 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / GMC Cars / February 2006GM Turnaround Plans Lack Magnitude
Column: GM Turnaround Plans Lack Magnitude Click the link below to read the full story: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2006/02/10/ap2517054.html?partner=alerts ____________________________________________________________ Bankruptcy is cleaner and more effective > Bankruptcy is cleaner and more effective True. To hell with -the shareholders, -employees owed wages plus pension plus union contract, -the banks will take a percentage of their loans to own the restructured company. Which may then survive intact. Slowly killing the company all the wrong people can bail out and leave The villages around the factories that are slowly dying will deteriorate slowly Go into a quick bankruptcy and the villages will quickly revive and start again because they still have all the best people in there I have seen this happen over and over again In slow death then management and the banks syphon off as much as they can The best people in the towns and villages leave and because of hiring freezes the population gets older and when the company is all drained out the village is drained out too and nothing will replace it Unfortunately this has been going on for many years at GM In the JOBS bank the are a lot of oldtimers doing nothing The JOBS bank is receiving a lot of people and ever increasing numbers are going in there GM should have taken measures years ago but because they did not they should come clean now and go bankrupt before they cause more problems > Column: GM Turnaround Plans Lack Magnitude > > Click the link below to read the full story: > http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2006/02/10/ap2517054.html?partner=alerts > > ____________________________________________________________ GM doesn't really have a plan, or if they do then it isn't published. GM is hacking it's way along making up plays as it goes and hoping to find salvation around the next corner. Start by firing everyone who makes over $250,000 per year and then pay whatever you must to steal as much talent from Toyota, Honda and Nissan. And please, no more brain dead consumer products marketing idiots. John > GM doesn't really have a plan, or if they do then it isn't published. John, you must really have an axe to grind with GM to say such a dumb thing. You would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and just plain stupid not to be aware of all the cost cutting measures that GM has taken to return to profitability. GM is winning numerous quality awards for a range of vehicles. John, do you read the papers or listen to the news? When was the last time you looked at GM's Financial Statements? Their Plan is publicly laid out quite well in their Financial Statements for all to see. Or perhaps you'd prefer to keep getting your information from the tabloids, like Gosinn and Charge. They even offer a braille version for those like yourself with apparently poor eyesight or inability to read and comprehend. Frankly, I am getting sick of your ill-informed meanderings and malicious rants. It is one thing to have an opinion based on facts. It is quite another to offer a completely uninformed opinion, as you seem to do quite frequently. You, gosinnatgmaildotcom (Björn Helgason) and Charge seem to revel in your brainless speculation on the timing of GM's demise. John, GM will be around long after you Three Stooges are dead and gone. > GM is hacking it's way along making up plays as it goes and hoping to > find salvation around the next corner. No John, you are making up words as you go to express your dislike for GM. Why are you even in this News Group if you dislike GM and their products so much? > Start by firing everyone who makes over $250,000 per year and then pay > whatever you must to steal as much talent from Toyota, Honda and Nissan. John, you sound like a bitter old man who was fired by GM or one of its suppliers. This suggestion once again shows the illogic of your whole attitude. You advise us that GM should fire "everyone who makes over $250,000 per year". That is just plain silly John. You have no idea of the identities, intelligence or competence of "everyone who makes over $250,000 per year" at GM. And to even suggest that GM should seek to woo every man and woman working for "Toyota, Honda and Nissan" and then to "and then pay whatever you must to steal" them is an absolutely stupid thing to say John. As with the GM employees, you have absolutely no idea of the identities, intelligence or competence of any employees at Toyota, Honda and Nissan. On a further note John, explain to us all again how it would help GM to fire "everyone who makes over $250,000 per year" and replace them with people who make even more??? After all, you did say "pay whatever you must". > And please, no more brain dead consumer products marketing idiots. John, it has become quite apparent who the idiots are. We can only hope that the numerous mindless posts that you just bombarded us with are the result of you waking up on the wrong side of a hangover! *LOL* Surely no one in their right mind could intentionally post such meaningless tripe! There's a place for you, Gosinn and Charge over at alt.idiots.bitter God is dead - Friedrich Nietzsche Friedrich Nietzsche is dead - God > You, > gosinnatgmaildotcom (Björn Helgason) and Charge seem to revel in your > brainless speculation on the timing of GM's demise. John, GM will be > around long after you Three Stooges are dead and gone. > God is dead > - Friedrich Nietzsche > > Friedrich Nietzsche is dead > - God *LOL* Okay gosinn, I'll take you out of that grouping. You are clearly a lot brighter than those other two. My apologies. >>GM doesn't really have a plan, or if they do then it isn't published. > > John, you must really have an axe to grind with GM to say such a dumb > thing. You would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and just plain stupid not > to be aware of all the cost cutting measures that GM has taken to > return to profitability. I have read it all. When exactly does GM expect to turn a profit again? The answer is, they either do not know or are not saying. A play with no end posts is not a real plan. GM is taking many actions, but they do not have a credible plan. You seem to confuse actions with planning. John I watch a similar thing happening in slow motion with the shipbuilding in Sweden Kockums in Malmo was similar size company to Sweden as GM is to the US Kockums was allowed to die slowly The government paid through the nose over many years What happened was that the banks got away scot free They got their loans paid back The workers slowly drifted away The best first All of south Sweden was in ICU and hardly anything happened for years Kockums finally went belly up and south Sweden is slowly healing again Similar incident happened several years later Another shipbuilder in Gothenburg went into trouble Having learnt the lesson government did nothing Could probably not afford to no help was given Immediately after the sudden bankrupt all the villages around Gothenburg went bussing with life The former employees started new industries The difference being that in the case of Malmo all the best people slowly went away In Gothenburg all the best people were still there and started new companies Because GM is so big and has had growth for so long I bet they are not very knowledgeable how to handle a situation of decreasing sales I am pretty sure they have taken all kinds of measures to improve their techniques and have better cars now But what they are up against has little to do with tehnique and quality anymore The are fighting badwill and overproduction There is no easy way of turning their problems and questionable if they can Especially as the problems are so widespread and unfamiliar I have no interest in any of this except I am interested in large corporations and how they manage their affairs in different situations I guess Ford is facing similar problems as GM but because GM is the world leader and it is so unexpected to see them go into dire straits then I have been watching their case more than otherwise I am sure there are and will be a lot of tragedies around GM facilities when they are closed down and no fun in that > I watch a similar thing happening in slow motion with the shipbuilding > in Sweden gosinn, I'm not familiar with your comparative company, but I would suggest once again that GM will be alive and well, long after you and I are dead and gone. They are having problems. They are addressing their problems. They still have a strong capital base and a lot of very bright senior management. Their anticipated demise is greatly exaggerated. >> The are fighting badwill and overproduction > They still have a strong capital base and a lot of very > bright senior management. I am sure you are right about them having bright people > Their anticipated demise is greatly exaggerated That remains to be seen Badwill and goodwill is always very very difficult to estimate and especially when it is changing Goodwill usually grows very very slowly and is a big asset for a company but is difficult to put a finger on from a balance sheet Badwill can happen much more quickly and is devastating We have never witnessed badwill for very long in any company How long GM can withstand those forces is uncertain That is why I am particularly interested in watching GM IBM faced a similar change in fortune from 1980 having a huge goodwill in their books It changed into badwill and it almost killed the company ten years later and incidentally had $8.000.000.000 loss one year They ousted the top managers, and have made a remarkable turnaround but have also changed from a hardware company into a software company I can hardly imagine GM changing from a hardware company to a software company but who knows Maybe they stop producing cars themselves and just turn into services and banking That way they may live on with half the staff like IBM did > >> The are fighting badwill and overproduction Determination of whether a company has value in Goodwill or a liability in "Badwill" is a completely subjective issue. I sense from your writings that you feel there is a lot of badwill towards GM. I, on the other hand, feel that GM has a lot of value in Goodwill, simply because I have had such favorable experiences with GM vehicles. gosinn, of 26 vehicles I have owned in my life, 20 of them have been GM (Most of them were purchased new) and I have never once had any significant issues with any of them. The same can't be said for the Ford, one of the 2 Dodges that I owned or the VW. They all had major issues that cost me a lot of time, money and frustration. In my subjective opinion, the latter 3 automakers have a lot of "badwill" from my prespective and I will probably never buy any of their products again. > > They still have a strong capital base and a lot of very > > bright senior management. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > That remains to be seen gosinn, I'm sure that you will recall that Chrysler was once in far worse shape than GM and they not only survived, but thrived in their reincarnation, under Lee Iaccoca. > Badwill and goodwill is always very very difficult to estimate and > especially when it is changing [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > We have never witnessed badwill for very long in any company I agree with you completely on this comment. It is a dynamic environment. > How long GM can withstand those forces is uncertain > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > They ousted the top managers, and have made a remarkable turnaround but > have also changed from a hardware company into a software company I remember IBM only too well gosinn. One day, the company I worked for was extolling the virtues of IBM's stellar management and the next day, IBM was a Wall Street bum. Our Human Resource Department had spent a lot of money studying IBM's management techniques, only to abort the whole study! *LOL* > I can hardly imagine GM changing from a hardware company to a software > company but who knows [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That way they may live on with half the staff like IBM did Or they could die trying! *LOL* There was nothing wrong with IBM's management techniques What was wrong was they had stopped using them correctly after the founders One of the things they did was dishing out dinner for two If you give it to the right people - fine If you give it to the wrong people - worse than nothing They were giving rewards to the wrong people for a long long time That more or less killed IBM Similar techniques used to make GM great under Alfred P. Sloane Current management does not seem to master it > There was nothing wrong with IBM's management techniques > What was wrong was they had stopped using them correctly after the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > They were giving rewards to the wrong people for a long long time > That more or less killed IBM gosinn, this occurs all too frequently in a lot of sizeable corporations. Incompetent mid-level and upper-level executives surround themselves with their cronies and reward them for being "yes-men", rather than objectively assessing their performance. > Similar techniques used to make GM great under Alfred P. Sloane > Current management does not seem to master it The irony in this is of course that by todays standards, A.P.S. structured an "old boys" network of executives and dealers that excluded women from "the club". GM is now working hard to correct this flaw in A.P.S.'s strategy, but many of the old guard chauvinistically think that this change is to blame for GM's current woes. I have not read as much of GMs management history as I would like to do There was something mythical about how GM become so very great Everything seemed to go right I would also like to know more about why Toyota is growing as it does I have studied that a bit more than GM I have read quite a bit about Ford and its ups and downs In more or less all these cases very much is based on individuals at the top and of course what kind of people are chosen to assist the top Unfortunately for many of these the good intentions get watered down by middle management and people just trying to cover their own a.ses and have no idea about the greater good of the company All boils down to how the customers are treated I have had a Toyoto Hilux for a few years and I was interested in how they register everything about the car I own I have to say that even if everything done is way much better than I have experienced with my other brand cars then there are examples of the proceedures not working exactly like they should It is also interesting that when discrepancies are discovered things are not covered up and the reason for the negligance is corrected You have to have a general rule and all need to follow it Rules with exceptions are no rules > I have read it all. When exactly does GM expect to turn a profit > again? The answer is, they either do not know or are not saying. A > play with no end posts is not a real plan. John, if you had read it all, you wouldn't be saying that GM doesn't have a plan. Have you read their notes to their SEC filings? Do you even know what SEC filings are John? Do you know the difference between a Balance Sheet, a Consolidated Balance Sheet, an Income Statement, a Consolidated Income Staement, a Statement of Sources and Uses of Funds or a Schedule of Retained Earnings? When you can honestly answer "Yes" to all of those questions John, you can then say " I not only read it all, but I understand it all." And you clearly don't at this time John. > GM is taking many actions, but they do not have a credible plan. You > seem to confuse actions with planning. John, neither I, nor the investing community cares what you think is credible. Because you really don't appear to have a clue about GM's financial situation and/or plans. So cut the B.S. rhetoric and come up with an original thought of your own - based on fact, not your misunderstanding of fact. ;-) > On 2/14/2006 11:47 PM ... Cool Jet wrote: >> I have read it all. When exactly does GM expect to turn a profit [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > with an original thought of your own - based on fact, not your > misunderstanding of fact. ;-) Since you've read the plan, when does the plan show GM returning to profit? I haven't read it. But what I hear John saying is that he has read the plan and stated that the plan doesn't indicate when profits are expected to return. I'm curious...is that true? > Since you've read the plan, when does the plan show GM returning to > profit? If you are truly interested in GM's financial health jcr, you should make it a point of reading the company's financial reports and press releases. This information and their SEC filings are all available for the world to see at www.gm.com under "Investor Relations". > I haven't read it. But what I hear John saying is that he has read the > plan and stated that the plan doesn't indicate when profits are expected > to return. I'm curious...is that true? jcr, that's what tells me that Mr. Horner either hasn't read or doesn't understand GM's financial plans. GM continues to strive towards a return to profitability in fiscal 2006. Here's an excerpt from one of GM's recent press releases that points out their cost-cutting measures, which are capsulized as follows: "GM previously announced plans to reduce its North American structural costs by $6 billion on a running-rate basis by the end of 2006, and further plans to reduce its annual net material costs by $1 billion. GM signed a historic agreement with the UAW in October and announced a capacity reduction plan in November that included ceasing operations at nine assembly, stamping and powertrain facilities. Additionally, an aggressive target was recently announced to reduce global structural costs to 25 percent of automotive revenue by 2010 from the 2005 level of about 34 percent on a global basis." These measures, if acheived, would restore the company to a level of substantial profitability by the end of '06. Here's a link to the article: http://media.gm.com:8221/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.c om/gmnews/viewmonthlyreleasedetail.do?domain=589&docid=22849 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.