Blogs Car Info Our Show Deals Mechanics Files Vehicle Donation

Possible GM name change?

I read today that GM is considering changing its name. The marketing gurus out there are saying it’s not a bad idea, and citing examples of revived companies that have done this.

What do you guys think?

Can’t think of a serious one but after we see what kind of products and how reformed the new company is I think a new name will just leap off the paper.

Is it realistic to think that a new way of life will come out of this situation? Events have been pretty dramatic/drastic or are the events that we are seeing just for show and nothing has really changed?

One thing that does bother me and it is off topis MB so I will ask for a pardon, is the full electric car battery situation. How did it get decided that Korea will be making these batterys? I really wanted this to be U.S. produced as I think the key in our survival is for us to start making things again,actually producing a product.

So for me the new name will have to wait until we see the new company.

I supported GM and Chrysler through this whole mess but after listening to these guys in these hearings and their rationale for cutting dealers, and the plant closings, and lay offs, and so on, I have little faith in them. Do they think we are stupid in thinking if they call it a Gazette, we won’t know its a Chev? The marketing stupidity of these people never ceases to amaze me.

They put finance people in charge that could care less about the long term, don’t change designs for ten years, dump Olds and Pontiac but keep Buick that no one under 85 would buy, send their manufacturing around the world and cut US jobs, and they think the problem is a name? The same guys that gave us the glitzy Escalade? For what possible purpose? Sheesh. Long live Ford I guess. Only one I ever owned was a 73 Lincoln but that may change.

What I wanted was a good US car company. Making a variety of good designs with quality workmanship, in US plants, with US labor, at a competitive price. What’s wrong with that?

Korea doesn’t make the batteries, a company in Korea does. A buyer puts out a purchase specification and gets responses from interested parties. They describe what they will build, how they will do it, how much it will cost, and where they will do it. The last one is the least important. But it is important to the extent that the workers must be thought of as capable of manufacturing the batteries.

As to a name change, it would not matter to me. If it makes them feel better, I suppose they could do it. Hey, if the change their name to New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc will Toyota be part of the mix? :wink:

“…but keep Buick that no one under 85 would buy…”

GM is an international company. Buick is the most highly sought after brand in China. You weren’t on their mind when they made that decision.

I read in last week’s Business Week that the newly redesigned Buick Lacrosse (2010 model?) is going to be marketed to young upwardly mobile types who would normally look at cars like BMW or Lexus. The reason for this is that the median age of Buick drivers in the US is now 67 years of age.
If Buick retains that demographic, in just a few years a major part of their market will be dead or at least unable to drive. Hence, the attempt to interest younger buyers in Buicks.

Supposedly the new Lacrosse has much more “hip” styling and it is laden with gadgetry that should appeal to younger buyers. Also, instead of advertising mostly on PGA TV programs, Buick will switch to NFL programming for their advertising.

This is all a worthwhile effort, as long as GM remembers that younger drivers will not like the traditional Buick style of handling. If those yuppies take test drives and find out that sharp cornering causes the car to heel over on its suspension stops, all the advertising in the world will not help. Hopefully GM will have the sense to make Buicks into decently handling cars–for the first time ever.

You need no pardon, my friend. All those who help others out of the goodness of their souls are welcome.

I have mixed emotions about these off-shore vendor issues. On the one hand, I, as a former denizen of the shop floor, would like to see manufacturing back in the U.S. On the other hand, I realize that trying to preserve U.S. manufacturing here by buying here parts that can be more cheaply purchased from an offshore supplier will not make us competitive on the world or even domestic market. I think we need to think globally. If we can produce and compete more effectively by importing batteries, then we should. That will allow us to comnpete better both here and abroad. Losing the market due to a procurement policy that makes us noncompetative will lose us more jobs than it will gain.

This is a tough question. One without an easy answer.

That’s the thing though. Buick was the good ride and Riv. styling provided a little better look and sport but still comfort on the road. The handling was Pontiac and Olds. So again what is the rationale for us paying billions so that the Chinese can drive Buicks??? Is this making sense to anyone?? Yet if they simply provided the same Caprice that they do for the Arabs, it would be a big seller in the US.

We’ll see. The Regatta (I think that was the name) was actually a really clean coupe. But Buick was unable or unwilling to step out of its own box and market it differently.

Cadillac division did a great job creating a new identifty. Buick division cannot seem to do so. When it looks in the mirror it sees itself the same way it has for decades, and that’s how it markets.

If GM made the batteries would it be GM making the batteries or the U.S. making the batteries? Thank you for pointing out my inference that the Korean government had a hand in getting the contract for the batteries for a Korean company as it is only speculation on my part.

In todays climate of government control of industry having our (is it yours also?) government dictate where these bateries will be produced is fairly low down the line in the level of government influence.

If these batteries do get produced in multi-million quanities I think it will be sheer folly to allow them to be produced outside the U.S.,we need production jobs,badly.

Could you see us freeing ourselves from outside oil but linking ourselves to outside production of these bateries? what would we have gained?

Actually, I opined that the Korean government had little to do with it. Now, they might make sweetheart deals like many US states do to get a big factory located there, but that should be transparent to GM. I agree with MB (posted below) concerning where batteries should be made. I’m for the lowest long term cost, which will include excellent quality.

“I read in last week’s Business Week that the newly redesigned Buick Lacrosse (2010 model?) is going to be marketed to young upwardly mobile types who would normally look at cars like BMW or Lexus.”

GM has said for years that they want to compete with Lexus using the Buick brand. They want to compete with BMW using Cadillac. Maybe the lines are fuzzing. GM has shown a willingness to ignore the corporate style guide lately. The old Chevy Malibu was a style guide car. The new one is not. The project manager for the new Malibu specifically requested a waiver from the CEO to ignore the style guide. He got it, and the new Malibu is a big improvement over the old one.

The issue of where the batteries are made is more than a issue of where the best price comes from, it is a issue of national security. If things go well millions upon millions of these or some type of similar battery will be made,they must be U.S. made due to their significance in the overall economy. I wonder if this Korean company can even produce these batteries in the quanties needed to turn the U.S. into a electric car nation.

We would not be any better of in securing the energy source for our personal transportation vehicles if we moved the source from the volitale Middle-east to the volitale Korean pennisula. We need security in our energy source.

We do have plenty of idle American production facilites with plenty of workers,it just seems like a perfect product for American factories to produce. If the product needs to be subsidized by the Government well we already have both feet into that area.

We need a product that the workers can make and that the consumer needs. Make something,build something,fix something, enough with this service dominated economy

I Remember Pretty Cool (Hot?) Buicks During The First Pontiac GTO Era. It Was A Sky Hawk GS, I Believe. Does That Sound Right?

I could see somebody at the factory throwing a spoiler on a Buick and a couple of bucket seats and a throaty exhaust system. I’ve got to have something to replace a Pontiac some day. By the way, I’ve read from a couple of different authorities that the Pontiac name will be revived somewhere down the road. That’s if Government Motors doesn’t self destruct.


Hopefully that Buick would have a suspension upgraded from their usual “marshmallow” springs and struts.

I’ve heard somewhere that Ford wants to buy Pontiac. Not sure how true that is, but Pontiac does seem to fit the demographics Ford is going after now.

“The issue of where the batteries are made is more than a issue of where the best price comes from, it is a issue of national security.”

The same argument was made for the steel industry. Yet, we still seem to be just fine. There is still steel manufactured here, but not nearly in the quantities it was in the 1970s when the national security argument was made. And steel workers did move on. I certainly did, and it’s the best thing that ever happened to me. No offense meant to the steel industry; I had a great time and remember those 12 years fondly.

Look out your window do you see all the problems we are having? It is because we have exported most of our production jobs,things are not just fine.

Muscle Car Buick.

I have been calling them General Morons for a long time.