Automotive News, Media & Press - Lutz = Ewing

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060112/AUTO01/601120365

Remember a few years back when the NBA players went on strike, and a few of them tried to organize some fundraiser to help each other pay for their yachts and mansions? patrick ewing had this brilliant quote when questioned about why millionaire athletes should be the benefit of a charity event: "sure we make a lot of money, but we spend a lot of money, too"

enter bob lutz:


"Here's where people get this wrong: They say, 'Why are executives paid so much? You have to ask: Why are professional athletes paid so much?"



better yet, why don't we ask why the ceo for toyota, the most succesful auto company in the world, makes less than one million per year? compared to:



In 2004, Wagoner's compensation package included a $2.2 million salary -- the same as 2003 -- a $2.5 million bonus and 400,000 stock options valued at the time at $5.1 million. In 2003, he received a $2.9 million bonus and 500,000 stock options.

Lutz and John Devine, GM's former chief financial officer, received cash compensation totaling $4.4 million and $4.2 million, respectively, for 2004. In 2003, they each received about $6.4 million. The cash compensation included base salaries of $1.55 million each in 2003 and 2004, plus bonuses. York also called for GM to lower the pay of its outside directors, which receive $200,000 a year, with $140,000 deferred in restricted common stock units.

The automaker is planning job cuts and plant closings to reverse North American losses that reached $4.8 billion in the first nine months of 2005.



a better analogy would be right here with the detroit lions:

the Ford's hire matt millen 5 years ago and pay him 5 million dollars a year to help turn around a floundering franchise...he hires steve mariuchi to one of the richest nfl coaching contracts ever, pays huge signing bonuses to his draft picks, pays more than market value for free agents to come to a team to turn it around.....and five years later they still suck, mariuchi is fired but still collecting his money, the players are terrible but still getting paid, and millen gets a 5 year extension worth 25 million......like my brother in law says, they can't build a car, how do you expect them to build a team?

the fans, like the shareholders, get screwed....the difference is that they keep selling out ford field and the fords make money off of league revenue sharing, but how is gm gonna stay afloat??? lutz would like you to believe that it's only the blue collar workforce that is overpaid compared to the competition, but in reality it reaches a little higher than that...

He who knows the least gets paid the most. Such are the ways of modern society.

Comparing the salary of Toyota's CEO to the salary of GM's CEO isn't exactly even. Wouldn't the salary of Toyota's CEO have to go through currency conversion? One Million US is ~ One hundred, fourteen *billion* Yen(114,311,842.7 Yen). If you compare his Yen to average incomes in Japan mabe it's relatively as high as Wagoner's.

Comparing the salary of Toyota's CEO to the salary of GM's CEO isn't exactly even. Wouldn't the salary of Toyota's CEO have to go through currency conversion? One Million US is ~ One hundred, fourteen *billion* Yen(114,311,842.7 Yen). If you compare his Yen to average incomes in Japan mabe it's relatively as high as Wagoner's.


this was in the detroit news a while back:

In a reflection of Toyota's team-oriented approach, its executive pay is paltry by U.S. standards. Analyst Ron Tadross at Banc of America Securities estimates the total annual compensation of Toyota's CEO at under $1 million - about as much as a vice president at GM or Ford Motor Co. makes in a good year.

they are talking in "american money", not to mention that the cost of living in japan is ridiculously high compared to the states

That makes more sense. But what does this mean? Executives get paid big money in all types of business. That's compensation for an extremely stressful job. If Wagoner, Lutz, et al. aren't doing a good job, the board of directors need to replace them. But the next groups of guys will make the same type of money.

The difference here is that Wagoner is CEO of GM at large which is much larger than Toyota, Lexus, Scion. There will be a differential in compensation due to the differential in responsibility. That's why the CEO of Toyota is compensated much more like a vice president at GM or Ford.

jdustu: Well said! My other favorite "Lutzism" came from an article where he denounced dumping Saab and Hummer because it would be like removing 2 eggs from an omlet and trying to sell them separately. The Lions felt the wrath with an angry fan march, someone should put something together where we protest outside the Ren Cen and call for Lutz to be removed.

That makes more sense. But what does this mean? Executives get paid big money in all types of business. That's compensation for an extremely stressful job. If Wagoner, Lutz, et al. aren't doing a good job, the board of directors need to replace them. But the next groups of guys will make the same type of money.

The difference here is that Wagoner is CEO of GM at large which is much larger than Toyota, Lexus, Scion. There will be a differential in compensation due to the differential in responsibility. That's why the CEO of Toyota is compensated much more like a vice president at GM or Ford.

that's part of the problem: american executives in general, not just at gm, get paid way too much in comparison to the rest of the world.......that's fine if these companies are making money. but these guys are getting the big cash up front to help failing companies, taking gigantic risks involving the livelihoods of thousands of workers in hopes of turning things around, and if it doesn't work out at the very worst they file for bankruptcy and wipe their hands clean...even if they don't drop that far and they need to be replaced, the compensation packages for getting canned are ridiculous.....

gm is a bigger company than toyota (uh, for now)....but that article listed 3 guys at gm that EACH made more than 5 TIMES what toyota's former head Cho made in 2003!!! which wasn't exactly a banner year at gm....

not that it's just the auto industry:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P125120.asp
http://curiouscatlinks.blogspot.com/2005/08/ceo-pay-obscene.html

In that second link, I agree that someone like Bill Gates is "allowed" to receive large amounts of money since he founded the company and was/is the reason for it's success. On the other hand Wagoner and company making the money they make only makes sense to me if the company is doing well by them.

Only certain industries bother me when the CEO's make huge money at the expense of the consumer, e.g. Oil industries. I don't have to care about GM because I can always buy another car if I don't like their practices. If the workers at GM had a brain in their head they'd buy up the stock. As stock holders, they'd have more say in the direction the company takes. They could even vote to oust Lutz, Wagoner, etc.

perhaps as a consumer you don't care, but you if worked for gm and they wanted to cut your job you would....the major shareholder's are the ones asking for cuts, and i'm guessing its not so easy to get a bunch of good old boys on the board to cooperate....i just wrote this from my PSP, i feel so high-tech:)

The CEO of the company that I do work for made $1.5 million in base salary, $2.5 million in bonus, $786k in short term comp, and $6.6 million in stock options (2004). The talk about how much money he will receive when he retires is upwards of $10 million. Am I supposed to have a problem with that? Because I really don't care.

I just can't get my panties in a bunch because someone is making huge amounts of money. If I was a CEO making millions, I'd love it...and so would you. The reality is simple: The statement Lutz made is fairly accurate. There are people who are paid huge amounts of money for something seemingly pointless like professional sports or say running GM. Then there are people who get paid squat for doing something like fighting for our country, or police, or fire fighters. But considering the amount of time invested in education and time spent with a company to reach the top, I have no problem with CEOs making hugh salaries. I do have a problem with short-changing our men and women who fight for our country.

The CEO of the company that I do work for made $1.5 million in base salary, $2.5 million in bonus, $786k in short term comp, and $6.6 million in stock options (2004). The talk about how much money he will receive when he retires is upwards of $10 million. Am I supposed to have a problem with that? Because I really don't care.

I just can't get my panties in a bunch because someone is making huge amounts of money. If I was a CEO making millions, I'd love it...and so would you. The reality is simple: The statement Lutz made is fairly accurate. There are people who are paid huge amounts of money for something seemingly pointless like professional sports or say running GM. Then there are people who get paid squat for doing something like fighting for our country, or police, or fire fighters. But considering the amount of time invested in education and time spent with a company to reach the top, I have no problem with CEOs making hugh salaries. I do have a problem with short-changing our men and women who fight for our country.

So lutz's point was that he gets paid boatloads of money for doing something pointless? hardly, and if he was then gm is as good as gone.....and please don't sidestep the discussion at hand by playing the underpaid military/teacher card........

so if you worked for gm and were about to lose your job you'd have no problem with his position? because that's the hypothetical situation i posed....we've pretty much already covered that there is no issue with a succesfull ceo making the big bucks, but when said ceo is running a company on the verge of a possible bankruptcy, is told by his major shareholders and financial analysts that he(along with his excecutive staff) should take a pay cut, is grossly overpaid when compared to the most succesful person in his position at a succesful competing company, and is in the process of cutting thousands of jobs, pensions, ect. at his company, he has lost his mind to try to compare himself to an athlete who gets paid only what the market will pay him.........

I'll sidestep for a second...I never mentioned teachers. They're overpaid considering lower education in the States compared to other countries is atrocious.

Firefighters (non-volunteers), police, and military IMO work for their repsective townships, municipalities, government, etc. We have legislatures, city councils, etc that cut their pay, benefits, etc. similarly to how Lutz and Wagoner are talking about making cuts, yet vote themselves raises on the taxpayers dime. GM employees work for a company not an essential public service. That's the comparison I was making. I don't have a problem with companies cutting jobs for whatever reason. I do have a problem when a Senator cuts essential programs in favor of increasing his/her salary.

I'm not the best example since I do contract work. I am **always** at risk of being let go. For the record, I would just find another job.

By pointless I meant perceived. Seemingly pointless via the attitudes towards CEOs for making large amounts of money and making cuts at the bottom. Lutz's comments were made in response to a question "why are executives paid so much money? as if they aren't worth it. The company is run from the top down. Unfortunately the people at the bottom believe they are somehow more important than everyone else. Sure they do the "concrete" work, but they do not run the company. The job you have at a company is a privilege not a right.

I hear the argument quite often about someone like Wagoner making big money when the company is in trouble should take a pay cut. Why? If he's responsible for the companies woes, remove him. If the board won't remove him, then the board is the real problem. Only the shareholders can fix that. I just don't subscribe to the Robin Hood paradigm.

It's not that the "people below" believe that they are more important, it's that our country's economy is built on these people.... you are correct, having a job is not a right, but for our society to suceed as it is set up, it is as essential as the public services you mentioned for the majority of the population to have decent paying jobs, as well as security in those jobs.....as much as you are seemingly put off by blue collar middle classes desire for importance, i am put off by so many people discounting their value, as if our country could exist without them......desiring a ceo to balance his gluttony with the livelihood of the folks who work hard every day to keep the ship sailing is not "robin hood-esque" in the least, rather it is a requirement for this ship to continue afloat.........or would you rather have the u.s. slip into the 90% poverty, 10 percent filthy rich profile that many impoverished countries enjoy? we've had a nice medium for a while, but "globalization" is going to change all that....

The reason these guys are making money hand over fist while their companies flounder is due to the "buddy" system board of directors, so why leave it to them to can them? which is why the major shareholders are putting the pressure on.....lutz wasn't just commenting on the common folks perception of his seemingly inoordinately large compensation, rather he was responding directly to kerkorkian and other shareholders, along with financial advisors, telling him that they NEED to take a pay cut(among other cuts).......it had nothing to do with what the "people at the bottom" felt........

Hasnt that sack of shit worked at EACH of the big three? Now his sorry,spoiled, pampered ass is ruining GM.

It's not that the "people below" believe...

I agree. A company is run by a team (I left that part out from my last post) and the people at the bottom are *no more* important than the people at the top regardless of what they may think if they do so at all. I don't agree that our economy is built on these people alone. Our economy is built on a symbiotic relationship between industry and employement.

Jobs get cut. That's how a business saves money in the short term. Cutting the salary of the top execs is small potatoes compared to 300 employees. Unfortunately cutting jobs helps the company but 300 employees are now jobless. The long term reality is lose-lose for the company and the laid off workers.

I admit that I am quick to defend executives but I do not favor their greed. Nor do I favor the Union's greed when they negotiate unbalanced contracts in their favor by forcing management's hand. This is not a good display of teamwork from either side. When cutting wages or jobs is mentioned the Union has a coronary. But when a CEO's wages are expected to be cut no one bats an eye. Why is that?

For too long companies like GM have enjoyed much success keeping union workers and executives fat and happy (mostly). Now competition has cut into that luxury. Lutz, Wagoner, et al. can keep their salaries as far as I'm concerned, but IMO bonuses should be performance prorated not guaranteed. And as far as I'm concerned their performance ain't so hot.

If indeed the buddy system has crippled GM like so many other companies, then the stock holders (I apologize for restating this so often) need to take action. The company is run by the board, but owned by the stock holders. So where does the buck actually stop?

I admit that I am quick to defend executives but I do not favor their greed. Nor do I favor the Union's greed when they negotiate unbalanced contracts in their favor by forcing management's hand. This is not a good display of teamwork from either side. When cutting wages or jobs is mentioned the Union has a coronary. But when a CEO's wages are expected to be cut no one bats an eye. Why is that?
When blue collar jobs are threatened, you are gonna hear more uproar because there are more folks in that class.........That entire article i linked was pretty much Lutz having the same reaction to the idea of his pay getting cut as the union has when their pay is threatened.....

Jobs get cut. That's how a business saves money in the short term. Cutting the salary of the top execs is small potatoes compared to 300 employees. Unfortunately cutting jobs helps the company but 300 employees are now jobless. The long term reality is lose-lose for the company and the laid off workers.

I understand that, although i would disagree that cutting these exec's pay is small potatoes.....as kerkorkian's financial guru put it, the entire company should be in "crisis mode", given the dire straights they are facing.......long term, cutting an execs salary may not have the implication that getting rid of thousands of jobs and pensions may have, but short term, the lopping of millions of dollars in overpayed executive cash would really help....and that's just in the tangible realm: all we hear about in this new age of manufacturing is morale, and "everyone needs to pitch to make this work"..when lutz declines to take a pay cut,saying instead "i gave at the office", do you think that resonates well on the factory floor, with the workers who show up and "give at the office" every day? to me, this is just one more example of why "the toyota way" is breazing right by the big two....you would never hear that kind of out of touch with mainstream crap come out of their company's leadership

union leadership and big three management are both to blame, neither changed when the writing was on the wall, and now they both face cataclysmic change.......i don't deny that both sides are to blame, my only point is that both sides ARE to blame, and for bob to cut blue collar jobs, salarys, and benefits, while laughing at the thought of some personal sacrifice, is flat out corporate greed at it's worst........

what's funny is that while ford and gm can't make any money saddled with these huge labor costs and cumbersome union contracts, dcx is making money under the same contract.....not as much as they like, or so they say as they ship more jobs to third world and communist countries, but profits nonetheless.....

I agree. A company is run by a team (I left that part out from my last post) and the people at the bottom are *no more* important than the people at the top regardless of what they may think if they do so at all. I don't agree that our economy is built on these people alone. Our economy is built on a symbiotic relationship between industry and employement.

it's not built on these people alone, but without the working middle class our society will change drastically......it's hard to blame companies for outsourcing work overseas when the government allows it and it's so much cheaper, but it will erode the working class and sooner or later we'll be a nation of the very rich and the very poor....

What's funny is that while ford and gm can't make any money saddled with these huge labor costs and cumbersome union contracts, dcx is making money under the same contract.....not as much as they like, or so they say as they ship more jobs to third world and communist countries, but profits nonetheless.....


Exactly. DCX is making cars that do not have to rely on incentive programs to sell. They also dropped Plymouth and consolidated the strong brands. Sometimes I feel GM forgets they are in the business of making cars not just moving steel and rubber.

OK....a couple of thoughts.

Chrysler uses incentives...don't kid yourself....many of the incentives are 'behind the curtain' ..meaning dealer cash or lease deals where the money is put into the contract to boost the residual...bringing a lease down from, say $380 a month to the $289 that's advertised.

Closing a Division isn't an easy thing to do....anyone wanna venture how much it cost to close Olds down? (remember...there are these people called 'dealers' who had a sales and service agreement with GM...when the Division closed, GM owed them a lot of money to 'go away'....we won't even get into the discussion of what happened to all of those dealership buildings and land)

I don't agree with how top execs are paid in this country....I believe in many cases, the pay scale is way out of proportion.......that said, keep in mind that these top guys don't have much of a life.....from the time they awake in the morning, until they go to bed at nite.......(and there are never any "short" days)....they have every minute allocated......it truly is a whirlwind ordeal every day.

If you were to ask me what the key is to why these guys make the money -- or rise to the top where they are, I'd have to say it's 'discipline'.......there are many times each week where I'd love to just demolish someone.....now...I'm not gonna go postal on anyone...but under pressure, it's natural for your blood pressure to go up....and to get surly...and to perhaps yell........these guys don't. They remain cool and can focus with laser-like intensity.

One other thing.......it appears that a few of you don't like Bob Lutz. It's a free country, but I gotta tell you....he's the best thing that's happened to GM in a longggggggg time. I can tell you firsthand that he's broken down barriers and made changes that needed to be made for 25 years.

One story I love to relate is this: He spent a lot of HIS OWN money to have these stickers made up....white and blue ...round......and they have "SEZ WHO?" printed on them. Every time something comes across his desk that says "We can't do this" or "We shouldn't do this" or "It won't work" or "that's not the policy".......it usually gets this big round sticker plastered on it...and sent back to everyone including who it was cc'd to.

The guy's a car guy. Trust me.

OK....a couple of thoughts.

Chrysler uses incentives...don't kid yourself....many of the incentives are 'behind the curtain' ..meaning dealer cash or lease deals where the money is put into the contract to boost the residual...bringing a lease down from, say $380 a month to the $289 that's advertised.

Closing a Division isn't an easy thing to do....anyone wanna venture how much it cost to close Olds down? (remember...there are these people called 'dealers' who had a sales and service agreement with GM...when the Division closed, GM owed them a lot of money to 'go away'....we won't even get into the discussion of what happened to all of those dealership buildings and land)

I don't agree with how top execs are paid in this country....I believe in many cases, the pay scale is way out of proportion.......that said, keep in mind that these top guys don't have much of a life.....from the time they awake in the morning, until they go to bed at nite.......(and there are never any "short" days)....they have every minute allocated......it truly is a whirlwind ordeal every day.

If you were to ask me what the key is to why these guys make the money -- or rise to the top where they are, I'd have to say it's 'discipline'.......there are many times each week where I'd love to just demolish someone.....now...I'm not gonna go postal on anyone...but under pressure, it's natural for your blood pressure to go up....and to get surly...and to perhaps yell........these guys don't. They remain cool and can focus with laser-like intensity.

One other thing.......it appears that a few of you don't like Bob Lutz. It's a free country, but I gotta tell you....he's the best thing that's happened to GM in a longggggggg time. I can tell you firsthand that he's broken down barriers and made changes that needed to be made for 25 years.

One story I love to relate is this: He spent a lot of HIS OWN money to have these stickers made up....white and blue ...round......and they have "SEZ WHO?" printed on them. Every time something comes across his desk that says "We can't do this" or "We shouldn't do this" or "It won't work" or "that's not the policy".......it usually gets this big round sticker plastered on it...and sent back to everyone including who it was cc'd to.

The guy's a car guy. Trust me.


Scott you need to post more often :)

OK....a couple of thoughts.

Chrysler uses incentives...don't kid yourself....many of the incentives are 'behind the curtain' ..meaning dealer cash or lease deals where the money is put into the contract to boost the residual...bringing a lease down from, say $380 a month to the $289 that's advertised.

Closing a Division isn't an easy thing to do....anyone wanna venture how much it cost to close Olds down? (remember...there are these people called 'dealers' who had a sales and service agreement with GM...when the Division closed, GM owed them a lot of money to 'go away'....we won't even get into the discussion of what happened to all of those dealership buildings and land)

I don't agree with how top execs are paid in this country....I believe in many cases, the pay scale is way out of proportion.......that said, keep in mind that these top guys don't have much of a life.....from the time they awake in the morning, until they go to bed at nite.......(and there are never any "short" days)....they have every minute allocated......it truly is a whirlwind ordeal every day.

If you were to ask me what the key is to why these guys make the money -- or rise to the top where they are, I'd have to say it's 'discipline'.......there are many times each week where I'd love to just demolish someone.....now...I'm not gonna go postal on anyone...but under pressure, it's natural for your blood pressure to go up....and to get surly...and to perhaps yell........these guys don't. They remain cool and can focus with laser-like intensity.

One other thing.......it appears that a few of you don't like Bob Lutz. It's a free country, but I gotta tell you....he's the best thing that's happened to GM in a longggggggg time. I can tell you firsthand that he's broken down barriers and made changes that needed to be made for 25 years.

One story I love to relate is this: He spent a lot of HIS OWN money to have these stickers made up....white and blue ...round......and they have "SEZ WHO?" printed on them. Every time something comes across his desk that says "We can't do this" or "We shouldn't do this" or "It won't work" or "that's not the policy".......it usually gets this big round sticker plastered on it...and sent back to everyone including who it was cc'd to.

The guy's a car guy. Trust me.

i'm sure he is a car guy, and he may even be doing a good job.....he's also a greedy bastard who is getting overpaid compared to his companies performance.....i understand paying someone extra for a turnaround effort, but the company is still in trouble now and really can't afford such extravagances.......

chrysler definetely uses incentives, the difference is that they also sell quite a few cars with less cash back than gm.......the way automakers count their money is screwy anyways, they should have started lowering prices years ago: they count a vehicle as sold as soon as it leaves the assembly line, and then count everything below what they get for it as a loss, even if they made money above what it costs them to produce it......gm is getting accolades for doing it now, but dcx actually started this a year ago or so.....dcx was forced to start restructuring a few years before ford and gm, and a good turnaround plan is paying off now....bottom line: they are making profits, gm is not(incentives or no incentives)

you are absolutely correct on the cost to close a brand, which is where the eggs and omelet analogy comes from.......

I don't want to hear about the poor executives not having a life.......the same thing applies to all the "overpaid" line workers that make 80 grand a year: they don't make that in a 40 hour work week.....the skilled trades guys that make six figures are working 7 days, 12 hours a day for the most part, do you think that they have much of a life??? dieter and gettlefinger got into at the auto show, which is normally a "safe spot"......not very disciplined to let the common folk see the union head and the head of chrysler argueing is it?? and when they retire they could sell us all out and get a 70 million dollar buyout(aka eaton when he sold crysler) and dissapear, never to be seen again.....

he spent his own money to hav stickers made up:eyes: well he's got enough of it, and i'm sure there is a write off in there somewhere

OK....a couple of thoughts.
Closing a Division isn't an easy thing to do....anyone wanna venture how much it cost to close Olds down? (remember...there are these people called 'dealers' who had a sales and service agreement with GM...when the Division closed, GM owed them a lot of money to 'go away'....we won't even get into the discussion of what happened to all of those dealership buildings and land)


I never saw an Oldsmobile dealership. I would always (and worked for two) see Chevy Olds, or Chevy Geo Olds. Even though it costs money to close down the division sometimes it costs more, in the long run, to keep it. That being said, something like Buick which has been struggling needs either a new line of cars that make people wet when they see them, or needs to go away. Right now Buick is dragging down the ship...it may be time to weigh anchor. Frankly right now is Buick's chance to reinvent itself. People have forgotten Buick. They could come back with a small line of three maybe four cars that just inspire people to sign on the bottom line. And they don't have to even look like Buicks...since the only people who remember what Buicks look like have cataracts...they won't notice. :)

My take on the sad sales is simple...uninteresting vehicles. GM should be recruiting young talented designers with extreme prejudice. Horton (sp?) who rendered that sweet F-body would have made a fine addition regardless if GM used any of his ideas for the Camaro. Stick him in Buick's design house and see what happens.

It depends on where you sell buick, at our dealership buick is gold, mostly because of the people who buy them. All gov't people and buisness men buy Buick around here. Our dealership is strong in Buick, we sell as much Buick as we do Chevy. And the people that buy the new Buicks claim they are the best of the best, ride, fit and finish etc. Go drive a Buick and tell me if it isn't one of the best cars you have driven in a LONG time. My daily driver is a 98 Buick GSX and I’ll be honest with you with a few mods this car moves, not as fast as my TA but its a four door sedan that runs high 12's and has the class and ride of a cady (in its day).

Buick has been struggling as a whole but the new cars they have 05-up are some of the best out there. Bob Lutz recently took his cady out of commission and had a Buick put in its place. Bob has had a lot of input on the new Buicks and you can clearly see how much he has changed it. People complain about Pontiac, GMC, and Hummer as being dead brands. As gm stands today those are three of there hottest brands, too many people walk around today with their heads stuck in somebody else’s ass, go drive a car or buy it then make a decision on what it is.

I will agree i don't like everything GM makes today, but they do offer a lot of cool cars that people don't give them credit for, but yes some of their design still sucks they could use some new designers.

the problem with buick isn't quality, it's blandness.....it's been marketing to an increasingly pigeonholed demographic for too long.....

one of the reasons hummer is always brought up is that it is not a versatile brand whatsoever, and if gas prices continue to go up it would be more prudent to act now rather than later.....

gm is spread way to thin, so analysts try to find where they could cut the excess;therefore brands like saab, hummer, and buick are going to continue to be mentioned as possible victims......the problem is, in an effort to save time and money gm has used a lot of shared parts and technology throughout its brand(everyone does now), and invested a lot into those brands....i'm not sure about the legal side of it, but i would guess that to legally eliminate ties or to shut down one or more of those brands , especially those it recently acquired , it may cost quite a bit as well, even apart from the nuts and bolts stuff.....

Yes, but who are you selling Buicks to? Not to many guys right out of college go out and buy a Buick (or a trans am :drive: ) Everybody knows most people who buy them are 50's - up. The new Buicks with 18's are much more appealing to the younger crowd. A lot of 30's - 40's people are buying them, something never before seen. Just like Cadillac, remember when that was an "old person" car, today its one of the most popular brands for the young wealth, hell I’d buy a V series if i had the money. People who buy Buicks don't care about M6's or loud exhaust. They want quiet, smooth, chrome and big cushiony seats. A Buick isn't out there to be a BMW for someone trying to show they have money, the Buick is there to show they have class and sophistication.

Well, the guy advising the reluctant lutz and friends to take pay cuts was voted onto the board yesterday:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060207/AUTO01/602070405/1148

and the board didn't waste any time using his advice:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060207/UPDATE/602070424

The announcements came a day after a top aide to billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian was elected to GM’s board. Last month, Jerome York

So Kerkorian's advisor is now on GM's board...MOLE!!!!

So Kerkorian's advisor is now on GM's board...MOLE!!!!
Maybe not. I really think is going to be a GREAT thing.

Last April, York rejoined Tracinda as a consultant on Kerkorian's GM investment. However, York is technically joining GM's board as an independent director, and not as a representative of Tracinda.

While York remains a consultant to Tracinda, he is prohibited from sharing confidential GM information with Kerkorian. But the arrangement also allows Kerkorian to buy and sell GM shares without the restrictions put on directors and executives with access to inside information.

A GM spokesperson said York has the same deal as any other outside director. "There's no special agreement between GM and Jerry," said Toni Simonetti of GM. "He is going to serve under the same terms and conditions as all other outside directors."

In a federal filing Monday, Tracinda said its consulting agreement with York was amended "to clarify that Mr. York will not share with Tracinda any confidential information…which Mr. York may obtain in his capacity as a director."

interesting, eh?? although it would look pretty martha stewart-ish if he dumped a bunch of stock before it tanked......what's also intersting is that another board member quit over a "conflict of interest"....perhaps his interests were with paying his golf buddies loads of cash while the company struggled.....purely speculation, of course:)

moley, moley, moley, moley, moley...

http://www.the-reel-mccoy.com/movies/2002/images/AustinPowers_Mole.jpg