I had originally planned to write this week about the ban on direct manufacturer-to-customer sales in New Jersey, and what it could mean for Tesla’s business model and expansion plans.
Then the whole General Motors recall fiasco came along.
If the franchise law development is a gathering storm for Tesla, then the current trials of GM is a Category 5 hurricane. It could seriously undo the company’s glacial but assured improvements to its image and brand reputation since its post-recession restructuring.
Not everyone seems to be of that opinion. An Automotive News opinion piece argued that no matter how bad it gets, it’s “hard to imagine GM’s recall becoming Toyota-bad.”
I beg to differ. Although the scale of the recent recalls may not match that of Toyota, which sent out notices for more than 15 million vehicles globally over unintended acceleration issues, GM may have more to lose from the callbacks.
First, a little context.
After more than a decade of internal investigations and deliberations, the Detroit automaker recently green-lighted recalls of nearly 1.6 million vehicles with faulty ignition switches.
The affected cars include mostly defunct brands and models: the 2005-07 Chevrolet Cobalt and Pontiac G5, the 2003-07 Saturn Ion and the 2006-07 Chevrolet HHR, Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky.
The actual volume of cars ordered back for remedial measures is no big deal in recall history. But GM’s troubles lie elsewhere.
So far, about 12 deaths have been linked to sudden engine and safety system shutoffs caused by the defective switch. More may emerge as investigations progress.
The company is also facing class-action lawsuits from different quarters, including two from Canada. According to the Detroit News, at least one GM shareholder is taking legal action against the company for allegedly keeping investors in the dark about the problem.
A U.S. Department of Justice probe where GM executives, including current CEO Mary Barra, will have to testify in front of Congress added further gravitas to recent developments.
And, to make matters even worse, GM issued another recall for 1.5 million vehicles — this one impacting more recent models — over various critical safety-related issues.
The question that’s on everyone’s mind is why it took GM so long to address the ignition switch issue.
Some are blaming it on the company’s penny-pinching ways in the 2000s, a time when it had way too many brands in its portfolio and was in deep red territory year after year. To be fair to GM, it did report the problem to U.S. regulators but ultimately it failed to take any meaningful action.
Yes, GM’s a different company now and new boss Barra is willing to do whatever it takes to put the past behind. She has apologized publicly and implemented a massive plan to repair the faulty models. The automaker’s social media response has been transparent and thoughtful.
But, inaction — past or present — and any whiff of coverups can decimate a company’s image. Particularly one that has struggled for years to change negative customer perception of its products.
Indeed, you could argue that Toyota is largely responsible for its misery because of poor damage control. The $1.3-billion fine it has been asked to pay by the U.S. government stems squarely from the company’s attempts to cover up its safety problems. Current GM executives may not be responsible for the recent turn of events but when they go in front of Congress, past skeletons will be unearthed for sure — and I don’t think they will simply go, “Boo!” The deaths and delay are sure to lead to some serious bloodletting. Toyota’s fall from grace may have been shocking for everyone, and it did lead to some market losses in the short-term, but I think people may have perceived it as a one-off indiscretion, because of the company’s impeccable reliability record. Its resurgent market share, particularly in North America, is proof enough that as far as the buying public goes, the company has been forgiven. GM, on the other hand, hasn’t been able to win over consumers on reliability. And the recent success it has enjoyed in some initial-quality surveys may take a serious beating, depending on the way the cards fall.
In other words, much of the good work that recent GM execs have overseen since the post-bankruptcy turnaround may come undone.
In the end, GM’s fall may turn out to be less steep than Toyota, but the climb back will be far harder.
Kumar Saha is a Toronto-based automotive analyst with the global research firm Frost & Sullivan. Email: email@example.com.
Columns Everything you need to know about purchasing, maintaining and driving your car.
Become a member
Register now to access all features including:
- Save and ask friends to review vehicles
- Exclusive rebates & offers from local dealers
- Premium content, reviews and tools
- You can unsubscribe at any time. Please Contact Us for details.
All for free!
Already a member?
Registration 2 of 2
Welcome to Wheels!
As a final step we've sent a confirmation to your email address as a security measure. Please click the link in the email to complete your registration.
Terms of services
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, TORONTO STAR IS PROVIDING THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES ON AN "AS IS" AND "AS AVAILABLE" BASIS AND MAKES NO WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, IN ANY CONNECTION WITH THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES, THEIR CONTENTS, OR ANY WEB SITE OR CONTENTS WITH WHICH IT IS LINKED. TORONTO STAR DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE FUNCTION OF THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES OR THEIR CONTENTS WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE, THAT DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED, OR THAT THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES OR THE SERVERS THAT MAKE IT AVAILABLE ARE FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS.
TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NEGLIGENCE, SHALL TORONTO STAR BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF DATA, LOSS OF INCOME OR PROFIT, LOSS OF OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY, OR FOR ANY DAMAGES OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY COMPENSATORY, INCIDENTAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES), EVEN IF TORONTO STAR HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES OR LOSSES, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OF THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES, THEIR CONTENTS, OR ANY WEBSITE OR CONTENTS WITH WHICH IT IS LINKED. IN NO EVENT SHALL TORONTO STAR'S TOTAL LIABILITY FOR ALL DAMAGES, LOSSES, AND CAUSES OF ACTION, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NEGLIGENCE), OR OTHERWISE, EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR ACCESSING THIS SITE.X