Thursday

Who killed General Motors?

Watched an interesting show last night ... about electric cars. Normally, I don't think I'd be this interested in the concept - except it costs ALL of us hundreds and thousands of dollars to deal with the idiocy of our leaders. PLUS, riding my bike every day sucks, and to be honest can be scary, with all the cars on the road.


Because of this - I've become interested in the future of the car market.


Anyhow ...

Electric Cars have had 'potential' commercial viability since the 90's.

Ultimately, HOWEVER, GM (the leader of the technology at the time) moth-balled the entire concept because of lots and lots and lots financial rhetoric.


The interesting twist on it is this ...

General Motors Corp. is in danger of losing its 76-year title as the world's sales leader, as totals for 2007 released on Wednesday showed the automaker in a virtual tie with Toyota Motor Corp.


Toyota - who was the only large auto manufacturer who has been willing to keep the electric market alive - has slowly taken over for General Motors.



And Finally this ...

Toyota surpassed General Motors in worldwide vehicle sales during the first three months of this year, marking the end of one of the longest runs of dominance in all of global industry and another milestone in America's long decline from unchallenged industrial pre-eminence.



Photo from http://i.treehugger.com
Watch the show, Who Killed the Electric Car, and you'll see that GM deserves to be killed. They devastated, what could have been an excellent concept, for their own greed.

And I'm NOT talking about environmental protection. That doesn't even factor into my discussion AT ALL. I'm talking about cost savings on fuel and vehicle parts maintenance. And JOBS for all those laid of GM employees - because GM was too short-sighted, and greedy, to see what they had.


D.R.I.P. General Motors! (Don't Rest In Peace)

4 comments:

GO TEAM USA! said...

Speer Blogger,
Don't you think GM would sell as many of the electric cars years ago if the public was willing to buy them? You are not aware that the government/people were not willing to implement the infrastructure to support the electric vehicle when it was 1st introduced. GM ultimately bought back every electric vehicle it produced (at its own expense) as not to dissatisfy any of its customers. GM paid millions of dollars to bring this vehicle to market; unfortunately, the market was prepared to do the same.

Our Blogs said...

Hi - and thank you for the comment. It's actually good to see other folks are at least interested in this topic.

Probably where I agree with you the most - is on the losses that GM had to take in getting the car to the market, and in the early costs to continue development of the car.

However, I think the Toyota Prius, the recent massive dumping of bigger vehicles and SUV's, and future developments of vehicle battery production have proven to be very, very useful in making electric cars much more market viable.

As far as the 'market' buying it - I believe that is purely marketing driven. I think Media (and GM's marketing) have done a terrible job at letting American's know this technology was viable and available. If the right marketing is implemented, people will want to buy. True - maybe the 90's wasn't the right time for it - BUT if GM was on top of their game, they would have recognized some signs of interest from the market, otherwise why would Toyota have even attempted the Prius?

But, I think one of the most exciting parts of the video is the ending ... where they talk about the Toyota Prius (a car that is solidly on the U.S. market) becoming plug-in capable. And they don't just infer wierd, off-the-wall plug-ins ... NO! They 're talking about plugging them in through a 120V adapter. A person could do that right at home. Then the same person could choose whether or not they want to use electric or gasoline to power their car. A plug-n-play Toyota Prius with gas prices up near $4 a gallon would be a hit - I'm almost positive of it!

I think your point - about the market - IS VALID, because most Americans won't change unless it hurts. Which I think $4 a gallon DID hurt them. I guess my only doubt about my argument is ... if prices stay this low, maybe Americans won't change. And that could be true. BUT - once you compel someone to change (by forcing them to alter their habits) - will they go back to the way things used to be?

Jason V said...

I know that Ford was buying / licensing it's "hybrid technology" from Toyota.
That says it all. Even if we sell a hybrid here, the money goes to someone else, The company with the innovation and technology. :(

Toyota's Goals from 1950 re-structuring:
1) Deliver the highest possible quality and service to the customer.
2) Develop each employee's potential based upon mutual respect and cooperation.
3) Reduce cost through elimination of waste in any given process
4) build flexible production sites that can respond to changes in the market.

GM and Ford are bass-ackwards. They STILL refuse to grow up. They STILL are asking for handouts instead of innovating.
Unions still rule in stead of trust and respect.

good luck USSA.

Jason V said...

Dude! This picture reminds me of you sometimes!
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11/future-of-green-speed-bump-precipice.php