mid engine corvette qtr panels leaked photo

And anyone can successfully test drive a car, too. I recall back in the muscle-car era, dealers always had an automatic version of the GTO and 442 around.

 

GM making huge cuts in workforce and staff.... Not sure where a small volume expensive 2 seat sports car fits in when you're cutting 25% of your white collar staff.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/26/gm-unallocating-several-plants-in-2019-to-take-3-billion-to-3point8-billion-charge-in-future-quarters.html

 

The Corvette has been profitable for decades. Non-issue.

 

Its a question of resources, not profitability.

Are you better off putting your resources in making new Cross overs which the company needs or more low production 2 seat sports cars?

You have to believe allocation of resources at GM must also be taking place. You don't do a 25% cut back in white collar jobs and not look at every division and product line.

 

But their trucks are wildly profitable - by some accounts moreso than Corvette.

In a margin-thin business, even a relatively low run rate model with near 50% margins contributes significantly.

 

You have to think the Vette is as much an advertisement as it is a product from GM's perspective.

 

Corvette is the least of GM's issues. In no particular order:
Cadillac is a HUGE problem, they are building the best cars in their history and NO ONE cares.
Chevrolet Bolt and Volt desperately need a gas crisis or better yet, re-styling. Development costs of the Bolt in particular must have been astronomical and at it's price point, will be hard to recoup.
The car (non SUV) business in general is not doing well.

 

Unfortunately, some of you are using your emotional thinking rather than your business thinking. As Mr. Mayor is pointing out, there are huge cuts coming within the workforce and several major plant closings. They finally broke ground for a revised Design Center last spring, after 50 years of promising an update. The project is on indefinite 'hold'.
All i'm pointing out is the obvious..........anything is possible at this point.
I lived through this several times, and it's not pretty.

 

https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/...v/1126-gm.html
No mention of the 'non-existent' ME Corvette
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gm-restructuring/gm-to-slash-jobs-and-production-as-u-s-sedan-sales-sink-idUSKCN1NV1NB?fbclid=IwAR2IB87ck96zknFItBwHp64-OEclA07X_AswfI7xcOLVkga6J1rT-0un3JE

 

Radio silence continues. About an hour ago, The Detroit News said this about Chevy: The Camaro is the brand's halo muscle car.

Let the debate resume!

 

I have been through these kinds of things. When a company has a major cut back, everything is on the table. Some of it is reality, some of it is political, some of it is face saving, some of it is just street fighting for your job by killing the other guy.

There is no way GM can avoid not looking at every aspect of its car line for cutbacks, that includes Corvette. How much? Who knows. But it has to be considered in the mix.

The last time GM was seriously cutting back they brought out the Volt as their savior. It made good politics. The Vette may be good PR but it could also be seen as the "what's wrong at GM" also. Is this the halo car you want to show when you are cutting back on Impalas and Cruzes?

 

THIS is where they will be spending their money and resources. I don't see "2 seat halo sportscar" fitting in anywhere here....

"GM is also moving to cut capital spending overall, even as it says it will double the resources dedicated to electric and self-driving vehicles over the next two years.

GM last year promised to launch a fleet of 20 new battery electric vehicles in North America by 2023, along with at least 10 new electric vehicles in China by 2020. The expenditures to bring those vehicles to production will start to hit with new batteries and body architectures designed to generate profits."

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/autos-sports/2019-performance-car-of-the-year/ar-BBPSlpb#page=1

 

Huge mistake.

 

The Corvette hasn't been considered a "muscle car" for decades.
I'm not sure the Camaro can be called a "muscle car" either since it's strong suit is now road courses, not drag strips. Same with the Mustang. Challenger is the last "muscle car" (aka one trick pony) left, IMO.

 

Clearly no one cares about the Impala or the Cruze so if there's a "message" there, chances are no one is listening.

And the sky is not falling. A year from now, the ME Corvette will be out on the streets. No question.

 

I’m amazed at how tone deaf some are here. I put some numbers in place showing what GM’s contribution would be from Corvette, it's significant.

A struggling company is looking for cash flow, and anything wildly profitable (e.g., we make more money than it cost to build it) is not easily cut.

If GM expects to sell 40-45,000 units of Corvette globally, at roughly 50% gross margin (above the line), you are talking some serious money. Not to mention merchandising (Corvette is GM’s #1 merchandising property, generating even more revenue).

No electric car is doing that.

 

Maybe it’s their awful commercials with the fake focus groups that turns everyone off.

 

I am going to go with interiors as their epic failure. I think damn near every other car company makes a nicer, more user friendly interior.

 

I agree but there's a reason for those commercials. GM has a perception problem. If you look at every one of those ads its like "Gee, I would never have guessed that..." when it comes to stating something about the product --- which is exactly what they want the viewers to think.

They aren't selling specific cars or going through their features. The cars and trucks aren't being driving down Highway 1 in California at sunset. They are taking about stats which completely surprise people to get them to look at GM products again.

 

Unfortunately you are completely wrong in your assumption. GM has the wrong product line at the wrong time. It needs to not come back to profitability by cost cutting. It needs to REINVEST in products that consumers want, thereby making future products that people will buy. And those products may be 2 or 3 years from now.

That means you put your best brains and your top resources into creating and executing those new products. And you cut people and factories who won't be needed to help build those new products.

GM is reinventing itself. And when you reinvent yourself everything in the past comes into question.

You could argue GM is making a mistake by going electric. But you cannot argue that's what they believe is the right path and anything that is off that path is questionable.

 

Going electric is a huge mistake that is being made by many companies. Gas is cheap and getting cheaper as long as we have an American in office and not a globalist. The economic reason for buying electric won't be there. The social reason may still be there but social has never pushed sales as far as economics.

 

Having worked in tech for 25 years, cutting to profitability is usually a death spiral. If a company has bloat, I’d agree, but GM’s problems are strategic. We agree they have the wrong products, they’ve had the wrong products for YEARS. They are the undisputed masters of platform sharing, which is lazy and not fooling anyone. They didn’t foresee market shifts and they are paying dearly for it.

Big risk if said new products have no basis in real success. I’m not sure if it was you, but some argued against Harley doing the same thing. Both companies are similar, but not unlike Harley, I think investing in electric is a waste unless there’s a real reason (e.g. Europe). GM would be well served to kill every product off except trucks, SUVs, and the Corvette because these product work.

In whose fantasy - theirs? They are reinventing themselves like the NY Jets reinvent themselves every 3-5 years. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Ill believe it when I see it, but GM won’t have any success if they simply start cutting without a clear strategy for success (and I’m confident electric vehicles will not bring that success).

Agreed. I think they believe they are doing the right thing, but I’m so sure they aren’t I don’t need to wait. They will fail if they think electric is their future.

GM always had smart product people, but piss poor management, finance, and strategy. They peaked in the late 60s / early 70s and it’s been downhill ever since. No reason to believe they will recover.

I stand by my similar comments on Harley-Davidson, one of my favorite companies in the world. Both GM and HD are in very tough positions at the moment and I think it will take a miracle or a real smart strategic move to save them.

 

Agreed - Europe is the exception, however. Gas isn’t cheap and they don’t have the same natural resources that we enjoy in the US.

But GM is primarily a domestic manufacturer, and electric vehicles have not made a dent in sales compared to ICE powered cars. It’s a major mistake to chase this.

They would be better served mimicking Ford - kill off all passenger cars and sell only profitable vehicles - trucks, SUVs, and Corvettes.

 

The thought of a very well built car (better yet, pick up) w/ fantastic styling, instant torque, 300-400 miles of range and no ICE components that need to be maintained, well that's seemingly a win. They'll be cheaper to service and have fewer moving parts. VW/Audi entering the segment ensures charging stations and forces everyone to raise level of fit/finish standards. We may very well be on the brink of something special. Will it be your go to track car or exhilarating exotic, no. But, for a daily driver, not sure what more you could ask. Even the VW ID van thing looks fun and cool. And by the way, even cheap gas (not compared to plugging in) is not desirable by many because they hate, I mean hate, going to the gas station. Weird, but true. But electric cars are not the cause of GM woes. That's a whole different ball game.