|
|
  
 
Subject:
Re: Obama now owns GM
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:11:23 -0700
From: WayneC <WayneC(at)linkline.moc>
Subject: Re: Obama now owns GM
Lines: 32
Bytes: 3040
________________________________________________
JimH wrote:
> I worked for IBM in the 90`s when they were bleeding red ink and it
> looked like they were on the verge of collapse. John Akers, a long time
> IBM employee and executive was at the helm. He had to step down in order
> to bring about the change in the company necessary for survival. Like
> Wagoner, he was not just a part of the good old boy network in the
> company, he was the core of it. IBM brought in an outsider, and turned
> the company around.
>
I, too, worked for IBM at the time... I was among the 100k employees who
were "downsized", depriving me of the 5 most lucrative years that
determine retirement income.
> I remember reading an article at least 10-15
> years ago that forecast this exact set of events for GM. I didn`t or
> more probably couldn`t believe it at the time.
I worked with a very astute senior IBM salesman in the early 70`s who
went to an extended seminar in Japan on quality issues; while there he
toured the auto companies since he serviced the American auto industry.
He was more than impressed by what he saw, he was alarmed! When he
returned, he put together a lengthy presentation warning the American
car companies of what was coming, telling them they needed to get their
act together or go the way of the consumer electronics industry. He
began a crusade to wake the industry to the coming threat, and gave
numerous presentations to a spectrum of Detroit auto execs in the Big 3.
I found his message compelling and his sincerity refreshing. He said his
message was mostly met with a yawn; he finally got frustrated and left
IBM to start his own computer leasing company. That was 35 years ago.
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:59:50 -0700
From: WayneC <WayneC(at)linkline.moc>
Subject: Re: Obama now owns GM
Lines: 46
Bytes: 3993
________________________________________________
CardsFan wrote:
> "WayneC" <WayneC(at)linkline.moc> wrote in message
> news:ReCdnesQTdMLxk_UnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(at)linkline.com...
>> Speaker of the Truth wrote:
>>> Ever hear the song "too much too little too late"
>>>
>>>
>> I`d argue that Wagoner was steadily doing the right things, but hampered
>> (slowed & blocked) by pesky little things like union contracts &
>> negotiations, local politics in every town affected by his proposed
>> changes, green laws, etc, etc. The guy was a 31-year employee, not an
>> outsider emotionally unaffected by the changes he attempted to make.
>
> The whole point is the corporation has to have someone with an entirely new
> agenda to survive, not someone who`s sitting around pining for the good old
> days. The automotive world has radically changed and if it does not adapt,
> GM is dead. It would have been dead already without taxpayer help, so Mr.
> Wagoner was out of a job either way.
>
My point is that Obama isn`t hampered by contractual legal agreements,
he proved that with the AIG bonuses.... Wagoner had to honor those
legalities. Obama can wheedle the democratic mayors (and the union
bosses) and promise them largesse from the US treasury to smooth over
the changes he`d like to make in the auto industry... Wagoner could not.
Obama could have done the wheedling and still leave Wagoner in charge of
the change, but he needed a boogeyman for us peons to blame.
I still think Wagoner did as much, and went as fast in bringing change,
as he was able to do, I do not think he was in the same arrogant mold as
the prior bean counters who ruined GM for so many years. I think he got
hit by a world-wide economic credit crunch at precisely the wrong time,
when company coffers were low (partly from the costs of changes he`d
been making), and before his changes began to pay off. You`ll note that
the governor of Michigan called Wagoner a "sacrificial lamb", noting the
many changes he`d already made and the much-improved products just going
into production, while still retaining the good will of the politicians
and union.
I would rather see a "car guy" in charge of GM, but as I recall, they
did have one of those in the late 80`s and he wasn`t up to the rest of
the job... to paraphrase what one TV commentator said, GM today is a
retirement and health benefits company that operates a car-making
business on the side to help defray the costs of it`s public service
obligations. I just happen to think Wagoner was closer to a "car guy"
than the string of financial guys that preceded him, and that he did
push change.
From: "CardsFan" <me(at)here.com>
Subject: Re: Obama now owns GM
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:18:12 -0400
Lines: 80
NNTP-Posting-Host: cfs98-112.cfs.purdue.edu
Bytes: 5457
________________________________________________
"WayneC" <WayneC(at)linkline.moc> wrote in message
news:bPKdnTJrLInEHk_UnZ2dnUVZ_rbinZ2d(at)linkline.com...
> CardsFan wrote:
>> "WayneC" <WayneC(at)linkline.moc> wrote in message
>> news:ReCdnesQTdMLxk_UnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(at)linkline.com...
>>> Speaker of the Truth wrote:
>>>> Ever hear the song "too much too little too late"
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I`d argue that Wagoner was steadily doing the right things, but hampered
>>> (slowed & blocked) by pesky little things like union contracts &
>>> negotiations, local politics in every town affected by his proposed
>>> changes, green laws, etc, etc. The guy was a 31-year employee, not an
>>> outsider emotionally unaffected by the changes he attempted to make.
>>
>> The whole point is the corporation has to have someone with an entirely
>> new agenda to survive, not someone who`s sitting around pining for the
>> good old days. The automotive world has radically changed and if it does
>> not adapt, GM is dead. It would have been dead already without taxpayer
>> help, so Mr. Wagoner was out of a job either way.
>>
> My point is that Obama isn`t hampered by contractual legal agreements, he
> proved that with the AIG bonuses.... Wagoner had to honor those
> legalities.
Like everyone else, Obama is bound by the law. His directive was to "find
any legal means" to reclaim the AIG bonuses. It was the House which passed
a law to tax the bonuses at 90%, a law which probably will run afoul of the
Constitution. Obama has not signaled support for that law.
> Obama can wheedle the democratic mayors (and the union bosses) and promise
> them largesse from the US treasury to smooth over the changes he`d like to
> make in the auto industry... Wagoner could not.
> Obama could have done the wheedling and still leave Wagoner in charge of
> the change, but he needed a boogeyman for us peons to blame.
They threw out the head of AIG too. The only thing Obama has said is that
he`s committed to a sustainable US auto industry, and that the government
will honor GM/Chrysler warranties. I concede that the only way Wagoner
could have "saved" the company was to take it into bankruptcy. Its legacy
costs would have forced that already had they not thrown themselves at the
feet of the taxpayer.
> I still think Wagoner did as much, and went as fast in bringing change, as
> he was able to do, I do not think he was in the same arrogant mold as the
> prior bean counters who ruined GM for so many years. I think he got hit by
> a world-wide economic credit crunch at precisely the wrong time, when
> company coffers were low (partly from the costs of changes he`d been
> making), and before his changes began to pay off. You`ll note that the
> governor of Michigan called Wagoner a "sacrificial lamb", noting the many
> changes he`d already made and the much-improved products just going into
> production, while still retaining the good will of the politicians and
> union.
I just bought a lightly used car this past weekend, a 2008 Acura TL that was
a dealer service department loaner. I looked hard at the Malibu, and every
single car I saw on the lot/showroom had fit and finish issues of one sort
or another. Panels didn`t align, gaps were inconsistent on opposite sides
of the car, etc. My honest opinion is that none of those cars would ever
have made it out of a Honda factory. It`s not American workers, my car was
made in Ohio. I blame the engineers for poor design. If you tell me that`s
because the bean counters won`t let the engineers do their thing, I can`t
argue with you because I don`t know the inner workings of the company.
> I would rather see a "car guy" in charge of GM, but as I recall, they did
> have one of those in the late 80`s and he wasn`t up to the rest of the
> job... to paraphrase what one TV commentator said, GM today is a
> retirement and health benefits company that operates a car-making business
> on the side to help defray the costs of it`s public service obligations. I
> just happen to think Wagoner was closer to a "car guy" than the string of
> financial guys that preceded him, and that he did push change.
Remember "Roger and Me" when Michael Moore was funny, before he became a
self-righteous jerk?
AJM
`93 40th Anniversary coupe, 6 sp (both tops)
NEXT POSTS:
| | |
