HP3000-L Archives

December 2001, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mark Wonsil <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mark Wonsil <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 6 Dec 2001 22:39:10 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
Greg Cagle writes after Peter da Silva
>If you study the car business in detail, you can learn some things about
mass
>markets in general. One thing that I've always read is that even in hard
times
>there's always a market for the high end of the product line. What tends to
>happen, though, is that the mid-line product purchasers tend to slide lower
>in the product line.

That seems to be true, although *some* high-end folks do slip into the mid-
line but not in the same numbers as mid to low.

>The other interesting thing I've learned recently about the car business
>is that Ron Zarella (sp?), the CEO of GM, has admitted recently that the
>pure "brand management" and commodity approach they have been taking has
>NOT been working and has hired Bob Lutz (ex-Chrysler) to fix the perceived
>"product problem."

>Note also that GM recently cancelled the entire Oldsmobile product
>line, the oldest "brand" in the portfolio.

GM and Chrysler may be moving in very different directions now.  GM's brand
management was simply to rebrand similar cars and create an illusion of
choice.  Chrysler, OTOH, was borrowing engineering to create new vehicles.
The PT cruiser borrows a lot from the Neon and the Durango from the light
trucks and mini-van.  Like GM, they killed the Plymouth label but that is
not the same as killing any particular car as there was a lot of
duplication among the brands.

Under Ignatio Lopez, GM starting focusing on price, price, price.  This
made the line stagnant and ruined the relationship with the suppliers.
Look at how Saturn, the Invent of GM, is now under full GM control and has
had little breakthrough since its opening bell.  Now Daimler is ruining the
supply chain for Chrysler with the same kind of price-price-price thinking.

As for Peter's comments, my point is not that all auto-companies handle the
commodity change well, but some did.  Which path will HP follow?  Will they
cross-engineer and add value like the former Chrysler or become stagnant
and lose market-share in a commodity market like GM?

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2