"Lutz has got to GO!!!!!"

Kevin · GMPenguin

"Lutz has got to GO!!!!!"

ifcar · Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by: Kevin
"As requested by ifcar, here is the main reasons for why Lutz is bad from this thread.
quote:

Bob Lutz has got to go. He is destroying GM because he is the most self-centered and arrogant idiot ever. He has ruined the GTO, the Lacrosse, the G6, and the new Lumina (I mean Impala). Now he wants to accelerate the mid-sized SUV's. Well what do you know dummy, no-one wants an SUV that gets 15 MPG anymore. Long live the Freestyle!
"

I never imagined that it would be this idiotic.

Let's take it piece by piece:

"He is destroying GM because he is the most self-centered and arrogant idiot ever."

This not only is an unsupported statement, but it is flat-out illogical. Why would Lutz's personality, even if that is his personality, be at all relevent to his automaking procedures? Nothing that this poster has shown supports that, even if by some chance it were truel.

"He has ruined the GTO, the Lacrosse, the G6, and the new Lumina (I mean Impala)."

Lutz did not ruin the GTO, he simply wanted to get a V8 performance coupe into the Pontiac lineup. He found an excellent vehicle that wouldn't take long to get into production, but a high initial price and somewhat bland styling hurt sales. GM certainly isn't losing money on the vehicle, and has gotten a good number of loyal customers out of the deal.
The LaCrosse is a very good car considering that it wasn't allowed a new platform, and I doubt Lutz made the cost-cutting decision that forced that. He also made an excellent, high-quality interior, with one error of unimpressive rear seatroom.
The G6 certainly could've been better executed, but I've seen conflicting reports on whether it was actually a Lutz vehicle. Even if it was, it is hard to hold him responsible for the car's flaws. Judging by his other vehicles, interior quality is important to him, so cost-cutting probably went against his decision in the interior. And the platform and steering were definitely designed for the Malibu before he arrived, and I don't think the pricing was his decision. And despite its flaws, the G6 is selling reasonably well considering that it's a V6 sedan only.
And I don't see how this poster can criticize the new Impala already. It doesn't go on sale for months, and appears, like the LaCrosse, a good vehicle considering the platform it was left with. They even gave it new powertrain choices.

"Now he wants to accelerate the mid-sized SUV's. Well what do you know dummy, no-one wants an SUV that gets 15 MPG anymore. Long live the Freestyle!"

First of all, he's accelerating the full-size trucks, not the midsize SUVs. It's the Silverado, Tahoe, Suburban, Avalanche, and their clones, not the TrailBlazer and family.
Secondly, those vehicles are definitely aging, and high gas prices aren't stifling sales so much as the vehicle's mediocrity. And the incentives needed to move them are almost certainly going to make the improved vehicles worth the investment. Those vehicles' markets are far from dead, competitors are suceeding in them.
Thirdly, Lutz is working on car-based SUVs, more like the Freestyle that this poster seems to like than the current GM midsizes.

What a moron. I guess C/D doesn't get all the idiot trolls.

Kevin · GMPenguin

Here's a post that I thought was good from Rex Raider, GMI Admin (he's from Ontario, btw {GTO reference}):

I'm not defending the guy, but saying is easier than doing.

It's easy for any of us to play armchair quarterback and just come up with all these reasons that we could run GM better than anyone else.

But a what sounds simple ("Kill Pontiac, Kill Buick, less plaftorms, less badge engineering, etc...."). Is easier to say that in is to execute.

I don't see how he has ruined the GTO, LaCrosse, G6 and Impala.

Who is to know how any of them would have been without Lutz's involvement.

THE GTO may never have come over here.
The G6 is WAY better than the GrandAm ever was (but still not as desirable as the Altima)
La Lacrosse is way better than the Century (but still not as good as the weakest Lexus product).
The new Impala is no worse than the last Impala. It's no Camry or Accord.

Getting bnack to the original post:
How is he arrogant? Please give proof.
How is he self-centered? Please back up your statements.

ifcar · Moderator

Basically what I said. Is there anything intelligent being said on the other side that would be worth replying to?

SOAD2k8 · V-6

To guy that posted those comments:

Have you seen Cadillac lately?! aDUUUURRRR!!!

Kevin · GMPenguin

quote:
Originally posted by: ifcar
"Basically what I said. Is there anything intelligent being said on the other side that would be worth replying to?"

Well, here's kind of a little something: (By desmo9)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rex Raider
It's easy for any of us to play armchair quarterback and just come up with all these reasons that we could run GM better than anyone else.

I think it's alot simpler than that ... show me the money.

GM's in a tight financial and market share conundrum. We know great product is one of the few things squarely in GM's control to effectively reverse the slump. They can't do much right now about steel prices, health care reform and overpaid unions. Product is about it. Wagoner actually did have the vision a few years ago to recognize this need, so he hired what he thought was a revered "car czar" ... but one that had never truly proven himself in this capacity. Where's the results? I see nothing on the horizon that'll make GM a product leader by 2010. The Chevelles and Buick Flagships we dreamed about in 2002, for 2007, don't seem to be materializing. And what we see, in Impalas and LaCrosses, are simply underachieving and totally lack creativity.

LaCrosse would have been at the top of the class in 1998. Yet Lutz, seven years later, can't figure out why sales are slow, and he's stumped by Chrysler's success with the 300. He's given us no gotta-haves, certainly not in the mainstream market. The only prospective success he might claim are a couple low-volume 2-seat roadsters. And neither will actually turn the industry on its ear, cuz we've seem 'em for years now! Lastly, while the totally misguided Saab decisions might hurt GM's fortunes the least, it epitomizes just how detached Bob really is from the value of a brand and the customers who savor it.

ifcar · Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by: Kevin
"Well, here's kind of a little something: (By desmo9)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rex Raider
It's easy for any of us to play armchair quarterback and just come up with all these reasons that we could run GM better than anyone else.I think it's alot simpler than that ... show me the money.GM's in a tight financial and market share conundrum. We know great product is one of the few things squarely in GM's control to effectively reverse the slump. They can't do much right now about steel prices, health care reform and overpaid unions. Product is about it. Wagoner actually did have the vision a few years ago to recognize this need, so he hired what he thought was a revered "car czar" ... but one that had never truly proven himself in this capacity. Where's the results? I see nothing on the horizon that'll make GM a product leader by 2010. The Chevelles and Buick Flagships we dreamed about in 2002, for 2007, don't seem to be materializing. And what we see, in Impalas and LaCrosses, are simply underachieving and totally lack creativity.LaCrosse would have been at the top of the class in 1998. Yet Lutz, seven years later, can't figure out why sales are slow, and he's stumped by Chrysler's success with the 300. He's given us no gotta-haves, certainly not in the mainstream market. The only prospective success he might claim are a couple low-volume 2-seat roadsters. And neither will actually turn the industry on its ear, cuz we've seem 'em for years now! Lastly, while the totally misguided Saab decisions might hurt GM's fortunes the least, it epitomizes just how detached Bob really is from the value of a brand and the customers who savor it."

While this person can at least reason better than some of his fellow forumites, Lutz simply can't just make platforms apppear, and this poster does not seem to understand that. Unless they want to ignore the risk of quality defects, they just can't rush anything to the market. And they are developing an RWD platform that will be used for a wide variety of GM vehicles, cars and SUVs alike, but in the meantime they introduced upgraded versions of the Grand Prix, Impala, LeSabre, and Century/Regal, as well as their minivans, in the thought that a newer vehicle is better than the older one, though it would not be worth an investment in a new FWD platform with an all-new RWD platform coming in just a few years.

thewizard16 · V-12

It's interesting to me that the same groups of people who hailed Lutz as an automotive god a few months ago are now rallying against him. Poor guy. Oh well. Just interesting.

ifcar · Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by: thewizard16
"It's interesting to me that the same groups of people who hailed Lutz as an automotive god a few months ago are now rallying against him. Poor guy. Oh well. Just interesting."

They didn't expect him to be human, apparently. Each expected their own version of perfection, impossible in its own right, and further hindered by GM cost-cutting procedures.

thewizard16 · V-12

quote:
Originally posted by: ifcar
"

They didn't expect him to be human, apparently. Each expected their own version of perfection, impossible in its own right, and further hindered by GM cost-cutting procedures."

Agreed. Lutz could have never made everyone happy (who can?) but it's humorous to see the aftermath of his not pleasing everyone.