Quote:
Originally Posted by JSH
Barra is far overpaid like all US CEOs but I can't really point to anything that she should be doing differently. She has been pulling out of unprofitable markets, cutting unprofitable models and trims, investing in a common and flexible platform for EVs to prepare for the future. Cadillac has been doing fantastically well and growing over the last 4-5 years. GM's profit margins have about doubled under her leadership but the market wants more.
The only big thing GM should do is drop GMC and Buick in the USA. It should have been done back in 2009 under bankruptcy when it would have been free.
Now GM would have to pay billions to buy back the dealerships. Maybe she can kill off just Buick. Buick used to exist so that Buick / GMC dealership would have cars to sell but now there is nothing the Buick sells that GMC doesn't sell under a different model name. Buick is a completely redundant brand in the USA.
GM lost money in Europe and RHD markets for decades - billions down the drain. Eventually it makes sense to admit defeat and focus on profitable markets.
What GM needs to do now is look for a good partner because they are too small to compete on their own against competitors double the size.
|
I felt the diversity of GM was pretty cool back in the day. Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick... they were all the same yet all different. In a way it was pretty cool, and I feel they were able to make enough of a difference to make the different vehicles feel kind of different even though they were all the same underneath.
But fastforward to today and I don't see the point in having two or three of everything. The Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon, the Chevy Express and GMC Savana, the Chevy Traverse and Buick Enclave. Maybe I'm just more familiar with older vehicles than new ones, but if I were looking for a vehicle under GM's lineup I wouldn't care if I got the Chevy or GMC or Buick version.