Besides GM selling its Hummer brand, the General also claims it has 16 buyers for Saturn and three for Saab. Neither of these falls into the idea of “bad GM,” other than they are divisions that GM wrecked.
After buying Saab, GM slowly, but inexorably and ineptly, crushed every iota of uniqueness out of it. With Saturn, the one-time independent entity was dragged back into the GM fold, probably in part because it was making the rest of GM look bad.
GM didn’t name any of the potential buyers, but I can think of a couple.
Either Magna, the apparent buyer of GM’s European arm, Opel, or Fiat, who backed off Opel after GM wanted some extra last-minute money, could be interested in it. Fiat might also be one of those 16 potential Saturn buyers.
Yes, the dealers may be losing money on Saturn, but probably not for different reasons than other Shrinking Three dealers.
The General’s big mistake there was bringing Saturn the carmaker back into the generic fold without trying to shut Saturn dealers then or roll them into other brands. Well, now that the National Automotive Dealers Association has less of a leg to stand on, Saturn’s buyer will do just that.
And, while conservatives hammer the UAW, and liberals, greenish types in particular, slam GM itself, why doesn’t NADA get more blame? Doesn’t the acronym say it all?
At the same time, speaking of closing or selling off lines, why doesn’t the General get rid of GMC? Really, are diehard GMC aficionados going to go buy Fords? Let alone Toyotas?
No comments:
Post a Comment