Diego

Could you please explain this in another manner? It's not as clear as the rest of your post.

Redog

What I heard:

GM started planning the end of Olds back in the late 1970's early 1980's when they started putting 305 SBC V8s in some models like the A body Cutlass. People bought the cars, took the cars back to the dealership and said, "I bought an Olds, I want an Olds" GM was sued and was forced to recall the 305 Chevys and swap with Olds motors if the owners wanted the Olds powerplant.

Then ten years later came Saturn. Since Sautrn came about in 1991 until it's end in 2009 they NEVER turned a profit, however GM was still pumping money, loads of money into Saturn. So they started taking models out of the Olds line up and sales started to go down (less models, less sales, go figure) so the genius that Rick Wanger was, decided to axe Olds, to pay for Saturn. Smart move considering the history of Olds, vs the less than 20 year history of jokes that Saturn was

Diego

Coldwar:

I didn't mean for you to write up a treatise - if you reread your original paragraph with K-Mart, I think you'll notice there was a word or two there that screwed up the meaning of what you were trying to say - but thank you.

In regards to Ohio being a place used for demographical and psychographical data, I don't think it's true. Perhaps there's a town there that's often cited as being a micro representative of a macro population, but not the whole state. The only city I'm personally aware of is Framingham, but it's in Mass!

But back to K-Mart . . . the main reason why I had asked about clarification is because I thought your point may be how K-Mart lost its stature in your home town to Wal-Mart. There's a very good reason why K-Mart is a shell of its former self, and no doubt it's due to Wal-Mart's embrace of information technology and supply chain management. K-Mart, on the other hand, lagged in this regard, which is why they never had anything in stock that was advertised in the circulars.

I was lucky not to have Wal-Mart growing up. We didn't have Target either. Even Sears was a poor choice for young families because malls started popping up in the suburbs that had more interesting stores like Strawbridges and Clothier, Bamberger's (bought out by Macy's), and Wannamaker's (ditto?). Sears was a place to get tools or something fixed, but clothing? Appliances? Nope! K-Mart was for the unfortunate, and Jamesway was even worse.

I don't have a problem with Wal-Mart's existence, as it very much reflects what's great about America. However, I am not happy about how they've priced things under retail - WAY illegal - and how they're the biggest music retailer in the country. But the thing they've developed - and this is a great thing - is that you can walk in there, buy a tube of toothpaste, and know you're probably not overpaying for it. When my sensitivity to cost is a bit greater, I can equip myself with the knowledge to determine what's a good value for my own needs.

toro68

Funny you mentioned the "cut back" on Oldsmobile's R&D.
In a book by the late, Dale Smith, he said Oldsmobile was only getting $100,000/year for their racing budget(by GM) while Chevy had an open checkbook.

auto_editor

[From my position in a bunker deep beneath the hard-frozen Michigan ground I feel somewhat comfortable offering an opinion here. I only mention what I'm going to, well... mention as the traditional "2 cents", though adjusted for inflation.]

GM didn't really kill Oldsmobile. We did. The American consumer.

People buy Toyotas. They also buy cars from Lexus. The fact that the Lexus is really just a tarted-up Toyota in most instances doesn't enter into it. They also buy Scions. Same goes for them, just in the opposite $ direction.

This happens because there are CLEAR differences between the "brands." Heck, even when the Scion dealership is IN a Toyota dealership the differences are (mostly) plain to see.

Three, however, seems to be our limit (or, in Ford's case, two). We can differentiate between cheap, middle and expensive, but that's about it. GM, for the longest time, however, was banking on its being the one car company that didn't have to worry about that.

They were wrong.

No matter how much money GM shoveled into the advertising fire, people wanted an "inexpensive four-door," never an "Oldsmobile with its unique powerplants and hundred-year history of...".

The best GM could do was keep up with the reputations it still had, like "Ford v. Chevy" and "Lincoln v. Cadillac." This meant Chevy had to have EVERY level of car Ford did. And where did they have to carve those cars out from? Yup. The other "middle" divisions.

Proof of GM's sincerity has been laid bare recently. They REALLY thought we'd AT LEAST keep seeing Pontiac's "Excitement!" and Saturn's "Sophistication!" Did we?

I'm just a pup here, but that *might* prove my point. To be perfectly honest, if the car I fell in love with a few months back was a Pontiac or Buick "woodie" I wouldn't be here. Olds, to me--even with my lifelong passion and chosen profession--*might* have lived its best days long before 2003/04. Like 1983/84. CERTAINLY 1993/94.

She had a great run. Look how we all still love her so. But instead of looking for ways in which GM killed her unfairly *maybe* we could recognize that in THIS market she didn't stand a chance.

At best, she'd have been kicked out with Saab, Saturn, Pontiac and Hummer. At worst she could've died with Oakland and LaSalle and the rest of the GM divisions that didn't survive the LAST great financial meltdown.

In the end it wasn't bitterness. It was business.

Drew

Aceshigh

Doesn't make sense when in 1985 Olds sold 1.2 Million cars
Most of these theories are surmised from disgruntled enthusiasts.

The way you're laying out that statement, I disagree.
But I do agree with the rest of your thoughts. I just think you should say
the fault lies with Oldsmobile for not delivering what American consumers wanted.

http://www.joesherlock.com/nwsltr19.html

Jerry Flint, a noted auto analyst who writes for Forbes, cites:
indistinguishable styling,
uninspired engineering,
inexperienced leadership

as reasons for Olds marketplace failure.
Says Flint, "Oldsmobile has had 6 managers in 13 years

Simply put, GM got too corporate, too big, and couldn't handle all of it's divisions properly.
This is why I say, when corporations (or Govt) get too big, it's not good for anyone.

jaunty75

A good commentary, and a link to a story about his '80 Omega that's a bit unsettling.

Higgins

To paraphrase joesherlock, my 1972 Vega GT also "seemed like a good idea at the time".
Worst car ever. Never had any problems with the 69 442 or the 69 S.

goatwgn

It is a shame what GM did to Oldsmobile (and Pontiac). I happen to own two older, very reliable versions of both. They axed my two favorite brands. I beleive a lot of it had to do with the perfect storm of mismanagement, consolidation of too many parts (and engines) between divisions, and robbing one division's assests to prop up another (among many other smaller problems as well). (The reasons for the demise can be debated forever). Fortunantly, I only prefer older iron anyways, I repair late model vehicles for a living, don't want to get in one to drive home, so I use my trusty '74 Cutlass with almost 500,000 miles. But if I were to purchase a new car, it would no longer be a GM model. One of GM's later "misconceptions" is that a former Olds or Pontiac owner will come in and "step down" to a Chevy, or buy a Buick or Cadilllac.

1970cs

It seems to be like a sports game not just one play or factor losses the game even though some times it comes down to a final play or call.

We can site these items: quality of vehicles (reliability) mid 70's
Chevy engines late 70's
diesel engine (reliability) late 70/early 80's
cookie cutter styling mid 80's-mid 90's
bad advertising (not your fathers oldsmobile)
pulling out of blue collar motor sports (Nascar and NHRA) to go to IRL?
taking the Oldsmobile emblem off the first aurora
consumers switching from sedans to pickups and SUVs (yes,Bravada)
taking off all the familiar nameplates (Cutlass,88 and 98)
taking on brand managers from dog food and soapmakers

Plus outside factors such as Consumers report, I have been in several industries which they report on. I tend to highly disagree with their findings.
The biggest factor that seems to be hurting this country is buying of foreign made/produced, remember our cities, schools and plain old us are suffering from no business, homes and people to tax. Just remember that when you purchase these products, very little goes local, most goes to the manufaturer!

rustyroger

I was always surprised at the great brand loyalty the American public show towards their favorite brands, When I was growing up I was taught that British engineering was the best, from cars to razor blades.
Over time it dawned on me that wasn't always the case, no doubt I wasn't the only one. BMC used to be by far the biggest car manufacturer in the UK (50%+ market share in the '50s and '60s), but after decades of appalling management and an indifferent workforce turning out underdeveloped and outdated vehicles it no longer exists.

If the American buying publics brand loyalty was similar to the British I doubt America would have much of a car industry at all by now.

The successful makers present now all make up to date cars that don't go wrong very often. BMW, VW, Peugeot-Citroen, Renault have all dug themselves out of a big hole since the '70s, if the US industry is to follow suit it will take a combined effort from all concerned to get their act together, assembly line workers, management, outside suppliers, all need to work on long term viability, not short term profits which seem to be the order of the day now.

Roger.

f-85

I have been saying this since before 9/11. People just dont seem to get it/care. Its really simple. Americans buying Less American products = Less American Jobs. Things are not made like they use to be. So when we buy foreign products we send our money over seas, and then we have something with less and potentially no future value. It compounds over time. Now look at us (America) we have no money and no value.

68conv455

Bad decisions during the restructure:
Closing dealerships - reversed and saved many that were slated for the ax
Killing Pontiac - gone
Getting out of sports advertising - reversed completely judging by the superbowl ads
Stacking management with Union and Gov't officials. - This will lead to the next problem or under the table funding forever.

ent72olds

Bingo!

OLD SKL 69

l

Well said, couldn't agree more.

Ancient Iron

Very true.The U.S. Government let the foriegn automakers flood the market with cars produced by cheap labor.Now they let them build plants here and avoid Import Tariff's Yes It puts people to work but the money goes back out of the country. What we need to get paid to make a living in the U.S. Prices us right out of the market.Also big corporations don't think twice about outsorcing and sending work out of the country. Detroit, Flint, Lansing and others had third generation auto workers. Now you have people losing their home because the work is gone. Isn't N.A.F.T.A a great ???? Now you get Cheesey products at the American price. G.M isn't run by "Car People " any more ,People like Ed Cole,John Beltz, John DeLorean and Harley Earl to name a few. Now it is run by people who think think they can sell cars based on the past like the Pontiac GTO (Chassis come from Australia Chevy engine and a body that has absolutely no style plus it cost $40,000) And they wonder why they don't sell like the originals. America in general is Rocketing into Third world status

aliensatemybuick

Olds was put out of their misery. I'll never buy another Genital Motors product, not after the last three I've owned since 2003. Garbage.

Most common line from service departments when you complain about some problem or another: "that's normal".

No problem. From now on, I'll buy from another company where a low brake pedal, intermediate steering shafts that needs constant re-lubing, piston's that slap on a cold morning, burning 3 quarts of oil between changes, sunroof and door seals that howl with wind noise, etc etc are NOT considered "normal".

Diego

It's not that simple.

With the gas crisis and American hubris in their favor, the Japanese gained a lot of market share.

Politicians tried to slap on tariff upon tariff to stem the tide and support the American auto industry.

So what did the Japanese do? They built plants in America to avoid the tariff. And they proved that the problem with American cars wasn't with the factory, but with the men running the companies - quality is engineered, not built.

This is a complicated issue, yet it seems everyone suggests simple solutions. And blaming Consumer Reports?

Buy what suits you. It's the responsibility of companies to produce what the market demands, and its the responsibility of the government to promote good trade. Why should I support a company that doesn't meet my needs? Why should I ignore the rules of economics that make the case for specialization, which increasingly makes sense in this global environment?

I just don't see what sense it makes doing things the old way. The world has changed, and the playing field is more even than it's ever been. What has our government done to adapt? What are the people running for president (or, the person in office) suggesting to become more competitive? My wallet and my ballot will answer that.



Yes It puts people to work but the money goes back out of the country. What we need to get paid to make a living in the U.S. Prices us right out of the market.Also big corporations don't think twice about outsorcing and sending work out of the country. Detroit, Flint, Lansing and others had third generation auto workers. Now you have people losing their home because the work is gone. Isn't N.A.F.T.A a great ???? Now you get Cheesey products at the American price. G.M isn't run by "Car People " any more ,People like Ed Cole,John Beltz, John DeLorean and Harley Earl to name a few. Now it is run by people who think think they can sell cars based on the past like the Pontiac GTO (Chassis come from Australia Chevy engine and a body that has absolutely no style plus it cost $40,000) And they wonder why they don't sell like the originals. America in general is Rocketing into Third world status[/QUOTE]

Ancient Iron

Produce what the maket demands??? You are forced to buy whats out there. G.M. stopped building cars that people want. People in America need real cars like we used to build This is why suv's are popular they have room inside. We used to be the leaders of the world in everything ,Now we have a government that worries about everyone else but their own

goatwgn

x2!

Diego

No one is forcing me to buy anything. As an educated consumer, I can determine for myself what meets my needs. In my personal case, it was a Honda. 18 months later, it may have been a Chevrolet, but I didn't have that luxury of waiting.

Aren't GM's sales up yet again?

And why are you using your own personal experience to speak for "people in America?" Apparently, people in America are interested in what GM is offering since their sales are up. Ditto Ford and Chrysler.

Government isn't quite the problem. Old-style, "lizard" thinking is the problem. If anything, the Big 3's reliance on SUV's is what got them in trouble the first time in the past 10 years.

Ancient Iron

[QUOTE=Diego;383873]No one is forcing me to buy anything. As an educated consumer, I can determine for myself what meets my needs. In my personal case, it was a Honda. 18 months later, it may have been a Chevrolet, but I didn't have that luxury of waiting.







Honda..................... It figures

Diego

What figures?

rustyroger

Blame Consumer Reports for stating the obvious??.
IMO it's a good source of information for anyone wanting to make an informed decision about their purchasing choices, Which? magazine is a similar publication in the UK, both give us facts rather than hype.

Of course we buy what suits us, it seems the car buying public wanted reliable low running cost cars that the Big Three didn't provide, so eventually they turned to imports instead which did supply to their demands.
I used to date a fiercely patriotic (Texas first folowed by USA) lady fron Dallas, when I asked what car she had she told me it was a Nissan. So I asked her why not a Chevy or Ford?, she responded "I'd like to but I don't make a big salary and can't afford the repair shop bills". I wonder how many others were in the same position?.

Users of this and other car related forums love our cars for their own sake and probably don't mind or even relish getting our hands dirty fixing them.
But most car buyers simply want a car that will be reliable and pleasant to drive with low running costs. When the American auto industry focuses its efforts on making such cars Americans will buy them, but it will take time to woo back the ones who went to the Japanese and European dealers to find the cars GM, Ford and Chrysler didn't make.

Roger.

Diego

I guess I'm lost on what you're thinking is obvious?

rustyroger

Which cars/fridges/tvs/wristwatches/home insurance/cellphones etc are reliable/what features are offered/running costs/easy to use/have a good or bad track record etc.

If I intend to spend what is left of my salary after HM Government has taken its slice I want information about what I intend to buy.

Roger.

Diego

So you're pro-CR?

And what's HM?

rocketraider

Her Majesty the Queen of course.

ent72olds

And just to clarify, I've been reading by some posters here, that the imports are now building here, which does provide jobs, and the money is not going back into our pot, so to speak. Well, do you really think the "Big Three" are building all their cars here? Guess you are mis-informed...do you know how many "American Cars" are built over seas-across the border(Canada, Mexico, Australia and I'm pretty sure a good portion of GM cars are actually rebadged Opels(Germany)...wait 'till Chrysler releases the "DART"...how do you say "Italian" in "Mexican"?....I am all for buying "American", but really, what does that mean anymore? By the way, do you know what percentage of parts in your "American Car" were made in China? You probably don't want to know the truth...big business is about one thing....PROFIT...don't ask me how I know.....

Ancient Iron

.Also big corporations don't think twice about outsorcing and sending work out of the country. Detroit, Flint, Lansing and others had third generation auto workers. Now you have people losing their home because the work is gone. Isn't N.A.F.T.A a great ????

rustyroger

I'm all for anything that helps me make an informed decision.

Roger.

Diego

General Motors has been a global company WAY before NAFTA came about.

And I hope you understand NAFTA doesn't apply to China, right?

Roger, I'm with you. I have no problem with CR. I don't often agree with their car tests, but I also haven't driven everything they have, and I am an enthusiast, so my judgments come from a different place. If I want a toaster on wheels, CR is perfect.

Cane87

Everyone seems to be under the impression this is a post-NAFTA phenomenon. I'm currently considering buying a '77 Cutlass Supreme.

Whose VIN starts with a 3.

pogo69

for me oldsmobile declined with the 1978 cutlass and into the 80's with the rust,peeling paint lousy fit and and finish and poor mechanical reliability (thru the 80's). but i also felt the worst car was the cadillac cimarron but cadillac was able to rebound

goatwgn

All pre 1981 Oldsmobiles had a VIN that started with a "3". 3 meant Oldsmobile Division before the 17 digit VIN came out in '81. The plant code is the 7th digit. My '74 has an "R" the designates it was built in Arlington Texas. Chevrolets started with a 1, Pontiacs started with a 2, Olds started with a 3, Buick a 4, Cadillac a 6, GM Canada a 7.

Redog

Yes, before the 17 digit VIN 3 meant "Oldsmobile" in the VIN. If the car you were considering was an 87 Cutlass and the VIN started with 3, then we could talk. Plus I don't believe cars were made in Mexico for US Import before NATFA. Just like cars aren't made in China now. However if TAFTA, err I mean the TPP goes thru, then yeah...

Yes the orignal name for the TPP was TAFTA, but they didn't want to call it that because they figure Americans wouldn't embrace the idea

Bernhard

What killed Oldsmobile and caused GM's fall was management !
Lack of vision
Poor quality
Generic car line no competition between divisions
Accountants
The media told the car buying public over and over how bad US car manufactures are and how good the Japaneses manufacturers were.

I think the US car manufactures were not as bad as the media made out and that they built some
excellent cars,vans and trucks.

By the way I drive a GM pick up that I'm very happy with.

rustyroger

I disagree on two points;
GM divisions were competing among themselves, instead of taking market share from Ford, Chrysler or import brands Oldsmobile were fighting with Pontiac, Buick and even Chevrolet for the same market.


Yes, the media constantly told everyone how good imports were and how bad domestics were. But although US manufacturers were not as bad as they were painted they weren't up to the build quality standards of contemporary imports. If US made products were equal to imports then import brands would be looked upon as quirky unusual and rarely seen cars.


Roger.

nsnarsk65cutlass

All good arguments.imo it's not just one issue, Feds regulations,competition,Feds regulatioin,market flooded with cheaper imports,Feds regulations,uaw,Feds regulations,management.

Bernhard

Competition pushes a product forward,with out it the cars become stagnant
When GM was at its best there was a healthy competition between Divisions.

The import cars are not as good as the media say nor were the US cars as bad as they made out.

Import cars are not cheep today and if you add up the maintenance scheduled that you are to adhere to, they are over priced in my book.
The media never talks about the hidden service costs involved with there maintenance plan.