spend matters spend matters About this site
Advertise with Spend Matters
Advertise with Spend Matters
 

July 29, 2010

 

Obama Spells Out Some Tough Love to GM and Chrysler

While I have not spent more than a few minutes reading Obama's latest words about the government's plan for GM and Chrysler, I can say my initial reaction is that I'm glad we have a President who is finally showing some tough love to Detroit. The next 6 months could be very painful for the entire automotive (and lower tier manufacturing) supply chain as a result, but we need a bit of darwinism introduced into the situation. I heard someone talking earlier today about GM essentially being in the business of taking care of pensioners and selling cars as a means to achieve this objective. Clearly, something is wrong this picture and Obama appears to realize this, cutting off the unlimited government funds checkbook (and not wanting to have the government take over GM). I also agree with his harsh suggestions to Chrysler: close the deal with Fiat, restructure or liquidate in the next 30 days. Finally, the Feds put on a Spend Management hat when it comes to taxpayer dollars and Detroit. The only piece I'm not so sure about is having the government take over warranty liability for GM and Chrysler, but I suppose that will help them continue to market to customers even if one or both goes through Chapter 11 (which is looking like the only course for GM). As to Chrysler, I'd bet that Chapter 7 (liquidation) is a greater possibility, but still, they need to sell the cars already sitting on dealer lots. What do you think? And what do you think the supply chain / supply risk impact will be?

- Jason Busch


TweetBacks
Comments
theuncleanmasses's Gravatar I just wish 10% of the stipulations put on the auto industry had been applied to the free money faucet the banking industry has been drinking from. The auto industry is paying the price for 1) the overall meltdown of the economy brought on by the greed of the banking industry and 2) never standing up to the demands of the UAW.
# Posted By theuncleanmasses | 3/31/09 4:34 AM
Hunter's Gravatar Theuncleanmasses: You got it RIGHT ON. Reminds me of Arthur Andersen being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sometimes to fix things, you have to blow them up (pardon the expression). That is the case with GM. Not amount of tinkering, reorging, etc is going to set them straight. Too many really bad policies have create an environment where they will never be competitive. When is the UAW going to do the right thing here?
# Posted By Hunter | 3/31/09 4:58 AM
Dick Locke's Gravatar Mr Masses:

I have to add some points beyond your numbers 1 and 2:

3. Inbred management with no political sense. They have fought every safety improvement back to seat belts. They are still fighting CAFE mileage requirements. Some vocally dispute global warming.

4. Too many crappy designs. Read Matt Bai's recent NYT column about his rental Pontiac almost turning him against government help

5. A rigid supply chain with a focus on low parts inventory and an inherent loss of flexibility due to guaranteeing forecasts

There's probably a 6 or 7...
# Posted By Dick Locke | 3/31/09 5:44 AM
Jason Busch's Gravatar Dick,

So why did GM get their China strategy right, while blundering the US and ROW? What are the lessons?
# Posted By Jason Busch | 3/31/09 6:09 AM
About Us | Advertising and Sponsorships | Advisory Services | Contact Us   © 2004-2010 Spend Matters, LP All rights reserved