I worked at GM from 1978-81, and 1983-91, and from 1985-89 was with the GM-10 (W-Car) platform -- the mid-size cars of Chevrolet Lumina, Pontiac Grand Prix, Oldsmobile Cutlass, and Buick Regal. And in 1990-91 I was a member of a Product Simplification / Complexity Reduction task force. You've hit most of the salient points about GM's decline, but there are so many more that contributed to it. Many parties, both inside and outside of GM, felt that one of GM's strengths was the 5 passenger car divisions. That was probably the case into the 1970s, but the growing popularity of both the Japanese and European imports with more focused and firmly defined vehicles ate away at GM's practice of offering "all things to all people in all products all the time" with nearly all of its products. All of the car divisions except for Cadillac (and later Saturn) had: full-sized cars (B-Bodies); mid-sized cars (A-Bodies); mid-sized specialty cars (A-Specials -- Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Pontiac Grand Prix, Olds Cutlass Supreme, and Buick Regal); compact cars (X-Bodies); sub-compacts (J-Cars); plus others that were specific to just one or two divisions, plus the C- and E-Bodies for Olds, Buick, and Cadillac. And all of those A, B, J, and X cars had the full array of body styles (2-door, 4-door, etc.) at each car division. And they all had base trim level models, higher-level trim models, and "sporty" models. And they were all competing with each other, as well as with Ford, Toyota, and all other manufacturers. It was just as great a sin for the Chevrolet Division General Manager to lose a sale to Pontiac as it was to lose a customer to Ford. The absurdity of this over-duplication was pointed out in the late 1980s by GM Canada which only had two sales channels: Chevrolet/Oldsmobile/Cadillac, and Pontiac/Buick/GMC/Cadillac. GM Canada raised the issue of having nearly identical Chevrolets and Oldsmobile models in the one channel's showrooms, and the same situation with Pontiac and Buicks in the other channel's stores. The "all things to all people in all products all the time" mindset wasn't mitigated by any kind of product czar, or even a designated office or committee, that could say to any of the divisions, "Thou shalt do this .... and thou shalt not do this other thing." For example, if Chevrolet is the designated "low-price" division for a given platform, and Buick is the designated "premium price" division, nobody had the authority to say, "Chevy, you do NOT need a leather interior," and "Buick, you do NOT need to have hand-crank windows and an AM-only radio," among other things. Another problem that GM management failed to recognize, let alone manage, was the proliferation of equipment choices (options) and the head-spinning confusion that generated among buyers as well as the dealer network. When something new or an improved iteration of an existing item came along, they were only too eager to offer it, but would not eliminate the older or lower image alternative. Take radios, for example. By the early 1980s, AM/FM radios (whether accompanied by cassette or CD players or not) had already surpassed 50% installation across the industry. Yet all four sub-Cadillac divisions continued to offer the AM-only radio to meet a model's mythical "price point." (I doubt that anyone ever walked into a car dealer and said, "I have exactly $x,xxx to spend on a car with no options except for an automatic transmission. What do you have ?") When the GM-10s were being developed, Delco Electronics was still part of GM, and it determined that it was not cost-effective to engineer an AM-only radio. But the car divisions insisted on having that AM-only radio, so the AM radio was outsourced from a Japanese supplier. Offering Power Windows, Power Door Locks, and Power Outside Mirrors as "free-flow" options (that is, each one available by itself) generated 8 different interior door pad sets -- and multiplied by 4 interior colors resulted in 32 different interior door pad sets ... for EACH car division. And DOUBLE that, to 64, when you factor in the fact that the door pads were usually different for the higher tirm level than for the base model trim. It was possible to configure a base Chevrolet model to a higher level of "luxury" than the companion Buick upscale model. But, when trying to get the car divisions to package equipment items, they'd sooner sell their children and spouses to the gypsies ! Much of the resistence came from the high reliance on fleet sales, both daily rental and corporate fleets. Some fleets demanded power door locks for safety measures, but rejected power windows as "frivolous items." However, in markets with toll roads and bridges, power windows were deemed essential, but since company cars would be parked in company lots and garages, there was less concern for power door locks. in addition to sheet-metal variations across the car divisions -- specific fenders, hoods, and deck lids for each division, and usually doors, too -- there were additional sheet metal complexities generated by sun/moon roofs, and floor-mounted gear-shift levers. The car divisions complained that they needed the broad array of eqquipment option choices in order to "sell cars." Yet the Honda Accord became the top-selling model in the USA during that period with only 75 variations -- including colors, powertrains, and both exterior and interior color combinations. Pin-pointing the "Beginning of the End" for GM, and when the demise began is difficult. But all of these factors contributed, and the 1970s seem to be the period when GM wasn't able to see what was going within its walls, let alone in the outside world.
Fascinating! I would think the process for just one badge would be daunting enough. Even to imagine all makes to move en masse just to meet the new mandates just seems unfathomable. Thank you for your insight. 🙏😊
Adam, I was a service engineer back in the late 1980's. My biggest frustration was that I couldn't release a service bulletin to the dealer network until we had service part number(s), part(s) available in sufficient quantities with a reliability study to predict those numbers, etc. So, I had to wait.
There are a lot of "car history" channels, but yours continues to be the best. Not only do you have hands-on experience with so many cars, from driving to maintaining, but you also have the insight to analyze much of financial and management. Car guys typically know cars, not car companies: and here you are with lots of knowledge and experience with both! For full disclosure, I wasn't around at the time, but I've always felt that GM's two greatest downfalls occured earlier: decreased quality throughout the 1970s, and perception of the brands. The first of these is pretty obvious, a combination of rush designed, poor quality control, strikes, etc... which all US automakers faced, but GM seemed to be the biggest victim of. Perhaps its because their previous cars had been really high quality vehicles by comparison? Chrysler had quality issues since 1957 (or at least the market had that perception of them), while Ford worked really hard to maintain quality during the 70s and advertised the hell out of it. The second factor, brand perception, was I think a deeply cultural change as people began to be disillusioned by "old fashioned Americana". Cadillac had been an international standard for luxury in the 1950s, but by the 1970s, it had been replaced by Mercedes Benz. Volkswagen had gotten a magnificent reputation for build tough, simple Beatles that people loved and felt enthusiasm for. GM's bread and butter, the cars that really drew people into their showrooms, had their big comfortable boats and muscle cars, but these suffered heavily from quality cuts and of course government regulation. The big boats were also seen as being for old people, and the muscle cars were seen as seriously uncool. I think GM was doomed to fail. The Japanese made great cars and had built in marketing simply because they weren't the Status-quo. Same for the Germans. Management missteps like this 1984 reorganization certainly didn't help, but I think GM simply couldn't change its entire image of so many divisions overnight: they would've had to abandon the few vehicles they made that were still excellent... case in point, look how the B-Body platform stuck around through 96, before GM decided to replace big sedans and wagons in the market with trucks and SUVs for financial and government regulation reasons. They kept their faithfuls around as long as they could, before trying to move them into something else on the dealer lot. Meanwhile the idea of conquest sales is kinda hilarious. I know people today who still refuse to drive anything made by GM (or Ford or Chrysler for that matter) simply because they're American brands. The brand perception and public's opinion of their quality never recovered after the 1970s. What's funny now is how all these once unloved GM cars of the post 1973 era are finally starting to gain some popularity. While the glory days might've been over, GM was still doing some decent work in spite of the cascading failures stacking up against them. I saw a late 70s Caprice sedan tonight, and I was stunned by how handsome that body design really is, when it can catch some street lights after a light misting of rain. So much artistry and curvature for a vehicle called the "box caprice". It was the same color as the '77 9C1 Impala you have/had in light green.
This reorganization was certainly the end of an era if nothing else. From the birth of GM until this reorganization, GMs divisions basically acted as their own separate car companies. Sure, they shared bodies and chassis, but they each had their own powertrains, styling, and features on their respective vehicles. This reorganization upped the homogination to another level where the brands shared SO many components, including styling and engines, that the divisions lost their respective identities as a result. I have no doubt this decision led to the deaths of Olds and Pontiac, which is a shame.
I would definitely agree with you on that, specifically with 1972 being the last year of the true 'hardtop' and convertibles offered on the Malibu/LeMans/Cutlass/Skylark mid-size cars before the 'colonade' took over starting with the '73. Not to be a hypocrite, but the '73-'77 Monte Carlo, Grand Prix and Regal coupes pulled off looking good. I know the 1971-'76 full-size GM's weren't as popular as the '65-'70 models that preceded them, but they were the last to have the cool body styles of the 2 and 4-foor open coupes and convertibles through '75. Although the downsized GM's (starting in '77) were necessary for many familiar reasons, they lost all of the 'romantic', 'fun', 'parade-car' body styles forever, replaced with the generic 2 and 4 door sedans and a station wagon, dropping the 2-door sometime in the '80s. What happened to the full-size cars (I described) is overlooked as the beginning of the end for GM. It wasn't very long into my life this all happened, either. Born in May '57 during GM's pinnacle, I was still a teenager when the name, rank and serial # full size cars debuted in late 1976.
THANK YOU ! ! I entered college in 1978 and was interested in business/economics. I saw the confusion in GM and ran away, into Medicine ! Most happy to be retired now. My father indulged me, so I drove an Audi 5000 in 1979. It was wonderful, yet it angered me. GM and Ford should be better than a company like Audi. Well, as I mentioned, I ran away from the issue that still haunts me.
You were lucky to get an Audi during that time when they weren't so astronomical in price and less complicated and more reliable. I used to be a fan of the 5000 and also the 100s in the early 90s. I was going to look into getting a 90 or 100 until a friend of mine who owned a 100 talked me out of it. He said you have to make sure if you own a car like this, that you are going to have the money to fix it when it breaks.
I agree, CAFE regulations didn't give them the time needed to develop and fully tested everything first to avoid the problems before release. And the CAFE 'footprint' rules that basically exempted trucks and SUVs from the same rigid fuel economy standards is what ruined it altogether
It was around this time when interest rates were well over 10%. This generated surpluses in GM pensions far above the actuarial reserve needs which meant the surplus became revenue to the company as well as pension contributions were stopped. Also health benefits costs were low and easy to expand rather than pay higher wages and the number of employees was near its peak. In the nineties interest rates plummeted while the workforce shrank and huge numbers retired. Thus began the increase in pension liabilities and rapidly increasing health benefits costs to the aging workforce and retirees that bled the company for about twenty years that took it to and then over the brink.
As to the shoddy products, I bought my first new car after college from Ford. It came from the factory with a bent axle. I can tell similar stories about friends who bought GM and Chrysler products during that time. Then you have the Vega and Pinto. Shoddy products from US automakers in the 1970s is fact! I think the downfall of all the American car companies started during the 1970s. Because of poor quality, many customers went to Japanese products and never came back. This trend is somewhat still going on, though not as drastically.
@@67marlins See the Korean car brands. Read up on BMW, See the issues with most brands CVT transmissions. Read up on Fords double clutch transmissions. What you say is generally true, but clunkers are still out there. Ford and GM car quality is generally far, far better than in the 1970s.
Interesting video, I worked as a outside contractor for Executive Protection, covering about 6-8 of the Top GM executives Including the Presidents and Chairmen, it was during this period of Change , and I could tell when the pressure was on , they would be working long hours and and coming home at all Hours, And Robert Stemple was a very nice Man, Roger Smith Well.....
I grew up liking Fords and Mopar, but always admired the relative autonomy of Pontiac and Oldsmobile to create good cars that frankly embarrassed chevy.
My brand new 1986 El Camino had the balancer bolt shear off. Said balancer walked out, took off the crankshaft key, and started shaking like a paint mixer. Into the dealership it went. Pulled out the engine, and replacement of the crankshaft was the fix. 12K on the speedometer. Get it back, and a year or so later, the junk turbo 200R4 transmissions starts acting up. I had to disconnect the lock up solenoid. It would lock in all gears forward except 1st. Then a Chevette could pass me. The temperature selectors cable pivot broke. I either had full heat or full A/C. Took me awhile to figure that one out. Then the intake manifold gaskets started leaking oil. At 40K. All of my issues happened at low mileage. I was glad when a drunkard totaled out that truck. I was DONE.
Brilliant! I think that this type of series could really flourish on your channel. My dad worked as a millwright for Fisher Body in Flint and was laid off in 1987. I remember that year being a lean Christmas at our house. We almost had to move to New York state before he thankfully landed a job in town at GM Truck and Bus thanks to his seniority.
The real beginning of the end for GM was selling junk -- like the 1978 LeSabre with a 3.8L V6 that my parents foolishly bought ("GM knows what they're doing," said my dad). If you pressed the gas pedal more than half way down, the engine would just stall. It spent weeks at the dealer's service department to no avail. My parents were nearly in tears because they really needed that car. Forty-six years later, nobody in my family has purchased another GM product.
It's amazing that with all the effort in the mid-80s to improve efficiency and become more competitive, that GM still managed to drop the ball with regards to the competition, specifically from Japan. The timing of this video is interesting in that GM has just announced a major pullback on their robotaxi program. I can't help but think they are making another major strategic mistake.
I’m a millennial but I’ve always perceived the turning point for GM to be around 1980 give or take. The malaise era. It’s a shame the person in charge then (Roger Smith) did such a terrible job transitioning GM to a modern global automaker. Thru the sheer brute force of its size and market share it staggered into the 21st century, when it was finally felled by the Great Recession. The internet likes to make a passion play of obsessing over every flawed product from Vega to Aztek, but an inherently healthy company could’ve survived the occasional product failure. GMs relentlessly poor decision making in the 70s/80s was the lethal wound.
there's been a criticism that "GM never met a government regulation it didn't like". In the early days of mandates, GM had the economics and engineering to out maneuver the competition, GM already invented a lot of what became mandated. As things snowballed with CAFE limits, as the video mentions being so large and having to change so much tripped them up. So... don't forget govt regs in this mix. What would the automotive world look like today without CAFE regulations?
I remember as a kid in the 90s, being in my father's Chevettes, and wishing for the day he could buy an actual car. I knew they were garbage even at 5 year old. Yes, he owned up to five at one point. Only one was ever "working". Bought a Japanese car at 18 and have never considered a GM.
Just a brilliant video, Adam. I had no idea about the 1984 CPC/BOC reorganization. This was not something that even your typical die-hard GM buyer was even aware of... at least I wasn't. It wasn't common knowledge among the buying public. It's no surprise that it failed. Despite my loyalty over the years, my view of GM is sadly no longer the same. They are simply not the same company they were in the 60s, when they were producing beautiful, high performance vehicles. I think the decline began in the 1970s when the federal government began issuing mandates to the industry.
Roger Smith was the primary cause of GM's downfall. He is considered one of the worst CEOs in history. His policies of corporate conformity were disastrous for all of the divisions.
Wow, great information, Adam. I was there from 1980 to 2001 at Delco Electronics. I was hourly and ended up salaried. I was so busy at the time I didn't realize what they were trying to do but hopefully I can start putting it together with your help. I loved the Auto Industry. I remember being in a meeting in 1992 and they were saying North American Operations was loosing money. I was thinking how are we staying in business. It definitely got my. attention.
While I'll readily admit and even champion the idea that everyone has their own tastes, I can also agree that one of the fastest, best handling, and dare I say most attractive cars on the planet (the new ZR-1) could hardly be considered junk. It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it certainly is a masterpiece of modern engineering.
GM also went overboard in the 1980s with expanding their brands' lineups and introducing Geo and Saturn, which ended up costing GM a lot in a short period. The rebadging GM had been doing since the 70s had also begun to play a toll on finances. Seeing you did this video and a video on the history of the Pontiac brand, you should do a video on the history of Oldsmobile. I can also picture you publishing books on automotive history and selling them on Amazon Kindle.
The people behind this channel are probably aware of it but Ingrassia and White's book, _Comeback: The Fall and Rise of the American Automobile Industry,_ covers the BOC-CPC reorganization in quite a bit of detail. After reading it, and watching this video, I think GM suffered from an inertia problem. By the time it was obvious that they needed to make a change, it was so late that they had to make all the changes at once, on an impossibly short deadline. It was not a recipe for success.
I agree with you as much as GM frustrates me I fantasize that every car could be perfect cars like as an example the 80 Omega could essentially be a 96 Buick Century with the body and interior quality of a 92 Cadillac Brougham I have to forgive them I have no concept of what this takes. I remember in particular feeling like the 88 GMT400 was built of numerous what I believed would should be S series parts, thinking if the 88 truck had heavy duty bolted on door hinges like the 87 down truck and dual piston calipers like the competitors 1980 cab design GM would be the leader things like MYLAR on the late 70s cars these videos help explain this to people like myself who really want to know how we went from the 63 Starfire and 65 Bonneville to the 82 Cimarron and 83 Parisienne. This is where you have unlocked untapped resources sir I suggest segmented “old school” porch chats for this topic chapter base it for the geeks
At 15:33, one big reason is budgets. Every year, companies and divisions/subsidiaries within those companies need to create a budget for how to spend the money allotted/available to them. So, if you spend money developing and making a product, that is an expense that needs to be offset by the sale of that product. If you give that product to a sister-company/division, you need them to pay money from their budget to cover the costs you incurred, and even make some money, because you're trying to make a profit to justify your existence to the parent company and their shareholders.
So sad to remember that GM was not just the largest auto company in the world, it was the largest CORPORATION in the world... Maybe they should have held on to Frigidaire? 😢
When they needed to develop a product as refined as the little Honda Accord, they were stuck trying to meet CAFE, I never thought of ALL the components that had to be reinvented, right down to the door handles. All our 60-76 Caddies had the SAME door handles! With Frigidaire and EMD and later GMAC mixed in, there's more than a whiff of what happened to Penn Central RR in this story. It's a miracle there IS a GM in 2024.
Why not let the divisions operate more semi independently? That’s what allowed GM to thrive in its earlier days. The divisions could be nimble and adaptable. They had independent engineering and design and sometimes manufacturing too. But the GM umbrella allowed these semi independent groups to share technical developments when it was advantageous. Internal consolidation and elimination of redundancy probably seemed like a good idea to the bean counters when they took control. But it ended up killing the organizational organism from the inside. They tried to make a healthy subject healthier and ended up turning it into a sick patient. And every time they thought they hadn’t done enough they kept doubling down and making the patient sicker. All the while the “cure” was actually toxic to the organization. The question is whether these were innocent mistakes or whether the U.S. auto industry tanked on purpose so that ultimately they could have off shore work forces laboring under authoritarian regimes??? Sounds nuts I know but one wonders… Wall Street will stop at nothing to hollow out America and destroy it from within. And that’s where the real corporate control rests. Not in the top management of each company in the real economy. They all have to dance to Wall Street’s tune while the whole country goes downhill in a heap of imaginary “productivity” and debt that is all too real. Oh well … there’s my rant for the day. 😅
I bought a new '78 El Camino. Built in Mexico, half metric half SAE nuts and bolts. A POS that I sold in disgust 2 1/2 years and 65,000 miles later- never to buy GM again. So it started long before '84.
65k miles is a hell of a lot of miles for only 2 years of ownership....the average driver back then probably drove only about 10 to 12 thousand miles per year. Was this car maintained properly during this torture test? If not, no car is going to hold together driving 30 thousand plus miles a year.
@@rogergoodman8665In 1981, we bought a two-year old Oldsmobile Delta 88 with 60,000 miles on it. Drove it another 105,000 miles and sold it still running well - five years made a big difference in engineering and manufacturing. Didn’t buy a newer GM vehicle until last year with a Chevrolet Bolt EUV.
1979 is when I first had problems with GM. I purchased a '79 Monza Spyder that had multiple problems, two different color mirrors and Spyder decals also paint peeling off the bumper. The last two Chevrolets that I had were a 2008 Colorado and a 2010 Malibu. Both were poorly made and cured me of my GM addiction. The best GM car I ever owned was a '77 Camaro.
My new 1982 Z28 Crossfire Camaro was the fifth GM car I purchased. It was a total pile of garbage. The paint and assembly were perfect. But the trash components GM was using in those vehicles was the issue. Stereo heads, bearings, oil pressure sensing units and the worst was some transducer thing that fed speed info to the computer. (Oh yes, the first computer failed and went over to limp home mode at 500 miles.) When that transducer thing failed, it would take out the speedo cable and gears. I believe that happened three times. And the idler arms must have been made from pot metal. I have purchased 10 new cars since. Not one from GM. All of them from Japanese brands, other than one Volvo. In my book. That was the end of GM. When I traded in the Z28 for a Swedish car.
I'm going to be 67 years old next February and I kid you not that for the first almost 40 years of my life there was at least one GM car either my own or within my family Could be Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile ,Buick or Cadillac But since then I'm hard pressed to remember any GM car from the 90s or newer since then!!!!And it's sad beacuse I'm looking at my die cast car collection right now( very substantial) And I see more GM cars, The old GM CARSAnd it almost depresses me to think 'bout what happened!!!!!.In a similar note I live in the Cleveland Ohio area and the very first GMplants. That I can think of was Fisher Body in East Cleveland Long Gone, GM Parma in Parma and Fisher guide Division in EIyriaOhio, Both the Fisher plants are gone and certainly East Cleveland definitely started going down hill when Fisher body closed!!!!!.
Gm basically was its own government bound by the government ! Growing up in the 70's GM was a blessing for many keeping there cars on the road that much longer because of standardized parts ! 45 years later this still.holds true ! Parts are plentiful - low cost and fairly easy for the DIY community ! Thats why all i own is gm products !
Product redundancy and poor quality control at the factory did them in back in the 70s. It's ironic because many well designed cars and car parts like the Oldsmobile gas V8 were often some of the best ever made.
In Short Answer YES!! As soon as they came out with “Mr “Goodwrench” that GM brought out you knew that something was up especially with Regal, Grand Pre, Cutlas, and Monte Carlo, V-6 pre ignition as well as detonation and diesel ing (running after ignition is off) with absolute no power. I remember these Cuz I was in High School 81-85. These are mainly the years that killed the GM product. That doesn’t even cover the diesel and so much more, of Quality from then on was noticed that it No longer existed in the line up. It wasn’t only GM Ford and Chrysler was going to junk as well. Appliances followed and continues to Tools.
This was interesting. I learned what the “CPC” in “CPC Flint” is. The TPI 305 that came in my Z28 has a GM Motorsport decal on the intake plenum that has CPC flint logo on it. knew the motor was made in Flint didn’t know what the CPC was.
(with tongue in cheek) Ah! But the drop of market share for GM had a positive note: They didn't have to worry about the Federal Trade Commission making any inquiries about dominating the market . . . as years before there had been urban rumors about General Motors getting the Feds attention on such matters.
Adam, this is superb 👏 May I suggest seeds for the fertile soil of your imagination 🙏 1) Imagine a parallel timeline where this same decision was successful, 2) Which company has done this successfully? VW, with its myriad brands? 3) compare and contrast GM, Ford (with its PAG group), Stellantis, BMC, Rootes Group...., and, 4) the care and feeding of automotive subsidiaries, ie:- Holden, Vauxhall, Opel, Saab, Volvo, et al. 🖖🙏
Bought a new 88 IROC Z convertible - pricey for the time and the biggest piece of junk I've ever owned. It had issues that multiple dealers weren't able to figure out. Have bought mainly Honda the last couple decades.
I once read that GM was so confusing by design, even with the naming and options for their cars, for tax reasons. Someone said bookkeeping was so confusing in GM that even the IRS was baffled at some aspects, and GM got away with that for a very long time.
When it comes to GM construction quality, Adam you mentioned the body construction and interiors of the GM full size cars of 1971 as a turn for the worse. I totally agree that cars in this generation were really different (and worse) than everything before them, especially in these two areas. All you had to do was to experience how the doors closed. They were awful. In my opinion, the 1970 Camaro and Firebird were two of the best styled American cars of the entire 20th century. Unfortunately these cars with their “LCDs” (loose clunky doors) previewed the poor construction of the 1971 full size vehicles. This construction then also characterized the 1973 mid size cars. The mid 70’s GM compact cars were somewhat spared because the X-body (Nova, Omega, Ventura, Apollo - NOVA) cars benefitted from a significant facelift of the 1968 body, so the good structure remained intact. That said, at this time other cost cutting measures plagued these cars, cancelling out the goodness of this solid platform. Glued in place headliners, miserable afterthought Landau roofs (which caused roofs to rust, especially in California), and poor quality interior materials all led up to cars that were almost worthless after 7 years or 100,00 miles. I had the feeling that GM had lost all respect for their customers. Everyone knows that customer loyalty takes a long time to build, and in some cases it takes a while to degenerate. Lifelong “Chevy families” would never think to buy a Toyota back then, and these loyalists were “rewarded” with the Vega and Chevette. I think after these two debacles, in the most relevant segment of the market in the 70’s, the sub-compact market, GM gave loyalists pause to leave their brands forever. They regained many customers with the “well designed” FWD X cars at first, as their sales initially were astounding, but fell off sharply as those customers reported how painfully they had been let down by the miserable GM build and component quality. So now they destroyed their chances in both the compact and subcompact markets. Toyota and Honda were more than willing to offer customers in these segments really well made cars with lots of nice features (first generation Accord for example) bullet-proof reliability, great fuel economy and good price. With the momentum that the Japanese gained at this time, there was no way for GM to reverse the trend. The precipitous drop in market share meant that GM was getting what they deserved. This was all because they forgot to respect their customers and thought they could foist junk upon them. To me that was the core of GM’s downfall. (Also, to me the 1976 Seville was the last hurrah of the glory of how GM could build great cars. It had the solid X body platform as a basis, made only better great components, excellent materials and superior build quality. If only that car could have affected GM quality as much as GM rooflines in the 1980’s…)
Nicely put. GM’s problems ran through the entire organization even to the retail level. Too many dealerships trying to sell the same badge-engineered cars. Often within short distances of each other. Too many models. Dealerships in operation not to sell new cars, but rather to make money other ways in the car business of those times.
I had no idea about this split. Otherwise I think it started in the 1970's when the engineering and the quality took a nose dive especially Chevrolets engine components and the paint and horrific/catastrophic body rust.
My 2 cents, Toyota, Honda, Nissan / Datsun, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and to a lessor case VW/Audi, didn't have worthless duplicate products under different irrelevant brands. GM, especially after Roger rationalization of Drivetrains, etc made brands less and less relevant. Remember BMC/British Leyland failed because of worthless brands, Morris/Austin/Triumph/MG, Rover. They spent so much effort trying to appease those basically irrelevant brands while trying to make as much common. I blame the GM, Ford and Chrysler brand problem on the State by State dealership laws which protected them at the expense of the health of the parent company. In 1959 GM Finance got a taste of how much money could be saved by serious consolidation of the main body. That didn't last long and by the early 60's it was back to usual which still worked since each brand had their own drivetrains and chassis. By the 1970's GM would had been far more competitive if they went to two brands, Chevrolet mass market and Cadillac Premium. GM could had still kept most engineering unique making Cadillac a serious competitor to BMW, MB, Audi and later Lexus, Acura and Infiniti.Keeping components like AC parts, steering, electric parts fairly common to keep volume up and cost down. I worked the the largest US HVAC company and they wasted and still waste tons of money appeasing worthless brands that serve no real purpose since the products are just badge engineered! GM brands dealers ended up competing more with each other than Toyota etc. AMC would had died by early 60's had Romney not ditched Nash and Hudson for a unified Rambler brand.
I have an interesting vehicle collection of mid 80s Cadillac and Oldsmobile full size diesel cars. The 85 Fleetwood d'Elegance is a ONE YEAR mechanical wonder, different fuel injection/filtering arrangement from 84 and not offered in 86, all front drive that year. Yes, those cars are a mix of metric and SAE fasteners, fortunately I enjoy dealing with the fascinating challenges of keeping these old oil burners humming. Of course GM pulled the plug on the genre just as they got them reliable and developed. To my mind the 86 model year really showed the decline of quality and value across the product line.
Thanks for this very informative post.....great detail and supported with facts. It's a shame because GM made a fantastic, diverse and reliable family of cars until about 1977. However, I think we would all like your perspective on the post-bankruptcy, 2009-forward GM. Wouldn't the management structure have been much more effective after the Great Recession?
I think the biggest downfall for gm was just their build quality honestly. Car companies now and car design as a whole shows that people are willing to buy cookie cutter cars regardless of brand (think even within the gm stable with their small suvs that look similar and have the same exact engines). My dad was a mechanic during the 80s and 90s at gm dealers of various makes, and one thing that always comes up in conversation is build quality. Sending out cars for pdis with stuff that wasn't even installed from the factory, but that had the hardware in the center console for something like a different center console. Having poor engines that weren't very reliable overall, making engines like the Northstar that could have been amazing, but got a bad rep and then they took too long to fix that reputation. Same with their transmissions, where it took them way too long to ever correct the issues (like the 4t60 through the 90s and into the 2000s, or the transition from the 700r4 to the 4l60. Optispark in the 92-96 c4 giving it a bad rep and slightly being overblown, or the allante having an anemic engine for the first couple of years
7:50 I really want an OG Tempest! Interestingly Buick did well in the '80s. And I think that's Cadillac's doing. Between the "V 8-6-4" , "HT-4100" and the notorious Diesel, A lot of well heeled GM loyalists who could easily afforded a Cadillac went with a Buick instead. If I'm not mistaken the "J" platform was the only one used by ALL FIVE of the divisions. Examples: Only Cadillac and Buick ever had "D" bodies. But I don't think Cadillac ever used the "A" body, at least in the post war era.
It's hard to point to one single event when GM jumped the shark. It's usually an accumulation of small things that go unchecked or uncorrected that in time really add up. I think for Cadillac it was when they came out with the 4100 and the 8-6-4 engines. Both of those were just terrible failures that really tarnished Cadillac's name and image. I don't think Cadillac has ever recovered from those.
I would like to see a video about Ralph Nader and the safety regulations he pushed through and how GM and other auto manufacturers dealt with the issues.
I still contend that the reorganization should have kept all the car brands, but streamlined the product offerings so that there was no overlap. Drop Saturn, sell Saab keep Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile and Chevrolet as distinct models with fundamental platform sharing. Chevrolet focused on smaller /cheaper cars. Pontiac with sportier, models, Buick and Olds larger mid-luxury with Cadillac as a pure upmarket brand. No more cookie-cutter cars. Two dealer channels (GM stores and Cadillac stores)...no direct competition between brands. All light trucks under Chevy, all commercial trucks under GMC. I'm not CEO or marketing genius, but I am a lover of cars and history and this plan would have saved the legacy brands.
I think GMs downfall began, slowly, back in 1971. Much more parts shared among the divisions, such as suspensions and frames, and build quality went down the drain pretty fast. The Vega, need I say more? Everything GM tried to do seemed to be half-assed, using the customer to be the vehicle tester. In the 80s, all GM cars really did look alike. The Iron Duke- who would buy one after listening to it? GM did have some major successes, but more fails than wins.
I thought GM was shy of 60% in 78-79!? I know I was told that. 40!??? 😳😳😳😳😳 Wow. I don’t understand how that is? Maine must be a microcosm of the market? Growing up EVERYTHING was GM. I mean EVERYTHING. This is fascinating please explain what happened to our favorite car company
I think that GM’s downfall was in the sixties and it’s being ignorant of its problems with the Corvair. The next problem was the Vega, both in engineering and assembly by the GMAD. Quality started going down in the seventies. The division’s weren’t able to manage their own problems. The cars were losing their identities. The engineers were not responding to quality complaints like the 200 transmission and the diesel. By the time most stuff was fixed, we were driving Toyotas. They started taking money out of the interiors, when others started investing. Then there were consumers like me who had one crappy GM product and were pretty much done.
There's an interesting documentary available here on RUclips that also showcases the labor relations crisis that GM was in during the early to mid 1980s. It's called Final Offer and is well worth a look.
When I joined Detroit after executive assignments in Europe and Asia it was just the Truck and Car groups. IMO some of the best staff worked in the truck groups and had far better products and many in the car group were from a different era in attitude and arrogance. It was all very dysfunctional. After working for GMIO in Asia and also with Opel/Vauxhall I can say I pretty much hated everyday in Warren. Bully leadership and arrogance and team politics was abundant. GMIO had an entirely different business culture. I was an A-band executive so saw and heard it all in many meetings. It was obvious to me at the time what was coming
Growing up General motors was the can do company. They invited the catalytic converter , I believe the lunar rover true automatic transmission. The product was supposed to be rigorously tested before being sold.in the 80s the customer was driving in the proving ground
Regarding GM's cheaper products in the late '80's, my memories are paint peeling down to the grey primer, depressing decomposing interiors, cheapo plastic trim (especially those awful Cavalier nasty hubcaps), and dull and uninspired drivetrains. No wonder us Canadians switched to Civics and Golfs in that era, especially as our beloved Pontiacs were now reduced to crappy Sunbirds and Tempests, and (urp) LeMans built by Daewoo...
GM lost their minds around 1980. Decisions were made by idiots rather than the engineers. Bad transmission, engines rushed into production before testing was finished. In 1984 the olds 88 old body style was one of the best selling cars in the US and GM stopped production! I had a 79 98 diesel I loved although the engine crapped out at 70,000 miles. It was replaced by a dealer not trained in this engine and much later I found the engine had never been timed properly. In the 80’s Ross Perot bought in to the company. He asked a question, what do we do better than any other car company. Nobody could answer his question. They had bad water pumps, starter’s, cooling systems, transmissions and so on.
They tried for a quick fix. As with most quick fixes, it didn't work. Apparently nobody tried doing anything about scaling down the enormously bloated management structure in general motors. even after bankruptcy their treasury department was made up by dozens of people. Absurd. Later on there would be the disastrous attempt buy Roger Smith to automate the assembly process. If they could only get those billions of dollars back. Roger Smith was such a fool
I'd be curious to hear how the conception and brith of Saturn impacted GM's budget situation in the late '80s and early '90s. It obviously sucked away precious product development money at a time GM could ill afford it. I doubt it would've been enough to save GM from bankruptcy in 2008, but perhaps one of the other divisions might have survived?
16:30 Wonder if the spelling of employees as “EMPLOYES”’on the plate pictured was a deliberate internal GM New English spelling to save cost on the expense of extra letters.
Adam spoke about it alittel with GM having to completely reengineer their entire line up of vehicles as well as Ford, Chrysler and AMC as well as the could. The imports were stealing profits from them, while they didn't have to anything much to their line up. Just work with in the era Cafe standards. That is why American cars suffered so badly. Surprized that there are any left at all. Biden didn't with his term in office. I DON"T want an ELECTRIC vehicle, period! The tech is not there, at least for me anyway. Talking about battery storage capability. Pluss I HATE these massive touch screens! I want buttons and KNOBS that are lit up at night, and well placed.
While reducing bureaucracy is something to be championed, there must always be customer satisfaction as the end goal. The company may now say, "Look at our new streamlined platform", but the customer is going to say, "Hold on, that's not a Cadillac, that's a boxy little Chevy or Pontiac at a much higher price". If the reorganizing results in hideous stying, plastic interiors, and declining quality and reliability, then the customer is ultimately going to walk over to the Toyota dealership. And that company had no problem with size issues as it became number one.
The 1070 UAW strike was the root cause of the decline. In its wake, GM could no longer competitively make vehicles from a financial standpoint, especially against the increasingly more prevalent Japanese manufacturers (offshore or onshore). They had to cut costs is other areas, so it was quality of materials, and engineering. Their market share began to erode, which made things worse because they now had jobs bank where they had to pay idled workers to come in and sit in a room which made the cost issue even worse. Their lack of spine to break the union killed them. Ironically, they chose not to do that in the bankruptcy as well, which still kills them from a quality stand point.
I just felt there was no honesty in the marketing to consumers, the lousy longevity and reliability, and trying to pull on customer emotions they had with their cars from the 60's, but I had none since that was before my time.
![100 Most Iconic Technologies [Top Ten]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fMMEofqqn_Y/mqdefault.jpg)
I worked at GM from 1978-81, and 1983-91, and from 1985-89 was with the GM-10 (W-Car) platform -- the mid-size cars of Chevrolet Lumina, Pontiac Grand Prix, Oldsmobile Cutlass, and Buick Regal. And in 1990-91 I was a member of a Product Simplification / Complexity Reduction task force. You've hit most of the salient points about GM's decline, but there are so many more that contributed to it.
Many parties, both inside and outside of GM, felt that one of GM's strengths was the 5 passenger car divisions. That was probably the case into the 1970s, but the growing popularity of both the Japanese and European imports with more focused and firmly defined vehicles ate away at GM's practice of offering "all things to all people in all products all the time" with nearly all of its products. All of the car divisions except for Cadillac (and later Saturn) had: full-sized cars (B-Bodies); mid-sized cars (A-Bodies); mid-sized specialty cars (A-Specials -- Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Pontiac Grand Prix, Olds Cutlass Supreme, and Buick Regal); compact cars (X-Bodies); sub-compacts (J-Cars); plus others that were specific to just one or two divisions, plus the C- and E-Bodies for Olds, Buick, and Cadillac. And all of those A, B, J, and X cars had the full array of body styles (2-door, 4-door, etc.) at each car division. And they all had base trim level models, higher-level trim models, and "sporty" models. And they were all competing with each other, as well as with Ford, Toyota, and all other manufacturers. It was just as great a sin for the Chevrolet Division General Manager to lose a sale to Pontiac as it was to lose a customer to Ford.
The absurdity of this over-duplication was pointed out in the late 1980s by GM Canada which only had two sales channels: Chevrolet/Oldsmobile/Cadillac, and Pontiac/Buick/GMC/Cadillac. GM Canada raised the issue of having nearly identical Chevrolets and Oldsmobile models in the one channel's showrooms, and the same situation with Pontiac and Buicks in the other channel's stores.
The "all things to all people in all products all the time" mindset wasn't mitigated by any kind of product czar, or even a designated office or committee, that could say to any of the divisions, "Thou shalt do this .... and thou shalt not do this other thing." For example, if Chevrolet is the designated "low-price" division for a given platform, and Buick is the designated "premium price" division, nobody had the authority to say, "Chevy, you do NOT need a leather interior," and "Buick, you do NOT need to have hand-crank windows and an AM-only radio," among other things.
Another problem that GM management failed to recognize, let alone manage, was the proliferation of equipment choices (options) and the head-spinning confusion that generated among buyers as well as the dealer network. When something new or an improved iteration of an existing item came along, they were only too eager to offer it, but would not eliminate the older or lower image alternative. Take radios, for example. By the early 1980s, AM/FM radios (whether accompanied by cassette or CD players or not) had already surpassed 50% installation across the industry. Yet all four sub-Cadillac divisions continued to offer the AM-only radio to meet a model's mythical "price point." (I doubt that anyone ever walked into a car dealer and said, "I have exactly $x,xxx to spend on a car with no options except for an automatic transmission. What do you have ?") When the GM-10s were being developed, Delco Electronics was still part of GM, and it determined that it was not cost-effective to engineer an AM-only radio. But the car divisions insisted on having that AM-only radio, so the AM radio was outsourced from a Japanese supplier.
Offering Power Windows, Power Door Locks, and Power Outside Mirrors as "free-flow" options (that is, each one available by itself) generated 8 different interior door pad sets -- and multiplied by 4 interior colors resulted in 32 different interior door pad sets ... for EACH car division. And DOUBLE that, to 64, when you factor in the fact that the door pads were usually different for the higher tirm level than for the base model trim. It was possible to configure a base Chevrolet model to a higher level of "luxury" than the companion Buick upscale model.
But, when trying to get the car divisions to package equipment items, they'd sooner sell their children and spouses to the gypsies ! Much of the resistence came from the high reliance on fleet sales, both daily rental and corporate fleets. Some fleets demanded power door locks for safety measures, but rejected power windows as "frivolous items." However, in markets with toll roads and bridges, power windows were deemed essential, but since company cars would be parked in company lots and garages, there was less concern for power door locks.
in addition to sheet-metal variations across the car divisions -- specific fenders, hoods, and deck lids for each division, and usually doors, too -- there were additional sheet metal complexities generated by sun/moon roofs, and floor-mounted gear-shift levers.
The car divisions complained that they needed the broad array of eqquipment option choices in order to "sell cars." Yet the Honda Accord became the top-selling model in the USA during that period with only 75 variations -- including colors, powertrains, and both exterior and interior color combinations.
Pin-pointing the "Beginning of the End" for GM, and when the demise began is difficult. But all of these factors contributed, and the 1970s seem to be the period when GM wasn't able to see what was going within its walls, let alone in the outside world.
Fascinating! I would think the process for just one badge would be daunting enough. Even to imagine all makes to move en masse just to meet the new mandates just seems unfathomable. Thank you for your insight. 🙏😊
Interesting read!
After reading this, the problem is obvious. Not once did you mention quality.
Outstanding , you wrote a thesis! Adam should invite you as a guest
Enlightening and fascinating.
And I own several of these mentioned.
Looks like there was plenty of $ to have trinkets and plates made to 'celebrate' ... but no money to engineer window cranks that didn't break.
Adam, I was a service engineer back in the late 1980's. My biggest frustration was that I couldn't release a service bulletin to the dealer network until we had service part number(s), part(s) available in sufficient quantities with a reliability study to predict those numbers, etc. So, I had to wait.
From what you say, it’s amazing they could put out new cars at all.
There are a lot of "car history" channels, but yours continues to be the best. Not only do you have hands-on experience with so many cars, from driving to maintaining, but you also have the insight to analyze much of financial and management. Car guys typically know cars, not car companies: and here you are with lots of knowledge and experience with both!
For full disclosure, I wasn't around at the time, but I've always felt that GM's two greatest downfalls occured earlier: decreased quality throughout the 1970s, and perception of the brands. The first of these is pretty obvious, a combination of rush designed, poor quality control, strikes, etc... which all US automakers faced, but GM seemed to be the biggest victim of. Perhaps its because their previous cars had been really high quality vehicles by comparison? Chrysler had quality issues since 1957 (or at least the market had that perception of them), while Ford worked really hard to maintain quality during the 70s and advertised the hell out of it. The second factor, brand perception, was I think a deeply cultural change as people began to be disillusioned by "old fashioned Americana". Cadillac had been an international standard for luxury in the 1950s, but by the 1970s, it had been replaced by Mercedes Benz. Volkswagen had gotten a magnificent reputation for build tough, simple Beatles that people loved and felt enthusiasm for. GM's bread and butter, the cars that really drew people into their showrooms, had their big comfortable boats and muscle cars, but these suffered heavily from quality cuts and of course government regulation. The big boats were also seen as being for old people, and the muscle cars were seen as seriously uncool.
I think GM was doomed to fail. The Japanese made great cars and had built in marketing simply because they weren't the Status-quo. Same for the Germans. Management missteps like this 1984 reorganization certainly didn't help, but I think GM simply couldn't change its entire image of so many divisions overnight: they would've had to abandon the few vehicles they made that were still excellent... case in point, look how the B-Body platform stuck around through 96, before GM decided to replace big sedans and wagons in the market with trucks and SUVs for financial and government regulation reasons. They kept their faithfuls around as long as they could, before trying to move them into something else on the dealer lot. Meanwhile the idea of conquest sales is kinda hilarious. I know people today who still refuse to drive anything made by GM (or Ford or Chrysler for that matter) simply because they're American brands. The brand perception and public's opinion of their quality never recovered after the 1970s.
What's funny now is how all these once unloved GM cars of the post 1973 era are finally starting to gain some popularity. While the glory days might've been over, GM was still doing some decent work in spite of the cascading failures stacking up against them. I saw a late 70s Caprice sedan tonight, and I was stunned by how handsome that body design really is, when it can catch some street lights after a light misting of rain. So much artistry and curvature for a vehicle called the "box caprice". It was the same color as the '77 9C1 Impala you have/had in light green.
This reorganization was certainly the end of an era if nothing else. From the birth of GM until this reorganization, GMs divisions basically acted as their own separate car companies. Sure, they shared bodies and chassis, but they each had their own powertrains, styling, and features on their respective vehicles. This reorganization upped the homogination to another level where the brands shared SO many components, including styling and engines, that the divisions lost their respective identities as a result. I have no doubt this decision led to the deaths of Olds and Pontiac, which is a shame.
Ross Perot’s relationship with GM may be worth exploring.
Love GM. Pre 1973.
I would definitely agree with you on that, specifically with 1972 being the last year of the true 'hardtop' and convertibles offered on the Malibu/LeMans/Cutlass/Skylark mid-size cars before the 'colonade' took over starting with the '73. Not to be a hypocrite, but the '73-'77 Monte Carlo, Grand Prix and Regal coupes pulled off looking good. I know the 1971-'76 full-size GM's weren't as popular as the '65-'70 models that preceded them, but they were the last to have the cool body styles of the 2 and 4-foor open coupes and convertibles through '75. Although the downsized GM's (starting in '77) were necessary for many familiar reasons, they lost all of the 'romantic', 'fun', 'parade-car' body styles forever, replaced with the generic 2 and 4 door sedans and a station wagon, dropping the 2-door sometime in the '80s. What happened to the full-size cars (I described) is overlooked as the beginning of the end for GM. It wasn't very long into my life this all happened, either. Born in May '57 during GM's pinnacle, I was still a teenager when the name, rank and serial # full size cars debuted in late 1976.
Pre 1971 for me
Pre 1973 leaves out the 77 downsized full size cars and the 78 downsized G intermediates.
THANK YOU ! ! I entered college in 1978 and was interested in business/economics. I saw the confusion in GM and ran away, into Medicine ! Most happy to be retired now.
My father indulged me, so I drove an Audi 5000 in 1979. It was wonderful, yet it angered me. GM and Ford should be better than a company like Audi. Well, as I mentioned, I ran away from the issue that still haunts me.
You were lucky to get an Audi during that time when they weren't so astronomical in price and less complicated and more reliable. I used to be a fan of the 5000 and also the 100s in the early 90s. I was going to look into getting a 90 or 100 until a friend of mine who owned a 100 talked me out of it.
He said you have to make sure if you own a car like this, that you are going to have the money to fix it when it breaks.
"You dodged a bullet"...
@@Porschedude8 Indeed. I really wanted to be a fan and like that car. But evidence showed me afterwards I was glad I just went with a Taurus. 🤣
I agree, CAFE regulations didn't give them the time needed to develop and fully tested everything first to avoid the problems before release. And the CAFE 'footprint' rules that basically exempted trucks and SUVs from the same rigid fuel economy standards is what ruined it altogether
That might explain why the cars sucked but their trucks and SUVs were solid and reliable loved to this day?
Agreed!
It was around this time when interest rates were well over 10%. This generated surpluses in GM pensions far above the actuarial reserve needs which meant the surplus became revenue to the company as well as pension contributions were stopped.
Also health benefits costs were low and easy to expand rather than pay higher wages and the number of employees was near its peak.
In the nineties interest rates plummeted while the workforce shrank and huge numbers retired.
Thus began the increase in pension liabilities and rapidly increasing health benefits costs to the aging workforce and retirees that bled the company for about twenty years that took it to and then over the brink.
As to the shoddy products, I bought my first new car after college from Ford. It came from the factory with a bent axle. I can tell similar stories about friends who bought GM and Chrysler products during that time. Then you have the Vega and Pinto. Shoddy products from US automakers in the 1970s is fact! I think the downfall of all the American car companies started during the 1970s. Because of poor quality, many customers went to Japanese products and never came back. This trend is somewhat still going on, though not as drastically.
I don't think today anybody makes a really terrible car.
So, it seems everyone learned from the fast, reckless decisions you mention.
@@67marlins See the Korean car brands. Read up on BMW, See the issues with most brands CVT transmissions. Read up on Fords double clutch transmissions. What you say is generally true, but clunkers are still out there. Ford and GM car quality is generally far, far better than in the 1970s.
Interesting video, I worked as a outside contractor for Executive Protection, covering about 6-8 of the Top GM executives Including the Presidents and Chairmen, it was during this period of Change , and I could tell when the pressure was on , they would be working long hours and and coming home at all Hours, And Robert Stemple was a very nice Man, Roger Smith Well.....
I grew up liking Fords and Mopar, but always admired the relative autonomy of Pontiac and Oldsmobile to create good cars that frankly embarrassed chevy.
My brand new 1986 El Camino had the balancer bolt shear off. Said balancer walked out, took off the crankshaft key, and started shaking like a paint mixer.
Into the dealership it went. Pulled out the engine, and replacement of the crankshaft was the fix. 12K on the speedometer.
Get it back, and a year or so later, the junk turbo 200R4 transmissions starts acting up. I had to disconnect the lock up solenoid. It would lock in all gears forward except 1st. Then a Chevette could pass me.
The temperature selectors cable pivot broke. I either had full heat or full A/C. Took me awhile to figure that one out.
Then the intake manifold gaskets started leaking oil. At 40K. All of my issues happened at low mileage.
I was glad when a drunkard totaled out that truck. I was DONE.
GM employe here. We used to call BOC "Big Old Cars".
I see you also use the GM method of shorthand; i.e. 'employe'. Adam covered that a while ago.
I really think today's Buicks look like Bigfat TURDS .........
@@61rampy65 fuel "gage" lol
Brilliant! I think that this type of series could really flourish on your channel. My dad worked as a millwright for Fisher Body in Flint and was laid off in 1987. I remember that year being a lean Christmas at our house. We almost had to move to New York state before he thankfully landed a job in town at GM Truck and Bus thanks to his seniority.
The real beginning of the end for GM was selling junk -- like the 1978 LeSabre with a 3.8L V6 that my parents foolishly bought ("GM knows what they're doing," said my dad). If you pressed the gas pedal more than half way down, the engine would just stall. It spent weeks at the dealer's service department to no avail. My parents were nearly in tears because they really needed that car. Forty-six years later, nobody in my family has purchased another GM product.
It's amazing that with all the effort in the mid-80s to improve efficiency and become more competitive, that GM still managed to drop the ball with regards to the competition, specifically from Japan. The timing of this video is interesting in that GM has just announced a major pullback on their robotaxi program. I can't help but think they are making another major strategic mistake.
I’m a millennial but I’ve always perceived the turning point for GM to be around 1980 give or take. The malaise era. It’s a shame the person in charge then (Roger Smith) did such a terrible job transitioning GM to a modern global automaker. Thru the sheer brute force of its size and market share it staggered into the 21st century, when it was finally felled by the Great Recession.
The internet likes to make a passion play of obsessing over every flawed product from Vega to Aztek, but an inherently healthy company could’ve survived the occasional product failure. GMs relentlessly poor decision making in the 70s/80s was the lethal wound.
Fascinating discussion. It’s like we’re attending a history of General Motors college course. Well done! Locking forward to future lectures.
Good overview of the corporate challenges that GM endured. Thanks Adam.
Just watch Roger and Me and that will tell you what went wrong.
there's been a criticism that "GM never met a government regulation it didn't like". In the early days of mandates, GM had the economics and engineering to out maneuver the competition, GM already invented a lot of what became mandated. As things snowballed with CAFE limits, as the video mentions being so large and having to change so much tripped them up. So... don't forget govt regs in this mix. What would the automotive world look like today without CAFE regulations?
I remember as a kid in the 90s, being in my father's Chevettes, and wishing for the day he could buy an actual car. I knew they were garbage even at 5 year old. Yes, he owned up to five at one point. Only one was ever "working".
Bought a Japanese car at 18 and have never considered a GM.
My family had 6 Chevettes. No problems other than a fuel pump, alignment and AC recharge.
Just a brilliant video, Adam. I had no idea about the 1984 CPC/BOC reorganization. This was not something that even your typical die-hard GM buyer was even aware of... at least I wasn't. It wasn't common knowledge among the buying public. It's no surprise that it failed. Despite my loyalty over the years, my view of GM is sadly no longer the same. They are simply not the same company they were in the 60s, when they were producing beautiful, high performance vehicles. I think the decline began in the 1970s when the federal government began issuing mandates to the industry.
Roger Smith was the primary cause of GM's downfall. He is considered one of the worst CEOs in history. His policies of corporate conformity were disastrous for all of the divisions.
Wow, great information, Adam. I was there from 1980 to 2001 at Delco Electronics. I was hourly and ended up salaried. I was so busy at the time I didn't realize what they were trying to do but hopefully I can start putting it together with your help. I loved the Auto Industry. I remember being in a meeting in 1992 and they were saying North American Operations was loosing money. I was thinking how are we staying in business. It definitely got my. attention.
When GM ended Oldsmobile and Pontiac I never bought another piece of their junk!
Agreed 100%
Same, I’ve been buying Ford trucks and of all things Jeeps. To my surprise the Jeeps are remarkably great and reliable!
@DUNEATV
My sister has a 1998 Wrangler she bought new. Never a problem.
While I'll readily admit and even champion the idea that everyone has their own tastes, I can also agree that one of the fastest, best handling, and dare I say most attractive cars on the planet (the new ZR-1) could hardly be considered junk. It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it certainly is a masterpiece of modern engineering.
@@Jerry-ok8gj meanwhile, the current Jeeps 😬
They had great cars in Europe and Australia they could have made in the USA but management was too stupid!
And arrogant.
GM also went overboard in the 1980s with expanding their brands' lineups and introducing Geo and Saturn, which ended up costing GM a lot in a short period. The rebadging GM had been doing since the 70s had also begun to play a toll on finances.
Seeing you did this video and a video on the history of the Pontiac brand, you should do a video on the history of Oldsmobile. I can also picture you publishing books on automotive history and selling them on Amazon Kindle.
Thank you so much for all that you share. You are a true automotive enthusiast !!
The people behind this channel are probably aware of it but Ingrassia and White's book, _Comeback: The Fall and Rise of the American Automobile Industry,_ covers the BOC-CPC reorganization in quite a bit of detail. After reading it, and watching this video, I think GM suffered from an inertia problem. By the time it was obvious that they needed to make a change, it was so late that they had to make all the changes at once, on an impossibly short deadline. It was not a recipe for success.
The joke within General Motors was B-O-C stood for Big Old Cars, and C-P-C stood for Cheap Plastic Cars. I thought that it was a bad idea.
I agree with you as much as GM frustrates me I fantasize that every car could be perfect cars like as an example the 80 Omega could essentially be a 96 Buick Century with the body and interior quality of a 92 Cadillac Brougham I have to forgive them I have no concept of what this takes. I remember in particular feeling like the 88 GMT400 was built of numerous what I believed would should be S series parts, thinking if the 88 truck had heavy duty bolted on door hinges like the 87 down truck and dual piston calipers like the competitors 1980 cab design GM would be the leader things like MYLAR on the late 70s cars these videos help explain this to people like myself who really want to know how we went from the 63 Starfire and 65 Bonneville to the 82 Cimarron and 83 Parisienne. This is where you have unlocked untapped resources sir I suggest segmented “old school” porch chats for this topic chapter base it for the geeks
Great episode!
At 15:33, one big reason is budgets. Every year, companies and divisions/subsidiaries within those companies need to create a budget for how to spend the money allotted/available to them. So, if you spend money developing and making a product, that is an expense that needs to be offset by the sale of that product. If you give that product to a sister-company/division, you need them to pay money from their budget to cover the costs you incurred, and even make some money, because you're trying to make a profit to justify your existence to the parent company and their shareholders.
I wonder if anyone at GM watches these videos because they're very good.
So sad to remember that GM was not just the largest auto company in the world, it was the largest CORPORATION in the world... Maybe they should have held on to Frigidaire? 😢
Pretty much all domestic refrigeration companies and household appliance devisions have been sold to China.
When they needed to develop a product as refined as the little Honda Accord, they were stuck trying to meet CAFE, I never thought of ALL the components that had to be reinvented, right down to the door handles. All our 60-76 Caddies had the SAME door handles! With Frigidaire and EMD and later GMAC mixed in, there's more than a whiff of what happened to Penn Central RR in this story. It's a miracle there IS a GM in 2024.
Thanks to the US government in 08. GM was too big to let fail.
Why not let the divisions operate more semi independently? That’s what allowed GM to thrive in its earlier days. The divisions could be nimble and adaptable. They had independent engineering and design and sometimes manufacturing too. But the GM umbrella allowed these semi independent groups to share technical developments when it was advantageous. Internal consolidation and elimination of redundancy probably seemed like a good idea to the bean counters when they took control. But it ended up killing the organizational organism from the inside. They tried to make a healthy subject healthier and ended up turning it into a sick patient. And every time they thought they hadn’t done enough they kept doubling down and making the patient sicker. All the while the “cure” was actually toxic to the organization. The question is whether these were innocent mistakes or whether the U.S. auto industry tanked on purpose so that ultimately they could have off shore work forces laboring under authoritarian regimes??? Sounds nuts I know but one wonders… Wall Street will stop at nothing to hollow out America and destroy it from within. And that’s where the real corporate control rests. Not in the top management of each company in the real economy. They all have to dance to Wall Street’s tune while the whole country goes downhill in a heap of imaginary “productivity” and debt that is all too real. Oh well … there’s my rant for the day. 😅
The typo on the plate at 16:45 says it all.
No wonder they lost the plot.
That was an intentional spelling. There’s an entire story behind that.
I bought a new '78 El Camino. Built in Mexico, half metric half SAE nuts and bolts. A POS that I sold in disgust 2 1/2 years and 65,000 miles later- never to buy GM again. So it started long before '84.
Just curious, what engine?
Was the engine a big part of your problems with it?
Hope you didn’t buy Asian, because they’re an even bigger POS.
65k miles is a hell of a lot of miles for only 2 years of ownership....the average driver back then probably drove only about 10 to 12 thousand miles per year. Was this car maintained properly during this torture test? If not, no car is going to hold together driving 30 thousand plus miles a year.
@@rogergoodman8665In 1981, we bought a two-year old Oldsmobile Delta 88 with 60,000 miles on it. Drove it another 105,000 miles and sold it still running well - five years made a big difference in engineering and manufacturing. Didn’t buy a newer GM vehicle until last year with a Chevrolet Bolt EUV.
All American cars in the 70s were shit.
Fascinating! Thanks Adam...
1979 is when I first had problems with GM. I purchased a '79 Monza Spyder that had multiple problems, two different color mirrors and Spyder decals also paint peeling off the bumper. The last two Chevrolets that I had were a 2008 Colorado and a 2010 Malibu. Both were poorly made and cured me of my GM addiction. The best GM car I ever owned was a '77 Camaro.
Bro, brilliantly explained. Thanks for posting this video!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
On the commemorative plate for BOC Chicago Assembly, they spelled “employees” wrong. That sort of sums it up.
😂 For those who missed it the first go around (I was one of them) it’s at the 16:14 mark.
I understood it was intentional. GM had their own spelling rules to avoid miscommunication.
My new 1982 Z28 Crossfire Camaro was the fifth GM car I purchased. It was a total pile of garbage. The paint and assembly were perfect. But the trash components GM was using in those vehicles was the issue. Stereo heads, bearings, oil pressure sensing units and the worst was some transducer thing that fed speed info to the computer. (Oh yes, the first computer failed and went over to limp home mode at 500 miles.) When that transducer thing failed, it would take out the speedo cable and gears. I believe that happened three times. And the idler arms must have been made from pot metal.
I have purchased 10 new cars since. Not one from GM. All of them from Japanese brands, other than one Volvo.
In my book. That was the end of GM. When I traded in the Z28 for a Swedish car.
I'm going to be 67 years old next February and I kid you not that for the first almost 40 years of my life there was at least one GM car either my own or within my family Could be Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile ,Buick or Cadillac But since then I'm hard pressed to remember any GM car from the 90s or newer since then!!!!And it's sad beacuse I'm looking at my die cast car collection right now( very substantial) And I see more GM cars, The old GM CARSAnd it almost depresses me to think 'bout what happened!!!!!.In a similar note I live in the Cleveland Ohio area and the very first GMplants. That I can think of was Fisher Body in East Cleveland Long Gone, GM Parma in Parma and Fisher guide Division in EIyriaOhio, Both the Fisher plants are gone and certainly East Cleveland definitely started going down hill when Fisher body closed!!!!!.
Gm basically was its own government bound by the government ! Growing up in the 70's GM was a blessing for many keeping there cars on the road that much longer because of standardized parts ! 45 years later this still.holds true ! Parts are plentiful - low cost and fairly easy for the DIY community ! Thats why all i own is gm products !
Product redundancy and poor quality control at the factory did them in back in the 70s. It's ironic because many well designed cars and car parts like the Oldsmobile gas V8 were often some of the best ever made.
What if GM leveraged their European auto platforms such as Opel and Vauxhall? They were fuel efficient and decent build quality.
In Short Answer YES!! As soon as they came out with “Mr “Goodwrench” that GM brought out you knew that something was up especially with Regal, Grand Pre, Cutlas, and Monte Carlo, V-6 pre ignition as well as detonation and diesel ing (running after ignition is off) with absolute no power. I remember these Cuz I was in High School 81-85. These are mainly the years that killed the GM product. That doesn’t even cover the diesel and so much more, of Quality from then on was noticed that it No longer existed in the line up. It wasn’t only GM Ford and Chrysler was going to junk as well. Appliances followed and continues to Tools.
This was interesting. I learned what the “CPC” in “CPC Flint” is. The TPI 305 that came in my Z28 has a GM Motorsport decal on the intake plenum that has CPC flint logo on it. knew the motor was made in Flint didn’t know what the CPC was.
That bump back up in the late 70’s was Project 77, the new Chevrolet Caprice Classic/Impala and the 1977 downsizing 👍
(with tongue in cheek) Ah! But the drop of market share for GM had a positive note: They didn't have to worry about the Federal Trade Commission making any inquiries about dominating the market . . . as years before there had been urban rumors about General Motors getting the Feds attention on such matters.
Adam, this is superb 👏
May I suggest seeds for the fertile soil of your imagination 🙏
1) Imagine a parallel timeline where this same decision was successful,
2) Which company has done this successfully? VW, with its myriad brands?
3) compare and contrast GM, Ford (with its PAG group), Stellantis, BMC, Rootes Group...., and,
4) the care and feeding of automotive subsidiaries, ie:- Holden, Vauxhall, Opel, Saab, Volvo, et al.
🖖🙏
Loved the video, very informative.
I had an 82 Z28. 305V8-POS. Didn't keep it very long. I love pre 74 GM.
Thanks Adam. I remember watching the "3/4" body's from Fisher on S.Saginaw in Flint on trucks to the Buick plant on Stewart St.
A major car magazine in the late 1980's: "General Motors would make cars out of cardboard if they thought it would save them 2 cents per unit..."
More of this! More of this! More of this! Please! Please! Please!!!!!
Bought a new 88 IROC Z convertible - pricey for the time and the biggest piece of junk I've ever owned. It had issues that multiple dealers weren't able to figure out. Have bought mainly Honda the last couple decades.
Absolutely!
I once read that GM was so confusing by design, even with the naming and options for their cars, for tax reasons. Someone said bookkeeping was so confusing in GM that even the IRS was baffled at some aspects, and GM got away with that for a very long time.
When it comes to GM construction quality, Adam you mentioned the body construction and interiors of the GM full size cars of 1971 as a turn for the worse.
I totally agree that cars in this generation were really different (and worse) than everything before them, especially in these two areas. All you had to do was to experience how the doors closed. They were awful. In my opinion, the 1970 Camaro and Firebird were two of the best styled American cars of the entire 20th century. Unfortunately these cars with their “LCDs” (loose clunky doors) previewed the poor construction of the 1971 full size vehicles. This construction then also characterized the 1973 mid size cars.
The mid 70’s GM compact cars were somewhat spared because the X-body (Nova, Omega, Ventura, Apollo - NOVA) cars benefitted from a significant facelift of the 1968 body, so the good structure remained intact. That said, at this time other cost cutting measures plagued these cars, cancelling out the goodness of this solid platform. Glued in place headliners, miserable afterthought Landau roofs (which caused roofs to rust, especially in California), and poor quality interior materials all led up to cars that were almost worthless after 7 years or 100,00 miles. I had the feeling that GM had lost all respect for their customers.
Everyone knows that customer loyalty takes a long time to build, and in some cases it takes a while to degenerate. Lifelong “Chevy families” would never think to buy a Toyota back then, and these loyalists were “rewarded” with the Vega and Chevette. I think after these two debacles, in the most relevant segment of the market in the 70’s, the sub-compact market, GM gave loyalists pause to leave their brands forever. They regained many customers with the “well designed” FWD X cars at first, as their sales initially were astounding, but fell off sharply as those customers reported how painfully they had been let down by the miserable GM build and component quality.
So now they destroyed their chances in both the compact and subcompact markets. Toyota and Honda were more than willing to offer customers in these segments really well made cars with lots of nice features (first generation Accord for example) bullet-proof reliability, great fuel economy and good price. With the momentum that the Japanese gained at this time, there was no way for GM to reverse the trend. The precipitous drop in market share meant that GM was getting what they deserved. This was all because they forgot to respect their customers and thought they could foist junk upon them. To me that was the core of GM’s downfall.
(Also, to me the 1976 Seville was the last hurrah of the glory of how GM could build great cars. It had the solid X body platform as a basis, made only better great components, excellent materials and superior build quality. If only that car could have affected GM quality as much as GM rooflines in the 1980’s…)
Nicely put. GM’s problems ran through the entire organization even to the retail level. Too many dealerships trying to sell the same badge-engineered cars. Often within short distances of each other. Too many models. Dealerships in operation not to sell new cars, but rather to make money other ways in the car business of those times.
I had no idea about this split.
Otherwise I think it started in the 1970's when the engineering and the quality took a nose dive especially Chevrolets engine components and the paint and horrific/catastrophic body rust.
My 2 cents, Toyota, Honda, Nissan / Datsun, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and to a lessor case VW/Audi, didn't have worthless duplicate products under different irrelevant brands. GM, especially after Roger rationalization of Drivetrains, etc made brands less and less relevant. Remember BMC/British Leyland failed because of worthless brands, Morris/Austin/Triumph/MG, Rover. They spent so much effort trying to appease those basically irrelevant brands while trying to make as much common. I blame the GM, Ford and Chrysler brand problem on the State by State dealership laws which protected them at the expense of the health of the parent company. In 1959 GM Finance got a taste of how much money could be saved by serious consolidation of the main body. That didn't last long and by the early 60's it was back to usual which still worked since each brand had their own drivetrains and chassis. By the 1970's GM would had been far more competitive if they went to two brands, Chevrolet mass market and Cadillac Premium. GM could had still kept most engineering unique making Cadillac a serious competitor to BMW, MB, Audi and later Lexus, Acura and Infiniti.Keeping components like AC parts, steering, electric parts fairly common to keep volume up and cost down. I worked the the largest US HVAC company and they wasted and still waste tons of money appeasing worthless brands that serve no real purpose since the products are just badge engineered! GM brands dealers ended up competing more with each other than Toyota etc. AMC would had died by early 60's had Romney not ditched Nash and Hudson for a unified Rambler brand.
I have an interesting vehicle collection of mid 80s Cadillac and Oldsmobile full size diesel cars. The 85 Fleetwood d'Elegance is a ONE YEAR mechanical wonder, different fuel injection/filtering arrangement from 84 and not offered in 86, all front drive that year. Yes, those cars are a mix of metric and SAE fasteners, fortunately I enjoy dealing with the fascinating challenges of keeping these old oil burners humming. Of course GM pulled the plug on the genre just as they got them reliable and developed.
To my mind the 86 model year really showed the decline of quality and value across the product line.
I’d love to find a really nice low mileage 1985 Cadillac diesel particularly a Fleetwood de Elegance 4dr.
Thanks for this very informative post.....great detail and supported with facts.
It's a shame because GM made a fantastic, diverse and reliable family of cars until about 1977.
However, I think we would all like your perspective on the post-bankruptcy, 2009-forward GM.
Wouldn't the management structure have been much more effective after the Great Recession?
I think the biggest downfall for gm was just their build quality honestly. Car companies now and car design as a whole shows that people are willing to buy cookie cutter cars regardless of brand (think even within the gm stable with their small suvs that look similar and have the same exact engines). My dad was a mechanic during the 80s and 90s at gm dealers of various makes, and one thing that always comes up in conversation is build quality. Sending out cars for pdis with stuff that wasn't even installed from the factory, but that had the hardware in the center console for something like a different center console. Having poor engines that weren't very reliable overall, making engines like the Northstar that could have been amazing, but got a bad rep and then they took too long to fix that reputation. Same with their transmissions, where it took them way too long to ever correct the issues (like the 4t60 through the 90s and into the 2000s, or the transition from the 700r4 to the 4l60. Optispark in the 92-96 c4 giving it a bad rep and slightly being overblown, or the allante having an anemic engine for the first couple of years
7:50 I really want an OG Tempest! Interestingly Buick did well in the '80s. And I think that's Cadillac's doing. Between the "V 8-6-4" , "HT-4100" and the notorious Diesel, A lot of well heeled GM loyalists who could easily afforded a Cadillac went with a Buick instead. If I'm not mistaken the "J" platform was the only one used by ALL FIVE of the divisions. Examples: Only Cadillac and Buick ever had "D" bodies. But I don't think Cadillac ever used the "A" body, at least in the post war era.
Gm 68-72 and 73-77 best years GM ever had
Barra was the beginning of the end of GM
It's hard to point to one single event when GM jumped the shark. It's usually an accumulation of small things that go unchecked or uncorrected that in time really add up. I think for Cadillac it was when they came out with the 4100 and the 8-6-4 engines. Both of those were just terrible failures that really tarnished Cadillac's name and image. I don't think Cadillac has ever recovered from those.
I would like to see a video about Ralph Nader and the safety regulations he pushed through and how GM and other auto manufacturers dealt with the issues.
I still contend that the reorganization should have kept all the car brands, but streamlined the product offerings so that there was no overlap. Drop Saturn, sell Saab keep Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile and Chevrolet as distinct models with fundamental platform sharing. Chevrolet focused on smaller /cheaper cars. Pontiac with sportier, models, Buick and Olds larger mid-luxury with Cadillac as a pure upmarket brand. No more cookie-cutter cars. Two dealer channels (GM stores and Cadillac stores)...no direct competition between brands. All light trucks under Chevy, all commercial trucks under GMC. I'm not CEO or marketing genius, but I am a lover of cars and history and this plan would have saved the legacy brands.
I think GMs downfall began, slowly, back in 1971. Much more parts shared among the divisions, such as suspensions and frames, and build quality went down the drain pretty fast. The Vega, need I say more? Everything GM tried to do seemed to be half-assed, using the customer to be the vehicle tester. In the 80s, all GM cars really did look alike. The Iron Duke- who would buy one after listening to it? GM did have some major successes, but more fails than wins.
I thought GM was shy of 60% in 78-79!? I know I was told that. 40!??? 😳😳😳😳😳 Wow. I don’t understand how that is? Maine must be a microcosm of the market? Growing up EVERYTHING was GM. I mean EVERYTHING. This is fascinating please explain what happened to our favorite car company
I think that GM’s downfall was in the sixties and it’s being ignorant of its problems with the Corvair. The next problem was the Vega, both in engineering and assembly by the GMAD. Quality started going down in the seventies. The division’s weren’t able to manage their own problems. The cars were losing their identities. The engineers were not responding to quality complaints like the 200 transmission and the diesel. By the time most stuff was fixed, we were driving Toyotas. They started taking money out of the interiors, when others started investing. Then there were consumers like me who had one crappy GM product and were pretty much done.
There's an interesting documentary available here on RUclips that also showcases the labor relations crisis that GM was in during the early to mid 1980s. It's called Final Offer and is well worth a look.
Have seen it. Great film
When I joined Detroit after executive assignments in Europe and Asia it was just the Truck and Car groups. IMO some of the best staff worked in the truck groups and had far better products and many in the car group were from a different era in attitude and arrogance. It was all very dysfunctional. After working for GMIO in Asia and also with Opel/Vauxhall I can say I pretty much hated everyday in Warren. Bully leadership and arrogance and team politics was abundant. GMIO had an entirely different business culture. I was an A-band executive so saw and heard it all in many meetings. It was obvious to me at the time what was coming
Growing up General motors was the can do company. They invited the catalytic converter , I believe the lunar rover true automatic transmission.
The product was supposed to be rigorously tested before being sold.in the 80s the customer was driving in the proving
ground
I worked at Van Chevrolet in Scottsdale AZ from 1993 to 1996 and I could tell you the trucks sold like HOTCAKES 🥞!!!
Those were great trucks & well designed
And paying a woman $29000000 a year who knows nothing about cars. Shows how stupid a company can be. Paid to destroy GM.
Regarding GM's cheaper products in the late '80's, my memories are paint peeling down to the grey primer, depressing decomposing interiors, cheapo plastic trim (especially those awful Cavalier nasty hubcaps), and dull and uninspired drivetrains. No wonder us Canadians switched to Civics and Golfs in that era, especially as our beloved Pontiacs were now reduced to crappy Sunbirds and Tempests, and (urp) LeMans built by Daewoo...
The only thing harder than getting to be number one is staying number one.
GM lost their minds around 1980. Decisions were made by idiots rather than the engineers. Bad transmission, engines rushed into production before testing was finished. In 1984 the olds 88 old body style was one of the best selling cars in the US and GM stopped production! I had a 79 98 diesel I loved although the engine crapped out at 70,000 miles. It was replaced by a dealer not trained in this engine and much later I found the engine had never been timed properly. In the 80’s Ross Perot bought in to the company. He asked a question, what do we do better than any other car company. Nobody could answer his question.
They had bad water pumps, starter’s, cooling systems, transmissions and so on.
He did not buy into the company. General Motors bought his company.
They tried for a quick fix. As with most quick fixes, it didn't work. Apparently nobody tried doing anything about scaling down the enormously bloated management structure in general motors. even after bankruptcy their treasury department was made up by dozens of people. Absurd. Later on there would be the disastrous attempt buy Roger Smith to automate the assembly process. If they could only get those billions of dollars back. Roger Smith was such a fool
Ford and GM break my heart. They can go back to the Mercedes 240D and build it even Better !!!
The Germans have lost their way. Fill The Void !
I'd be curious to hear how the conception and brith of Saturn impacted GM's budget situation in the late '80s and early '90s. It obviously sucked away precious product development money at a time GM could ill afford it. I doubt it would've been enough to save GM from bankruptcy in 2008, but perhaps one of the other divisions might have survived?
16:30 Wonder if the spelling of employees as “EMPLOYES”’on the plate pictured was a deliberate internal GM New English spelling to save cost on the expense of extra letters.
Adam spoke about it alittel with GM having to completely reengineer their entire line up of vehicles as well as Ford, Chrysler and AMC as well as the could. The imports were stealing profits from them, while they didn't have to anything much to their line up. Just work with in the era Cafe standards. That is why American cars suffered so badly. Surprized that there are any left at all. Biden didn't with his term in office. I DON"T want an ELECTRIC vehicle, period! The tech is not there, at least for me anyway. Talking about battery storage capability. Pluss I HATE these massive touch screens! I want buttons and KNOBS that are lit up at night, and well placed.
While reducing bureaucracy is something to be championed, there must always be customer satisfaction as the end goal.
The company may now say, "Look at our new streamlined platform", but the customer is going to say, "Hold on, that's not a Cadillac, that's a boxy little Chevy or Pontiac at a much higher price".
If the reorganizing results in hideous stying, plastic interiors, and declining quality and reliability, then the customer is ultimately going to walk over to the Toyota dealership. And that company had no problem with size issues as it became number one.
The 1070 UAW strike was the root cause of the decline. In its wake, GM could no longer competitively make vehicles from a financial standpoint, especially against the increasingly more prevalent Japanese manufacturers (offshore or onshore). They had to cut costs is other areas, so it was quality of materials, and engineering. Their market share began to erode, which made things worse because they now had jobs bank where they had to pay idled workers to come in and sit in a room which made the cost issue even worse. Their lack of spine to break the union killed them. Ironically, they chose not to do that in the bankruptcy as well, which still kills them from a quality stand point.
Very sad that today I would never consider buying a new GM vehicle.
It’s strictly Honda or Toyota for me.
Well said
What a mess amazing it's still around. As I currently drive a buick envista.
I just felt there was no honesty in the marketing to consumers, the lousy longevity and reliability, and trying to pull on customer emotions they had with their cars from the 60's, but I had none since that was before my time.