Oldsmobile joins Plymouth: RIP

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2004-04-27-last-olds_x.htm

Herewith my commentary.

--

MBAssholes, or Requiem for a Heavyweight

The last-ever new Oldsmobile will be assembled the day after tomorrow. I
have no particularly strong emotional attachment to Oldsmobile as a
product or as a brand, and tend to cast a jaundiced eye towards GM's
products in general, but historically the division's engineering was
frequently the best -- or if nothing else the least worst -- of its type
across all of GM.

In the 1950s, the Oldsmobile version of the Hydramatic transmission was
the best one, and Chevrolet was still futzing around with the grossly
inferior Powerglide. In the 1970s, Oldsmobiles were the only GM cars that
ran well and got relatively decent fuel economy while complying with
then-new exhaust emission control requirements, which was quite a feat
given the state of the engine-management art of the day. Olds engines were
demonstrably superior in structure, function and materials than their
counterparts from other GM divisions, and not just barely -- such was the
difference that when GM began sneaking inferior Chevrolet-built engines in
place of Olds-built engines in 1977, customers howled and GM faced a
costly class-action lawsuit.

The MBAssholes at GM, in the manner of their verminous kind at virtually
every other US company, consider it beneath their station to know anything
about the goods or services their company makes. To them the cars are
nothing but "product", and their buyers (end users) are considered
brainless boobs easily bamboozled into seeing a new car where only
taillights and nameplates differ from an otherwise-identical model badged
as a Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac, etc.

Likewise, these degreed fools frown on legitimate and significant
innovation. This is a chicken-and-egg scenario: The public has been fed
such a steady diet of trivially minuscule "improvements" for so long that
by and large they willingly buy whatever is offered. GM sold a lot of
Luminas. Ford sells a ton of Tauri. And it's not just domestic makers,
either. Mitsubishi has same-same-samed itself to imminent death. Volvo
decided to court the masochist market a decade ago by forgetting, after
five decades of doing so, how to build a reliable electrical system. This
move put them in direct competition with VW, a company that never knew how
in the first place and so was spared the inconvenience of trying to
forget. But I digress.

Through the latter '70s, '80s and '90s, Oldsmobile's engineering
superiority was diluted and then eliminated with the homogenization of all
GM passenger cars. The resultant ChevrOldsmoBuAcs all looked, drove, lived
and died pretty much alike (with the obvious exception of the
aforementioned taillights and nameplates). For a brief few years, it
looked like Saturn was going to be the Think-Different GM division, but it
was soon turning out its own taillamps, grilles and nameplates to go on
the corporate identicars.

The ruse worked for a little while. The Oldsmobile Cutlass had enjoyed a
fine reputation for reliability and a top slot in North American sales
figures for a very long time, with extremely loyal customers coming back
again and again. GM effectively killed Oldsmobile around 1986, slapping
Oldsmobile badges on corporate-common cars. Those repeat buyers
still came back for one or two or three new Oldses, but the cars, while
some of them were perfectly honest, decent cars, were as innovative as a
wooden kitchen match, and new customers drove away in stays.

By the late 1990s, the wall was written off. People weren't buying a lot
of Oldsmobiles (oddly enough, changing the name of the division's
most-successful car from bold and evocative "Cutlass" to the nonlexical
focusgroupism "Achieva" not only didn't increase sales but made the car
the butt of jokes involving the word "under"), and the MBAssholes simply
finished the job they'd started twenty years before.

The selfsame thing happened to Plymouth. Remember Plymouth? The brand
officially disappeared a couple years ago, but it really went away in
1974, when the only difference between a Dodge and a Plymouth became which
nameplate was on the fender and hood. The Prowler was much too little, far
too late, for way too few people. The PT Cruiser was originally conceived
as a Plymouth, and it, together with a few other truly different cars,
even if they'd been based on corporate platforms, would surely have
propelled that brand back to high-flying success.

But, no. It's all "product", and they don't teach anything about "product"
in MBA school except that it's icky, to be dealt with only by equally-icky
brown people with blue collars, and should be outsourced to China whenever
possible.

Ptewph.

Copyright (C) 2004 Daniel J. Stern, all rights reserved

 

The only thing I find a bit strange about GM is that if you look at Consumer
Reports repair surveys, Buicks turn out to be pretty darn good compared to
the rest and pretty close to Japanese imports.

 

Pure olds stuff is actually the only GM stuff I have respect for.
I once frequented a BBS where the autos group was dominated by
olds fanatics. Even though I was blue oval I had enough olds knowledge
to fit in. (my grandfather only had oldsmobiles, at least in my lifetime)
Oldsmobile was the division that GM should have standardized to if it
wanted to make good cars. But the MBA types aren't interested in making
good cars, they want to make crap and make the crap appear to be a good
car.

Yep. I have encountered the exact same thing. Management doesn't want
hear about making a good product. Only making sure it ships on time using
the crappiest in the world suppliers for the parts.

Yep, that's when the real oldsmobiles died. 1985. However, it appears the
wagon lived until 1990, along with the 307. (I recently saw one in good
shape on the used car lot of a local chebby dealer)

Don't forget us engineers. We might as well all be 'icky brown people' as
far as the MBAs are concerned. Just think of the good old GE method of
bottom 10% to cycle out engineers with experience that know how to build
good product and replace them with cheaper, moldable and controlable
fresh outs.

Guess what I had on my answering machine today? A recruiter wanting me to
go back to my former employer, a typical large american corporation where
my ranting about making a good product first and foremost got me marked
for downsizing. Oh and then there was the time I got a talking to for
offering to help a customer myself. Heaven forbid I actually help the poor
sap that bought one of the last product I worked on there, the one I
tried my best to fix but was unfixable.

 

And you consider this to be something "strange about GM".

Interesting.

Did it not occur to you that the explanation lies (as it were) in
something strange about Condemner Retards?

 

See groups.google.com for why you shouldn't put faith in what CR says
about cars. Note the posts about the badge engineered cars shared by
domestic and import makers.

 

442. Ah.... (smile)

Okay, a 1960's Buick Skylark convertable is great as well.

 

That's because the average Buick buyer is 63 years old and can't see
defects or hear rattles.

Japanese import owners are some of the most mechnically naive people
around and don't understand the difference between repairs and
maintenance. Their cars "never" need repairs because they've been
convinced water pump replacement at x miles is maintenance. Hence the
"good" repair records for Japanese cars.

 

I think it's in the high 50's actually. Most people who buy one
new have plenty of time and money for preventative maintainence
and don't drive them very hard.

 

It *IS* maintenance, when the WP is driven by the cam belt. Not that
I agree with that design philosophy (Yo! Dr. Ing. H.C. F. Porsche,
you listening?) the consequences of having the WP seize up before the
next scheduled cam belt replacement are just too horrible to
contemplate.

nate

 

Faugh. A fucking *Alero.* A far cry from the '67 Cutlass I remember
being carted around in as a kid. In an era of 1st-gen FWD blandboxes
it stood out proudly, a gleaming gunmetal grey battleship in a sea of
dinghys. The damned thing still was eminently roadworthy at 300,000
miles, although it did need a new carburetor and the frame was
starting to rust. Had I been a little older and/or smarter I would
have asked my dad to put it upstairs in my grandfather's barn for me,
rather than sending it to the Big Parking Lot in the Sky as he did.
The interior was still pristine, with the original factory floormats
even... I still see Cutlasses, F-85s and 442s of that era on the
roads occasionally, can you say the same for many Olds products since?

Can you see *anyone* waxing nostalgic about an Alero thirty-some years
from now? Hell I'll trade you a brand new Alero just to have that
Cutlass back.

nate

 

As of last year, Buick was the highest at 63. Cadillac was 55,
Chrysler 50. Toyota was the highest import at 47.

 

RIP Indeed

our family had several

1961 Oldsmobile F-85 4 door sedan
sold in 1973

1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass Cruiser Wagon
sold in 1989

1980 Oldsmobile 98 Regency 4-door
sold in 1994

1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 4-door
sold in 1997--- still in town, and running

1986 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 4-door
sold in 2001---still in town and running

 

edward ohare explained the CR ratings thus in message

OK, I'll bite--which country-of-origin's car owners are the most
mechanically brilliant?

 

Depends on whether 'x' is 40,000 or 140,000. Parts wear, there's no
getting around that.

 

I imagine this is mostly due to the 3800 V-6, which is probably the
best engine going in the GM fambly right now.

nate

 

I'd vote for one of the former soviet republics. A fair number of
really bad cars around and no money for mechanics. They ALL do the work
themselves!

Dan

 

Yugoslavia. You have to be, to keep them running.

 

Yes, with that lovely shallow V8 350. MMmmmmm.

 

I worked for an MBAssole for a while. He truly was an arogant bastard.
When he took over the company we were making product. Up to that
point, I enjoyed working at the company and was looking forward to
doing so for a long time.

Then I heard him make a comment that left me gobsmacked...

"There is no value added in manufacturing."

It took a LONG time for the implications of his statement to sink in,
but as time went on, I knew my days were numbered. At that time some
of our technology was acquired from England, and in the transfer
process I discovered "problems". I raised the issue, and was
sidelined. When the US Military raised the same issue, I went to bat
on their behalf (it was part of my job), and was basically told to
lie. I refeused to lie, and that was the begining of the end for me.
Not long after, I was let go because "you no longer have a 'good fit'
within the organization".

A few years later - after NAFTA was signed, I saw an advert in a US
trade magazine. It showed a map of the USA and Mexico in which the
border was stylized. The caption:

"This is not a border, it's an edge! Let us help you increase profits
my moving your manufacturing south of the border! We can show you
how!"

Of course we all know where that went!

Yet another company I worked for was a privately owned company. The
"owner" could be a little cranky to say the least, and was not well
liked by many. But you always knew where you stood and in no uncertain
terms. The plant workers unionized on him. Finally after a lot of
pressures and hassles, a public company offered to buy the place. The
owner sold, and the union members were extatic! Sort of a "ding-dong
the witch is dead..." thing. I was less than ammused. When asked, I
told them:

Did it never occur to you that the reason we are alll here and
gainfully employed is because this man was born and raised here, and
wants his company to be here???? Did you ever consider that now that
we will be part of a multi-site, multi-national company that if some
MBAsshole decides that the best thing for the shareholders is to shut
us down and move the plant elsewhere that we will be handed pink slips
in the blink of an eye??

"Oh no that will never happen!"

"Yeah? well our plants back east are 100,000 and 75,000 square feet,
and they are running at less than 50% capacity. We are 30,000 square
feet and running at 90% capacity. Do the math, they buy us, steal our
customers, shut us down and utilize their cheaper plants back east
where labour is cheaper while ditching us as an un-needed expense!

That statement sure saw a number of eyes fly open!

In the end, the new MBAssholes - as it turns out - did not understand
the business that they purchased! They were in the process of raiding
our customers, but mis-managed the business so badly that thier entire
multi-national company crashed and burned. Then EVERYONE was out of
work.

It boggles the mind how short sighted these MBAs can be. And people
believe that they can go to university, get this degree, and then go
manage a business that they know nothing about! It is scary. Worse, it
could be the death knell for many businesses. As a "technical" person
my technical abilities are under constant scrutiney. I wish that the
MBAssholes received the same level of scrutiney that I do! Perhaps we
could fire some of them for a change and get on with real business.

 

I'd vote for cuba and all makes. 1950s US made cars and no supply of
replacement parts. They use bits from soviet block vehicles that copied
the US designs of the era and recondition everything else including
welding on to transmission gears and recutting the teeth.

And the damn US coast guard keeps sinking their boat cars/trucks.