Autos.ca Home  


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Task force cites 5 key flaws in GM's viability plan  (Read 1341 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
articsteve
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Location: ON
Posts: 14443



View Profile
 Stats
« on: March 31, 2009, 12:15:33 am »

Jamie LaReau
Automotive News
March 30, 2009 - 2:14 pm ET

President Barack Obama's auto task force says General Motors will be hard-pressed to meet its projections in five key areas without a dramatic restructuring.

In response to the viability plan GM submitted Feb. 17, the task force demanded that GM intensify its restructuring over the next 60 days or face possible bankruptcy.

In a statement released today, the task force criticized GM's assumptions in these areas:

1. Market share

2. Price

3. Brands/dealers

4. Product mix

5. Legacy liabilities

The task force did not dispute that GM is in the early stages of a turnaround, saying it has made "material progress in a number of areas, including purchasing, product design, manufacturing, brand rationalization and its dealer network."

But despite that progress, GM's current plan "contemplates initiatives that will take many years to complete," the task force wrote.

Details on the key areas:

1. Market share

In 2008, GM's North American market share was 21.5 percent, down from 23.8 percent in 2006. In its Feb. 17 viability plan, GM estimated that its market share would be 21.1 percent this year and decline to 19.4 percent in 2012 and 19.1 percent by 2014.

But the task force noted that GM has been losing market share for decades. "Yet its plan assumes only a very moderate decline, despite reducing fleet sales and shuttering brands that represent 1.8 percent of its current market share," the task force wrote.

GM is looking to sell Hummer and Saab and has committed to providing product to Saturn through the 2012 model year. If Saturn can't be spun off, GM will phase out the brand.

Obama's team is pushing GM to move more quickly to make itself competitive.

2. Price

GM's February viability plan did not discuss its expectations on pricing, said GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson. He added that "the task force went through all of this and did their own financial analysis."

And the task force analysis found flaws in GM's assumptions.

"The plan assumes improvement in net price realization despite a severely distressed market, lingering consumer quality perceptions and an increase in smaller vehicles," the task force report noted. It went on to mention how GM historically has struggled to maintain pricing power.

The task force noted that in 2006 and 2007, GM North America achieved a 30.4 percent "contribution margin" -- the sale price minus any variable costs of building the car. GM assumes that margin will increase to 30.8 percent this year and be at 30.7 percent in 2010, 30.9 percent in 2013, and 30.3 percent in 2014, the task force says.

That's despite a distressed market and an increased focus on passenger cars and crossovers, which traditionally have yielded lower margins than big trucks.

3. Brands/dealers

GM is currently "burdened with underperforming brands, nameplates and an excess of dealers," the task force said.

GM said it plans to offer just four core brands -- Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC --and a cut-down version of Pontiac. GM also said it would reduce its dealer count from 6,246 in 2008 to 4,100 in 2014.

The task force said those measures are not aggressive enough.

4. Product mix

GM said its restructuring plan would allow it to produce "fewer, better" entries because it will have fewer brands, nameplates and dealers. GM said cutting brands would improve profitability because more than 90 percent of its U.S. profits are derived from the four core brands.

But the task force noted that GM earns a large portion of its profits from high-margin pickups and SUVs, "which are vulnerable to a continuing shift in consumer preference to smaller vehicles."

The report went on to say that while the Chevrolet Volt electric hybrid car "holds promise," it will be too pricey for short-term commercial success.

GM has estimated that the Volt likely would come to market with a $40,000 or more sticker.

5. Legacy liabilities

GM owes $20 billion to its Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Association plan. It is trying to persuade the UAW to take half of that amount in stock rather than cash.

GM also indicated that the asset values in its pension fund have declined significantly over the past six months. GM's total U.S. qualified pension plans had $84.2 billion in assets at the end of 2008, compared with $104.1 billion in 2007. That has left GM's pension plans only 87 percent funded last year, compared with 124 percent funded the year before.

The task force said that going forward, GM's cash needs associated with legacy liabilities grow "to unsustainable levels, reaching approximately $6 billion per year in 2013 and 2014."

For GM to meet that obligation, it will need to sell 900,000 more vehicles per year. That would leave GM "fighting to maximize volume rather than return on investment," the task force said.

The task force said that GM's progress over the past few years has been "far too slow" in these five areas and that if the company is to survive, its stakeholders must engage in a "substantially more aggressive restructuring plan."
 
Logged

“Frankly, we are not going to ever defeat the insurgency,”     Billions for jets and pennies for vets; Harponi is MAGNIFICENT.
vdk
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: '08 GTI, '06 ZZR600
Gender: Male
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4710


I try and stay limber, swim, run, ride motorcycles


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2009, 01:24:56 am »

Apart from other stuff. Why are they keeping GMC around?  Huh
Logged

sailor723
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 11 ML350 Bluetec and 11 BMW 328i xDrive
Gender: Male
Location: NB
Posts: 3377


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2009, 05:49:38 am »

I guess I can seeing keeping Buick in Asia but as far as NA sales are concerned why not just Chevy-Cadillac? I mean aren't Chevy and GMC trucks basicly the same thing under the skin? In terms of cars it would seem to make sense to follow the Toyota/Lexus and Nissan/Infiniti model of having one mainstream and one highline brand.

I really don't understand the idea of Pontiac as a niche "sporty" brand. When I think of GM and "sporty cars" I think Camaro and Corvette.
Logged

My first ever GM ownership experience  can best be described as   "Fool me once...."
toolatecrew
Drunk on Fuel
****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 08 VW GTI
Gender: Male
Location: Dartmouth NS
Posts: 2551


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2009, 07:24:38 am »

Funny aren't those all falws in the paln that were pointed pout by posters in thsi forum like the day after it was published?

The brands and dealers in particular. People have been saying they have way too many bands for a long long time. I did a case study on GM in 1993 in my Masters program. The conclusion. They needed to cut brands. The response from the professor..GM culture won't allow it find another solution.

The dealers? I debunked that the day after the detailed plan was released. Short term they planned to reduce the number for dealers by 2012 by very colse to the nukber of Saturn/Saabb dealers out there right now. Not really reducing dealers to allow more sales per dealer just trimming dealers that would be gone anyways through the sale of brands or through natural attrution.

Nameplates? For all their bluster about reducing brands their plan actuallay results in MORE nameplates per brand than before. Yes the ttoal number is less but of course it would be oless when you turf 2.5 brands entirley.

I'd like to see them survive but when you are talking this type of $ in this type of economy you can't really think that you can overcome a poor plan by fudging the sales and growth projections to compensate can you?
Logged

carcrazy
Car Crazy
*****
Online Online

Location: GTA
Posts: 4023

member


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2009, 10:46:11 am »

One positive sign from this rejection is that finaly someone with authority actually analyzed the "plans", called them BS and explained why.
Now I'm not sure that a good alternate solution can be crafted, but it's a step forward anyway. 
Logged
sailor723
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 11 ML350 Bluetec and 11 BMW 328i xDrive
Gender: Male
Location: NB
Posts: 3377


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2009, 11:04:44 am »

I just hope that they (the US and CDN gov) are smart enough to stick by their guns and not end up pouring money down a rat hole. If the companies come up with a plan that has a reasonable chance of success and give the taxpayers a decent chance of seeing the money again fine. Otherwise.........Sydney Steel and Devco anyone?
Logged

My first ever GM ownership experience  can best be described as   "Fool me once...."
Cortina
Drunk on Fuel
****
Offline Offline

Location: SW Ontario
Posts: 1496



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2009, 11:33:30 am »

I think the only way foward is Two product lines.

Scrap Pontiac-Saturn-GMC - Sell GM DAT and Saab- Sell Buick to the chinese

GM

Three Cars - Small-Med-Large.
Two SUV's/Cross- Small-Med.
Two TrucK - Med-Large.
Two Vans - Commercial - Mini-Van

Caddy Brand

Two Whizo Lux cars.
One Whizzo Lux Suv.
Logged
tpl
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: VW GTI, Honda Fit
Gender: Male
Location: Guelph On.
Posts: 13963



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2009, 11:58:36 am »

I think the only way foward is Two product lines.

Scrap Pontiac-Saturn-GMC - Sell GM DAT and Saab- Sell Buick to the chinese

GM

Three Cars - Small-Med-Large.
Two SUV's/Cross- Small-Med.
Two TrucK - Med-Large.
Two Vans - Commercial - Mini-Van

Caddy Brand

Two Whizo Lux cars.
One Whizzo Lux Suv.

And the Corvette and possibly the Camaro.
Logged

It is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.
Lord Palmerston
barrie1
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Location: London Ont Canada
Posts: 14832



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2009, 05:40:33 pm »

Better yet lets just stop all imports from coming into these 2 Countries and play the same game as many of them do with restrictive laws. GM and Chrysler would certainly do much better then with a level playing field. There products are as good if not better built then many of the imports anyways.  Smiley
Logged
Stuff
Drunk on Fuel
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1256


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2009, 05:55:40 pm »

 Laugh at Post Above
Logged
ovr50
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Location: Kelowna, BC
Posts: 18417


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2009, 06:10:31 pm »

Better yet lets just stop all imports from coming into these 2 Countries and play the same game as many of them do with restrictive laws. GM and Chrysler would certainly do much better then with a level playing field. There products are as good if not better built then many of the imports anyways.  Smiley

What are you, Barrie, a robot programmed to only repeat endlessly the CAW based dogma??  Tongue Tongue

Have you any idea what that kind of protectionism would do to the rest of the Canadian economy? Or more likely, the auto unions don't care as long as they can preserve their cushy jobs.  Tongue
Logged

2011 BMW X3 35i Vermillion Red, MSport
and
2005 Toyota Highlander in Indigo Ink
rrocket
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Location: My house
Posts: 17335



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2009, 06:25:06 pm »

Better yet lets just stop all imports from coming into these 2 Countries and play the same game as many of them do with restrictive laws. GM and Chrysler would certainly do much better then with a level playing field. There products are as good if not better built then many of the imports anyways.  Smiley

Barrie...have you been doing this tonight by chance?Huh  LOL

Logged

How fast is my Supra?  I sh*t on Cessnas from a roll....
aquadorhj
Drunk on Fuel
****
Online Online

Location: Winter Wonderland
Posts: 1287


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2009, 06:28:11 pm »

I just hope that they (the US and CDN gov) are smart enough to stick by their guns and not end up pouring money down a rat hole. If the companies come up with a plan that has a reasonable chance of success and give the taxpayers a decent chance of seeing the money again fine. Otherwise.........Sydney Steel and Devco anyone?


And isn't Obama's ultimatum on Chrysler's to fix the fire under their as$ in 30 days basically saying Chryslers on fire sale and is practically free for Fiat to "Merge" with?

If Obama injected some liquidity into Chrysler (under severe guideline of course) to make it "SEEM" viable, the stock/bond holders would have at least had a chance at getting some of the money back(even though we are still talking pennies on dollars) in the "merger" deal...  Now it's just free for Fiat...  dumbasses..

Not that I really really care about Big 3 anymore... I still don't like any of them..   ..Except possibly CTS-V..
Logged


Driving thrills makes my wallet lighter.. and therefore makes me faster because i'm shedding weight... Cheesy
Stuff
Drunk on Fuel
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1256


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2009, 06:28:27 pm »

I think this was something far more nasty then Marijuana  ROFL

Barrie...have you been doing this tonight by chance?Huh  LOL

Logged
aquadorhj
Drunk on Fuel
****
Online Online

Location: Winter Wonderland
Posts: 1287


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2009, 06:36:22 pm »

Better yet lets just stop all imports from coming into these 2 Countries and play the same game as many of them do with restrictive laws. GM and Chrysler would certainly do much better then with a level playing field. There products are as good if not better built then many of the imports anyways.  Smiley

I'm sure you know, but USA places PLENTY of restrictions on imports(maybe not cars) on practically everything.
Even on us Canadians...  softwood, anyone?  maybe some beef?  what about mined minerals, eh?

so, in the intricacies of multi-national trade restrictions among all these parties, i'm sure the disadvantage of importing cars from asia/japan/europe whatever to US is off-set (or most likely advantageous) for the USA in the grand scheme of things.
Logged


Driving thrills makes my wallet lighter.. and therefore makes me faster because i'm shedding weight...
toolatecrew
Drunk on Fuel
****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 08 VW GTI
Gender: Male
Location: Dartmouth NS
Posts: 2551


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2009, 06:58:41 pm »

Better yet lets just stop all imports from coming into these 2 Countries and play the same game as many of them do with restrictive laws. GM and Chrysler would certainly do much better then with a level playing field. There products are as good if not better built then many of the imports anyways.  Smiley

Yeah shame on any comapany that would be in league with those godless imports.

Pontiac Vibe
Honda Engine in Saturn Vue.

Glass houses and stones anyone?
Logged

vdk
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: '08 GTI, '06 ZZR600
Gender: Male
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4710


I try and stay limber, swim, run, ride motorcycles


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2009, 06:58:53 pm »

Really dude.. That's a perfectly sound plan.. Can't compete with those nasty well made good on fuel and imports? Just ban them.. WTF they doing in MY country afterall Huh
Logged

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.4 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Brkdmrcn v4 By [BrKDmRcN]
| Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.085 seconds with 39 queries.