Katz,



Thanks for the post. The difference between what you say and what Psyshack said is all in the delivery. I can deal with people who disagree with me. I have no time for people who just want to be disagreeable. There's a huge difference. Psyshack also caught me on a bad day with what was, and still is in my opinion, an insulting post.

As far as the "does GM really car about fuel economy?" issue, I'd say the evidence is right there in front for all to see. Some would qualify "cares about fuel economy" to mean "stop making SUVs". That is obviously not GM's pov. If GM were truly not focused on fuel economy, you would not see so much effort put into making the new Tahoe, Yukon, Suburban, etc the best fuel economy vehicles in their segments. Because I get to see the engineering effort and the content that goes into that and the styling tradeoffs that are made in favor of achieving best in class fuel economy, I know that the commitment is there.

Likewise the commitment to make the mid size sedans fuel economy leaders in their segments.

As far as providing people the incentives by subsidizing the fuel purchases, I'd just say there is a fine line between saying "we'll credit you for fuel prices over $1.99" or just putting $2,500 back in your pocket at time of purchase. At the end of the day, the same amount of fuel is going to be used. How the subsidy is managed is pretty much immaterial.

Thanks for reminding me what I wrote in my first post. I will continue to try to live up to that. I will, however, fire back when I think things are way over the top or personal.

Peace,

Martin

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues