• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Congress suggests management shakeup at GM a necessity

boomerang

boomerang

Lifer
Along with five members of the Board of Directors.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122868452234486231.html

On Sunday, Jerome B. York, an adviser to billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian who served as a GM director in 2006 when Mr. Kerkorian owned a stake in the company, called out publicly for sweeping change at GM. "Aside from a failure of leadership at the most senior executive management level, GM has five long-serving directors who have been on the board 10 years or more," Mr. York said in a telephone interview. "They have approved of and overseen many of the moves that have contributed to the company's troubles. They should also resign."
Click to expand...

President-elect Barack Obama, speaking at a news conference in Chicago Sunday, also suggested the Big Three may have to make management changes as part of a bailout, although he stopped short of naming Mr. Wagoner directly.
Click to expand...

They can't get rid of him soon enough to suit me. If it takes Congress or Obama to do what the BoD needed to do years ago, then so be it. It's way past time that someone at GM was held accountable for the decline of the corporation.

The saddest truth is that Wagoner's background is in accounting.

Edit: Spelling
 
Not saying it wouldn't hurt anything to change management at GM, but seriously, why weren't they demanding the heads of the citigroup, AIG, etc, resign?? We're pretty much writing them blank checks.
 
Chrysler Chief Executive Officer Robert Nardelli had the balls last week to say that he'd step down if that's what it took to fix his company, possibly by a merger with GM.
 
Originally posted by: Slick5150
Not saying it wouldn't hurt anything to change management at GM, but seriously, why weren't they demanding the heads of the citigroup, AIG, etc, resign?? We're pretty much writing them blank checks.
Click to expand...
The financial group is a career path for a lot of those in Washington. Some of the architects of the meltdown are being brought back into government service from the very institutions they greedily mismanaged into dire straights.

These guys don't want to bite the hand that feeds them. They don't see the automotive industry as a career path for them so they have no qualms conducting the witch hunt. Of course the public outcry from the financial bailout pretty much dictates they have to put on a good show. They are going beyond a show and this is a good thing.

The witch hunt needs to be done. Wagoner and the board are responsible for the state the company is in. There can be no question of that. You can't expect the same people that got the company into trouble to get it out of trouble. Their mindset is the same, there will be no change.


 
Originally posted by: TallBill
Chrysler Chief Executive Officer Robert Nardelli had the balls last week to say that he'd step down if that's what it took to fix his company, possibly by a merger with GM.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I've posted this before but this Chrysler situation is pretty different from GM and Ford. Many of you may know I live in SE Michigan. The papers and the news are always buzzing about what's going on with the auto industry.

Cerberus Capital Management is the majority owner of Chrysler. They have a history of buying up companies, splitting them up and selling them or their assets off for profit. When they bought up Chrysler, the rumors were flying like crazy. They of course denied they any intention of repeating their typical modus operandi. We all new it was a lie.

But they bit off far, far more than they could chew. They were unable to get the company to a state where they could accomplish their goal and then the financial meltdown hit. They have absolutely zero intention of trying to make this company viable. They want to cut and run which is why the possibility of a merger between Chrysler and GM was explored and while you may still see it happen.

If you watched any of the hearings with the House and the Senate you'll know that Congress knows this. Nardelli was asked numerous time why Cerberus was unwilling to pump money into Chrysler. Nardelli was question rather extensively about this. But the questions were carefully crafted as were the answers. If they'd had somebody from Cerberus before them and asked the question they did, the guy would more than likely have been really squirming.

Mullaly at Ford has done great things for them. I honestly don't know whether he's really that bright or if he just got lucky.
 
Strange they've not made similar demands of the banks, isn't it?
You can't expect the same people that got the company into trouble to get it out of trouble. Their mindset is the same, there will be no change.
Click to expand...
100% the thing I've been saying for those who oversaw the financial meltdown, particularly bernanke and paulson. It was their job to do better. You get a botched boob job by a back alley plastic surgeon, you don't go back for repairs.
 
Originally posted by: Slick5150
Not saying it wouldn't hurt anything to change management at GM, but seriously, why weren't they demanding the heads of the citigroup, AIG, etc, resign?? We're pretty much writing them blank checks.
Click to expand...

 
Although, I 100% agree with their sentiments and probably wouldn't stop there, I worry that if you strip too much working knowledge from any company you are most likely to have a short term downside before the "new guys" get up to speed and GM can ill afford any downside right now. It is a conundrum, but I guess you wouldn't lose too much with just one fall guy.

Someone needs to pick apart all the data that GM didn't want to make public to see just how viable any of their plans are before we start looking for a fall guy.
 
Chrysler needs to be chopped up and fed to the dogs. Ford and GM need to continue their improvements (compare an average 2008 domestic vehicle to a 1998 domestic vehicle to get an idea of how far they've come).
 
I don't doubt that a change in leadership is needed at the highest levels of the US auto industry, but for Congress to be saying so is laughable.

After all, Congress has managed to bankrupt the entire country the same way these companies have been run into the ground. The only difference is that congress has the power of government and can simply continue to increase the deficit to levels that would have bankrupted any private company long ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top