Local GM auto dealers - they ones that have been allowed to remain - are hoping that nothing has changed and that they can continue basically as if nothing has happened. I've heard several interviews with dealers expressing this point of view.
Unfortunately, this is wishful thinking. Things have changed, The dealer ranks have thinned. The brands are changing. Pontiac is no more, and Hummer has been sold. The parent company is no longer solvent. The parent company is no longer in control. No one knows if they can turn the corner on sales, rebound from no buyer confidence, keep dealers supplied with parts, and compete with other stronger companies.
Then, there's the warranty issue, but not to worry. The government has vowed to honor all warranties. I don't even want to think about how that might work.
One thing is clear, it's not business as usual.
──
For more information on my coaching and educational programs and services, visit my website stevehoffacker.com or go to my other blog homesalesinsights.com for additional sales tips, insights, and commentary. You can also listen to my free podcast messages at Steve Hoffacker's Happenings . © Steve Hoffacker, 2009. All Rights Reserved.
I sure don't trust the new and improved Government Motors.
Bob,
Why would anyone? This is likely only a stopgap until total meltdown anyway. :)
Steve
Its more of a jobs program. You just never know when it will end.
We Realtors were the first to face a whole new situation and we had to adapt to a new reality, now a lot of other industries are facing a big change. Let's see how ell they adapt. Uppps, it might not be the same, I nearly forgot that W E did not get any stimulus money.
Steve, Remember when "Lee" Iacocca took Chrysler out of bankruptcy and paid back Uncle Sam? I wonder why that model wasn't followed?
Eric,
Maybe this is part of the government's plan to "save" or create jobs. :)
Steve
Anne,
Very true, and we are free marketers where most of them are not. :)
Steve
Paul,
Lee had two things current leadership doesn't - vision and a plan. :)
Steve
Steve,
This is totally unchartered waters for everyone; I wouldn't want to be steering the ship.
Terry,
That is true, but it didn't have to come to this. I can't help but wonder if the government didn't steer the ship toward this dock on purpose. :)
Steve
What scares me is the ones hired to steer the ship know nothing about the industry or even business for that matter.
Makes me think they are just puppets on a string.
And let's take a look at who is on this team in-charge of dismantling GM.
The best and brightest?
Jun 1, 2009 4:35 PM by Ed Morrissey
Steve, warranty work won't be a problem. The bankruptcy judge will allow dealers to be paid for their warranty work.
Steve - don't worry, they will be carrying smaller cars, so they can fit more on the lot, thereby having more cars on the lot that won't be bought.
Steve, revisit history. GM was in trouble as early as 2007. In 2008 they got their first bailout. Obama withheld any more money until they could present a plan, showing the government how they could restructure. And now you're blaming this on him? Yes he's trying to save and create jobs, an estimated 450,000 jobs could be lost if GM does not survive.
Alice,
Agreed. We never should be on this road and now we have no map or compass. :)
Steve
Kris,
That assumes that there are enough dealers to go around (they've already said to be prepared to drive an extra distance to get warranty work done) and that they inventory enough parts - and that they can still pay their mechanics. :)
Steve
Mike,
Great - that helps with the production model but does for the sales side. :)
Steve
Terry,
It doesn't matter when it happened - it is still wrong. Bad fiscal policy, bad example for capitalism. Saving 450,000 jobs is not the same as creating them if not one person is added to the payroll. The plain fact is that no business is too big to fail, and when it does, others will come in behind it and do much better.:)
Steve
Yes but Steve, we have no idea what the outcome of this may be? There may be jobs created. That said, I would think, for the sake of the economy, that adding 20,000 more unemployed is better than adding and estimated 483,000.
Terry,
I agree that we have no idea where this is going to end up, but I don't like the direction. It is not the government's job to keep people employed. This is not anywhere in the Constitution. :)
Steve
Gosh darn Steve, just cause it aint in the constitution doesn't mean it aint the right thing to do for the country. There's lots of things that ain't in the constitution, like invading innocent countries, but we do it anyway :-) I think if you look at what FDR did to keep people employed and out of the bread lines, you might find it was the "best" thing to do. If you can't go along with the government providing jobs, then you must think of what this country would look like with 30% unemployment and you could be next!
Terry,
Actually waging war is in the Constitution. Providing jobs and preventing unemployment is not. :)
Steve
Steve, I do know the Constitution does say congress has the authority to wage war, but doesnt say we should (invade innocent countries just because). But what the heck does the constitution have to do with providing jobs and preventing unemployment? Isn't that the right thing to do? Don't we have a moral obligation to others in this country, or is it just a free for all?
Steve, Maybe the government can help GM turn a profit just as well as they took care of Amtrack. I feel bad for Ford with the Government subsidizing both Chrysler and G M where does Ford have a chance it will be like trying to start a Rail Line or competing with the Post Office for first class mail.
Terry,
You are correct. The Constitution has nothing to do with providing jobs and preventing unemployment. Under capitalism, the government has no responsibility to provide jobs. :)
Steve
Hugh,
This is the best thing that could have happened for Ford. :)
Steve
It isn't your Dad's Oldsmobile anymore.
Ryan,
That's quite the understatement. We'll have to see if Olds even remains a brand. :)
Steve