Let's see: Stand-alone brand, with a new facility and standards of operating excellence. Sounds OK by me. Or would you rather eat at Louie's Italian Pizzeria,Falafels and Custard Stand, Bait Shop and Discount Tobacco Outlet that has been in the same building for 50 years? How about a Starbucks that also serves Barnie's Coffee? And there are more performance standards that must be met for selling a latte than there are for selling a $30,000 car or truck. Where would you like to buy a car from: A brand-new gleaming, uniform Honda,Toyota or Nissan store, or from a worn-out facility in a run-down part of town that also happens to sell some other foreign brand? It seems to me that GM has diluted its' own market share for years by allowing multi-brand points. This isn't Sam's Club,where you pick your car off the shelf: This is a personal relationship, and a major purchase for the consumer.
If the GM product is so good (and it is), then, by God, treat it as such. Yes, I know a new store costs a fortune. So do new manufacturing plants, and I applaud GM for closing their 100-year-old dinosaurs. You might say that new stores are being closed, and old ones get to remain. Maybe so. In my area, some of both are closing, both GM and Chrysler. But we must compete on the same level as the competition, or continue to lose market share until we have none, period. Would you enter a Formula 1 race with a 10-year-old car and expect to win?
Are these argreements perfect, or even just? Yes and no, maybe and probably not, depending on your perspective. But change has to come, or just turn out the lights now.
And I agree that a necessary part of this change means replacing these "leaders" in GM; Bring in "car guys", not accountants, and get rid of the "good ol' boy" legacy. They led us down the road to ruin.
But, regardless of who is/was at fault: This day of reckoning was coming, like it or not. As a wise boss told me years ago: "Accept;Adapt;Accelerate".