unusually frank advertisement acknowledging it had "disappointed" and sometimes even "betrayed" American consumers as it lobbies to clinch the federal aid it needs to stay afloat into next month.

The print advertisement marked a sharp break from GM's public stance of just several weeks ago when it sought to justify its bid for a U.S. government on the grounds that the credit crisis had undermined its business in ways executives could never have foreseen.

It also came as Chief Executive Rick Wagoner, who has led the automaker since 2000, faces new pressure to step aside as GM seeks up to $18 billion in federal funding.

"While we're still the U.S. sales leader, 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."

 

As the former owner of a clunker 2000 GMC Sierra, my only comment to the ad:

"No s***, really?"

 

Who gave the go ahead to put this out? Wagoner, the Board, someone in the corporate communications department? Think carefully about what went on internally to have this come out.

(e.g. Is "someone" getting setup to be the goat for an upcoming change?)

 

Actually, Execs usually get extra bonuses for sending 'production' to 'low cost countries' since they are positively affecting the short term bottom line. Why would THEY lose THEIR jobs? THEY did a good job cutting costs.

 

Bob Lutz???

 

Let's hope not.

An ad like this sends out very bad indications. At the root of it, the ad indirectly makes a statement that "We know we are doing bad, and we hope you will overlook or forgive us." At the next level up, it indicates that all the "oversight" (e.g. board of directors) does not disagree. If GM is to get out of this mess then what they could do for an ad is:

1) Show a plan for eventual success. It all starts here....and it is not being done. Specifically, here is what we are are doing and going to do to have the BEST quality in the business (not sort of close to the competition)....and here will be our proof.

2) Here are the vehicles that are going to achieve this turn around. Volt, Malibu, whatever.....pick something and GO.

3) Here is how we are going to use our workforce to get to these goals.


But no, we get this stupid "confession".

 

GM brought out a Volt for the cameras in the 21 October 2008 edition of Frontline, "Heat." The vehicle could barely make it up a short hill, then died completely. It had to be pushed away. This, after the narrator asked why GM had crushed all of its EV1s? Answer: This was GM's recycling program. Now, 10 years after EV1, they are starting from scratch and learned little from their EV1 experience.

 

Bob Lutz made a press statement today that if Congress required a scalp he would be the one to take one for the team.

From MotorAuthority.com - Car news, reviews, spy shots and videos

Bob Lutz took a different angle at defending Wagoner, shifting the blame to himself and offering his own job as a sacrifice. “If Congress wants a sacrifice, it should be me. I’m older, and I’ve made politically incorrect remarks about global warming, so it should be me," he said, according to the Detroit Free Press. Both men take a clear stance that while mistakes have been made, finding a replacement with enough know-how to do better would likely be impossible.

 

He's almost 77 years old. Enjoying retirement isn't much of a stretch at this point, hardly a sacrifice. In fact, if it wasn't for Volt he probably would have already stepped down anyway.
.

 

Wow. The auto gods have spoken.