Rick Wagoner Stepping Down
Ok, Rick Wagoner is going to step down. I would love to hear everyone's viewpoint on this move. Is this good? Is it bad? Should he have started "pressing for change" a whole lot earlier? What does this mean for the Dealers?
Is the Govt. going to dictate what GM builds? I would love to hear everyone's thoughts!
Is the Govt. going to dictate what GM builds? I would love to hear everyone's thoughts!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Courtney Cole on -
I just read that Fritz Henderson is going to step in as the CEO for GM. This is FANTASTIC news! We saw him speak at NADA and we all walked away saying, "This guy SHOULD be the President of GM."
He is super intelligent and he can explain things exactly the way they exist. Everyone walked away from the congressional hearings saying Ford's CEO Mulally was the sharpest of the 3. Fritz Henderson will be an OUTSTANDING leader. In my opinion, this should have happened a long time ago.
I hate that GM is back to being in the "bad" headlines. However, I have a ton of confidence in Fritz Henderson! He will make the difficult decisions and take action.
-
Permalink Reply by Gene Daughtry on -
I do not like the implication that he was "forced" to step down by the government.
There is way to much government getting into business.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris Wray on -
Couldn't agree more Gene. I just asked a co-worker, "Since when can the government force a CEO of a public company to resign?"
-
Permalink Reply by Courtney Cole on
-
Normally I would agree with this statement but when you have to ask the government for money, it probably gives them a whole lot more power. Not that I agree with the govt calling the shots, but I would venture to bet that there is a whole lot of behind the scenes "stuff" that we do not know. I would not be surprised if the bondholders forced this issue. If Fritz is left to run the deal, I think he will do a great job.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Rees on -
In my opinion Wagoner should have stepped down a long time ago. I think this is great news for GM dealers - it seems obvious that the government will not allow GM to fail.
-
Permalink Reply by Charles Jaekel on -
One knew this eventually going to happen sooner or later. It's unfortunate though that the Obama Administration had to pull the strings.
I have heard from a few other GM dealers that Mr. Wagoner needed to go. Having just read GM and Chrysler viability determination plan...both companies are in a world of hurt.
-
Permalink Reply by David Ruggles on -
When can the government force a CEO of a public company to resign? Answer: When the government (taxpayers) are the majority stockholders.
Courtney, I don't think the bondholders are running anything these days. The bondholders and the UAW are having a "stare down" to see who blinks first. The Obama administration has had enough and will lower the boom on both parties. It seems the UAW believes that Obama will give them a better deal because of their support during the election and his stated committment to the "domestic" auto business. They are about to find out differently. Obama put Wagner in the position of forcing the concessions out of the two competing entities and he didn't get the job done. Now he's out. Obama doesn't want to be seen as the one who forced hard concessions on the UAW but he's pragmatic enough to understand what has to be done.
I'm fine with Henderson. I hope he keeps Lutz around for a while. Obama is right about GM's failed business model, which was based on gas guzzlers with no contingency plan. But it isn't the Detroit 3's fault the financial system melted down at the same time fuel prices spiked. They were left with no way to obtain traditional financing. GM still had assets they could have collateralized. It's not GM's fault this country doesn't have a true energy policy like the rest of the industrialized world. With an economy addicted to cheap fuel they built the vehicles they needed to build in light of their uncompetitive legacy costs.
The danger now is that the gov't will GM build vehicles that the public won't want to buy if fuel prices stay low. Why do all the other developed nations manage their economies with fuel taxes? What makes us smarter than they are? What makes Americans entitled to ride around in huge gas guzzlers, which adds demand and tends to drive up fuel prices for everyone else in the world? Which makes us strategically vulnerable to folks that don't like us very much?
Regarding Ford: I don't think Mullaly is as smart as people think. After all, he's the guy who revived the Taurus name after Ford ruined it by making the Taurus the most ubiquitous fleet car in history. I believe the Ford family gave Mullaly strict "marching orders." The Ford family owns a special class of stock that allows the family to maintain control of the company. If they had had to go to the government for assistance, that control would have ceased. I believe they told him to lay in credit lines and cash, and for that they all look smarter than everyone else. I like the idea of their EcoBoost engines, slated for introduction soon. The new Lincoln MKS is beautiful on the outside, but the really scrimped on the door panels and some interior refinements. These are things that can be straightened out, but in this era the bean counters don't seem to know the difference between "cost" and "investment."
-
Permalink Reply by aaron on -
My feelings are this Rick Wagoner was there too long he did nothing in the USA his focus was overseas so therefore it's time to move on to another direction to save gm and chrysler too He is like any other auto mftr CEO never sold a car nrver worked in a dealership so he has no real experience.
-
Permalink Reply by Lawson Owen on -
I think in the short term things are going to get very difficult for dealers. Cash will get tight and slow to come for the dealers.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Stanton on -
My problem with all of these people in this scenario is that none of them from the cheif idiot in charge, his task force of cronies to the guys in charge in Detroit, NONE of them have ever worked in the real world ever.
Not one of them including Geitner could back into the numbers of a call back sheet, nor could they figure out how to set fixed operations in a real world situation. As for THE CARS people didn't want and GAS GUZZLERS... More American Cars get 30+ miles per gallon than any other manufacture, plus someone has been buying them, I know we sold 600 of them last year on a small independent lot.
As for Trucks I will ask this question, 'Can a contractor haul supplies in a civic?'
what a pure waste of time and effort, because of the announcement on Sunday the Market opened in a freefall plunge.... Way to go Mr. Sotero ( Obama's actual name)
-
Permalink Reply by David Ruggles on
-
Jack,
Here's a news flash for you. The Detroit 3 CAN make vehicles that get good fuel economy. They just can't be profitable doing it given their legacy costs and other inefficiencies. If their cost structure changes, they can thrive. That's what this entire deal is about.
No one expects contractors and farmers to be able to haul in a Civic. It's never been about that. The issue is that the only way the Detroit 3 have been able to survive to this point, even before the gov't stepped in, is because of cheaper fuel than that paid by the rest of the developed world.
I suspect Geithner could back into a deal. Bernanke is the brains of the deal anyway. He scored a record on his SATs, so he obviously isn't a dummy. If you disagree with him, that doesn't mean he is wrong and you are right.
It's a dangerous deal to base your premise on what the stock market did on a particular day. What will you say if it goes back up, GM survives, the taxpayers are paid back, and we avoid a catastrophic meltdown of the industry and its suppliers? I lived through these same gloom and doom predictions during the REAGAN era when Chrysler was bailed out. That "bailout" bought Chrysler a few decades and cost the taxpayers nothing. It happened under the aegis of that old socialist RR, helped along by the infamous "pinko" Lee Iacocca.
I didn't get the Sotero reference. Please enlighten me.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Stanton on
-
The reference to building fuel efficient cars was about the fact the government keeps referring to the car companies building cars no one wants as well as trucks and suv's..... hello the American people still buy them and always will. The financial crisis hurt us more than anything else. Their legacy costs and union overcharges? The companies have needed to shed them since Toyota started building in the US, only the government will not allow it.
As for Tim Geithner backing into a deal, He finished well back in his class in economics, that's why he went into government not Wall Street. Geithner cannot even see the fact that the first domino in this tragedy was Gas prices spiking artificially due to the commodity brokers manipulating the market. The second domino was the sub prime market, when the poor income people had a choice gas, food or mortgage payment most went for food and gas. So what did them government spend the 1st stimulus on? More social programs, a real Genius at the helm.
Oh yeah, fuel cheaper than the rest of the world? I had been stationed in Europe, 85 - 90% of the fuel cost over there is a built in VAT tax, that way the government can afford to pay for their socialistic programs. If our government will stop taxing us to death and quit trying to play nurse maid to every citizen most of the problems we face today would never have materialized.
Sotero - Barack Hussein Obama was legally adopted in Jakarta by his step father. Hence the Fact his actual given name is Barak Hussein Sotero. Legally changed by adoption never recinded.
© 2010 Created by Greg Goebel.
