GM's sales, mostly to corporate buyers does not address quality, fuel efficiency and core engine technology. Check out this link:http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/gm_red_tag.html
Viewing the link below, one can see compromises and non-visionary tactics hopeful of painting a truthful future for Ford: "Analysts remain cautious about the F-150 given the competition from General Motors Corp.'s new Chevrolet Silverado pickup that will hit showrooms later this year, and Toyota Motor Corp.'s all-new Tundra pickup expected in early 2007."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060918.IBFORD18/TPStory/Business
What does a merger bring forward; the continued existance of one or the other's technologies, processes and governance structure. Since these groups are still competitors, their foundation or base business platform are different and dissimilar in all things factory, Information management and Information technology wise.
Yes, a production line (moving line) may have simmilarities but the processes are not mergable. Difference in technology; dissimilar database stores and platforms, customer services, supply-chain management and inventory, let alone financial accounting systems with major differences in accounting methods should be capable of merging separate processes and therefore, increase or keep the same, performance technology and methodology. History of mergers show just the opposite and disparate Information Management Systems do not help each other.
Two giants themselves, Microsoft and SAP would agree that there exists major platform challenges ahead. Both software companies will say that their systems are able and ready but in a manufacturing environment SAP has shown world-wide that its mySAP BI with Netweaver and BW are ways to the future. Microsoft speaks of it SQL 2005 database and XP Pro as a viable contender and preferred operational system. So, who makes the choices and are these choices based on truth, politics or a mixture of both.
Surely, for a successful merger that focuses on profits for all divisions and factories, the Unions would compromise and choose only a political solution for its technology infrastructure or will its once mighty hand settle for a pure technological solution?
I doubt that it will - History proves that technology after the industrial revolution is not their friend but a friend to the company executives. So, merging personalities, yada, yada, yada.
Merger's are a sales job and hungry for a survivor; together they may survive but the excrutiating pain comes after when the trucks, cars, production technology and comunications infrastructure deliver the best technologically designed platform that is capable to compete globally on terms of pollution quality and environmental design. Not far behind are components and materials manufactured and supplied. Are these lines of communication open to drastic changes which merger's hasten?
"Although Ford executives have said since January they plan to sell a subcompact car in the U.S. market, the company made clear last week that will not happen until 2009."
The finished product will conjure the best debates and money for continued research and may drive exceptional quality, but for how long and who cares?
Have you seen these cars during the '70's? Pieces of shit - no doubt!
My bets are on foreign exports as they ratchet up technology as they have for the last 3 decades; for outstanding flex fuel use, exceptional microprocessor steering and shifting controls, along with best-practices security and anti-collision avoidance systems, all in the name of pronounced customer satisfaction and truly environmentally friendly machines - bar none or should I say, the bar is raised and opened for service.
No comments:
Post a Comment