This is a letter i wrote to the heads of the possible $25 billion bailout of the "Big Three" American automakers. i just thought i would put my two cents in (formerly valued at 17.5 cents).
Dear Sirs,
I am writing this letter to you because you seem to be at the forefront of the bailout for the “Big Three”. I will begin by saying that I am on the fence about whether they should receive financial support from taxpayers. That is not what this letter is about. This is about my perspective on what is wrong with the American automakers, why they have failed, are failing, and will continue to fail, unless of course they make some serious changes. I am a car aficionado and I follow the goings-on in the auto industry on a daily basis. Again, this is my point of view, as an observer.
First of all, and this applies across the board, the Big Three have failed to embrace alternative fuels as a marketable technology. Only when a crisis was looming, and they were losing business to foreign automakers, did they begin to introduce hybrid vehicles or ethanol vehicles. Sadly though, they are seriously lagging behind their Asian counterparts on hybrid technology and E85 ethanol seems to have stalled as a viable alternative. In reference to ethanol, I would like to make a few points. Certain South American countries have been able to mandate that all new cars sold must run on sugar cane ethanol, a cheaper and all around better source of ethanol. The Big Three build and sell those cars in South America. Why was that technology never applied to the home market except in SUV’s and pick-up trucks? A second alternative would be natural gas. Why is it that almost all CNG vehicles are for government purposes only? And why is it so cost prohibitive to convert my vehicle to run on CNG, let alone find a CNG filling station remotely near to where I live, in the DC suburbs? Shall I continue? How is it that some hippie can convert his 1960’s VW Microbus to run on used cooking oil but the Big Three can’t find any viable fuel other than good old petroleum? Yes I know GM is introducing the “Volt”, an all-electric vehicle, but dare I say too little too late? Not to be pessimistic, but considering GM’s track record of late, I foresee delays to market, recalls, and a myriad of other hiccups that GM has been prone to. We shall wait and see, I guess.
Moving right along, let’s continue with GM. General Motors markets and sells seven different domestic brands. Seven! Chevrolet alone produces fourteen different vehicles. Now that’s all well and good, but why do we need the same fourteen vehicles reproduced in one form or another across six other product lines, not to mention the foreign makers that GM has a stake in? Do Americans really need seven different Chevy SUV’s/crossovers, let alone the other ten or so spread across the other product lines? Do we need a Cadillac luxury four-door pick-up truck when Chevy already makes such an abomination? Have I lost you? It is mind boggling, I know. There is so much redundancy in GM alone that it is almost unfathomable to think that there are people being paid large amounts of money to come up with these ideas. I challenge you to find any difference between a Yukon, an Escalade, and a Suburban, other than the badges of course. And one more thing about General Motors. GM has the nerve to introduce the Cadillac Escalade Hybrid, a vehicle that is capable of a staggering 19MPG highway, for a hybrid. Are you serious? Shame on you GM! Just so you could say you produce yet another hybrid vehicle, you market this symbol of needless excess to the public with a straight face. Luckily enough, rumor has it that the Escalade hybrid has already been axed from its product line. And did I mention the Hummer brand? The word dinosaur comes to mind.
Next in the crosshairs would be Chrysler. Again, the theme here is redundancy. Aside from the same vehicles being sold across different product lines, Chrysler is guilty of something more egregious in my opinion. Chrysler owns Jeep, a company that makes nothing but SUV’s and crossover vehicles. My question to the brass at Chrysler is can Jeep honestly produce seven different vehicles that are not alike in one form or another? Why does the public need seven different SUV’s from one automaker? And if, let’s hypothesize, there is a need for these seven SUV’s, why does Chrysler feel it necessary to re-badge four of them for their other product lines? You own a company that makes SUV’s and only SUV’s. If you want them to buy your product across all car classes, sell them a Chrysler sedan, or Jeep SUV, or a Dodge minivan. Put them all on the same lot, and sell them under the same umbrella, because that is in fact what you are, one car company. I don’t need a Dodge SUV and a Chrysler SUV and a Jeep SUV, or seven for that matter. I understand a certain amount of brand loyalty, but this is borderline ridiculous.
Last on the list, but certainly not least, is Ford Motor Company. Again, Ford is guilty of the same redundant business practices. Compare the Ford Escape to the Mercury Mariner, or the Ford Explorer to the Mercury Mountaineer, or the Ford Edge and the Lincoln MKX. I dare you to come up with any significant difference. A rose by any other name is still a Ford. Is the Lincoln Mark LT, another luxury four-door pickup truck really necessary? Is there really a market for such a vehicle? Why can’t Ford just sell a really decked out F-150? Ford, though, has announced a plan which I agree with wholeheartedly. Ford will begin selling the same products worldwide, which I think is the best idea they have had in quite some time. No more different cars for different markets. The same Ford Focus that sells in Europe will be the one you buy here in the US. This is a start. The next thing Ford should do is take Mercury, and either dissolve it, or produce cars that appeal to a demographic that a Ford doesn’t cater to. Attempt to attract buyers to your house that wouldn’t normally buy a Ford. There is absolutely no point and no reward in having two auto brands producing exactly the same vehicles. One point of interest, the only American car I have ever owned was the first generation Ford Focus. And why? Because it was a car designed and produced initially in Europe, for the European market. Now I realize my tastes don’t align with everyone else’s, but the point I am trying to make is that Ford can make me and people like me interested in their product again, all the while remaining true to the brand loyalists. It’s not impossible.
I think I made my point abundantly clear. The Big Three need to thin the herd a bit. I don’t believe American consumers need that many options from one manufacturer across two or three product lines, let alone in economic times like these. Focus on making fewer products, and making them better. Invest in alternative fuels, more fuel-efficient gasoline vehicles, and shed some dead weight. If the Big Three can’t see the writing on the wall, then $25 billion won’t serve them any good, and maybe the best thing in the long run, for us and them, would be for any or all of them to close their doors permanently.
Sincerely,
Gianluca DiSomma