by reader tinman
With GM being the bigger of the three bullies vying for our monetary attention what are your guy’s thoughts about what to actually do with GM if it does enter bankruptcy?
I’m guessing since it’s even being tossed out there when only 3 months ago (??) Wagoner was insisting bankruptcy was not even an option on the table. Sure sounds like the winds of change have blown that one into the room here lately…and now they’re saying it’s their only option if they don’t get the money?!
So, if GM enters bankruptcy, I kinda like my idea of making “General Motors” a designer & builder of chassis and underlying bits to then sell to their former subdivisions.
GM can also offer contract building & assembly services to these companies – for a price obviously.
Spin off all of them and let’s see whether “survival” (of the fittest?) is something that can be done in the auto industry.
I’m sure you’ll have a bit of consolidation though how much is difficult to predict but I imagine it would be a while (5-10 years?) especially since they (the former subsidiaries) couldn’t cost-effectively jump from the GM ship too soon.
Remember, it takes years to design a car the buying public wants – and they have to be able to predict the future too! *puke*
And with them standing as their own entities you could effectively let the market decide what they’re worth overall and whether they’re even worth saving ultimately.
The US Governement:
Big problem, meet C-4 *boom*
Now, all you little “problems” need to decide how you’re to survive on your own.
And if you feel like going under it’s not something we forced you to do.
But if you come back to us for money, you (should be) are now a much more manageable issue.
It buys “us” time and does what the GOP loves to crow about when it works ‘right’ – the free market will decide.
Possible GM structure:
All brands separated from the parent conglomerate (Chevrolet, Pontiac, Cadillac, GMC, Hummer, Holden, Open, Vauxhaul, Daewoo, Breckland – anything else I missed?).
These separations incorporate the design studios, dealership sales contracts (for those individual brands only) & repairs. They can strike out on their own for tooling and manufacturing but there will be great incentives to contract with the former parent.
GM then becomes a tooling creator, manufacturer, chassis & parts supplier to the now free-standing brands. Each brand can use (or not) the GM Platforms™ as the basis for their vehicles which are designed and customized by their own in-house designers with GM providing the know-how to build and assemble the parts.
You’ve effectively made the auto industry into a carbon copy of the PC industry! There is an underlying set of features & capabilities (the “chassis” offered by AMD or Intel) that incorporates various alternate components (Seagate or Hitachi hard drive? NVidia or ATI video card? Similar to whether you get the leather or cloth interior…) depending upon what brand (HP, IBM, Dell, Sony – a la Pontiac or Opel) you ultimately buy.
It’s not only been successful for the past 20+ years (the PC industry) but there’s been intense competition within the industry as a whole for the various features offered by all participants.
Do you want a cheap but functional PC for e-mail only? Then an all-in-one product from AMD is your choice.
Like to play games? Then you’re looking at the highest-performing chip from Intel or AMD coupled with the highest-performing video card from NVidia or ATI.
Why couldn’t the auto industry operate in the same fashion? Maybe my glasses are a bit too rose colored…
by reader tinman