Chuck
05-17-2009, 11:55 AM
http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/../photos/data/2/Canadian_Flag.jpg Let's see: (1) Head buried in sand, (2) Ignore/dismiss what the competition is doing, (3) Don't prepare for bad times (failure is not an option), (4) Avoid tough decisions, (5) Keep losing brands (http://www.canada.com/business/fp/wheels+came/1555314/story.html)
http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/nocompete.jpgMatthew Coutts - Canada.com (http://www.canada.com/index.html) - May 3, 2009
I hope the remains of The Big Three are traumatized enough never to go down this road again. -- Ed.
The collapse of the North American auto market and the death rattles heard from Detroit’s Big Three — General Motors, Ford and Chrysler — didn’t happen overnight and was not caused by a single failing. Instead, it took a perfect storm of product-line disasters, labour concessions and pressure from foreign competitors to stamp the once-proud industry into bailout-begging submission. The National Post’s Matthew Coutts looks at six things that went wrong:
1. Big products led to bigger problems
At the height of the booming 1990s, North American automakers responded to consumer demand for larger trucks and SUVs and, soon, the majority of their profit was coming from product lines such as the Chevrolet Trailblazer and Cadillac Escalade, pictured. This worked out well for the Big Three, considering the profit on these vehicles was much higher than compact alternatives. A report last year suggested it would take the sale of 10 small cars to match the profit on one big vehicle. Half of all assembly lines were dedicated to large vehicles. After SUV sales peaked in 1999 and began falling to higher gas prices and environmental concerns, the companies were unprepared to adjust plans. “The industry has been in some sense responsible for its own downfall,” said Doug Leighton, a professor of auto history at the University of Western Ontario’s Huron College. “They made lots of money building trucks and SUVs. Those things are relatively cheap to make but the profit on them is enormous, compared to a motor car.” Manufacturers were so invested in producing these cars that they were not able to quickly adjust. Others blame complacency, a belief that if they kept producing product, people would keep buying. Some estimates say the Big Three were pumping out as many as 17 million cars in the United States each year, despite purchasing numbers falling to perhaps 11 or 12 million. “Everyone was saying that at some point, something was going to have to give. Well, it happened,” Prof. Leighton said....http://www.canada.com/business/fp/wheels+came/1555314/story.html
http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/nocompete.jpgMatthew Coutts - Canada.com (http://www.canada.com/index.html) - May 3, 2009
I hope the remains of The Big Three are traumatized enough never to go down this road again. -- Ed.
The collapse of the North American auto market and the death rattles heard from Detroit’s Big Three — General Motors, Ford and Chrysler — didn’t happen overnight and was not caused by a single failing. Instead, it took a perfect storm of product-line disasters, labour concessions and pressure from foreign competitors to stamp the once-proud industry into bailout-begging submission. The National Post’s Matthew Coutts looks at six things that went wrong:
1. Big products led to bigger problems
At the height of the booming 1990s, North American automakers responded to consumer demand for larger trucks and SUVs and, soon, the majority of their profit was coming from product lines such as the Chevrolet Trailblazer and Cadillac Escalade, pictured. This worked out well for the Big Three, considering the profit on these vehicles was much higher than compact alternatives. A report last year suggested it would take the sale of 10 small cars to match the profit on one big vehicle. Half of all assembly lines were dedicated to large vehicles. After SUV sales peaked in 1999 and began falling to higher gas prices and environmental concerns, the companies were unprepared to adjust plans. “The industry has been in some sense responsible for its own downfall,” said Doug Leighton, a professor of auto history at the University of Western Ontario’s Huron College. “They made lots of money building trucks and SUVs. Those things are relatively cheap to make but the profit on them is enormous, compared to a motor car.” Manufacturers were so invested in producing these cars that they were not able to quickly adjust. Others blame complacency, a belief that if they kept producing product, people would keep buying. Some estimates say the Big Three were pumping out as many as 17 million cars in the United States each year, despite purchasing numbers falling to perhaps 11 or 12 million. “Everyone was saying that at some point, something was going to have to give. Well, it happened,” Prof. Leighton said....http://www.canada.com/business/fp/wheels+came/1555314/story.html