As GM demand continues to grow, analysts won't rule out Janesville facility
JANESVILLE Was it an off-the-cuff comment ahead of a stock sale or an indication that General Motors is seriously considering future production at one of its two idled assembly plants?
While inquiring minds want to know—particularly in Janesville and Spring Hill, Tenn., the home communities for GM's two "standby" plants—at least one industry observer thinks both will rejoin GM's roster.
GM CEO Ed Whitacre reignited speculation in both communities Aug. 5 when he said the automaker might open one of its idled plants. Neither Whitacre nor other GM officials, however, have since added any details.
Whitacre was speaking at the annual Center for Automotive Research Management Briefing Seminar in Michigan.
David Cole, a respected industry consultant and the man who introduced Whitacre at the seminar, said the CEO's comment is indicative of GM's focus on its upcoming public stock sale.
But it's also a sign that GM thinks it will need more production capacity.
"It tells you that they are seriously thinking about things," said Cole, chairman of CAR, a nonprofit organization that studies trends and changes in the auto industry. "They're focused entirely on the IPO (Initial Public Offering) right now, and they have an earnings announcement later this week that they've indicated will be surprising.
"But the fact is that they are becoming capacity constricted."
GM sales were up 25 percent in July, and the automaker is selling more vehicles today with four brands than it did a year ago with eight. Four of the automaker's 11 U.S. assembly plants are now running three shifts, and nine of the 11 worked through their traditional summer shutdown in July.
"The key in manufacturing is to run the plant all the time," Cole said. "The goal is three shifts at all plants. They're not there yet, but they are seeing solid market growth, and they don't want to give that up.
"They're not going to open up a plant on the come. My guess would be that Spring Hill would be the one that would open first. If they continue on the path they are, one plant probably won't do it."
Cole said that could be good news for Janesville, which is the only other shuttered plant in line for future production.
"I would bet that within five years both Janesville and Spring Hill will be back online," Cole said.
While local officials contacted last week weren't that bullish, they told the Gazette that Spring Hill likely would reopen before Janesville. They also said that GM's indication that it is at least thinking about more capacity keeps the Janesville plant on a short list.
The Janesville and Spring Hill plants landed on GM's "standby" list last year after the automaker awarded production of the Chevrolet Aveo to a plant in Michigan.
At the time, speculation was that Spring Hill would be tapped to handle needed capacity for unibody vehicles while Janesville would build body-on-frame vehicles such as trucks and large SUVS.
But Ron Harbour, an industry analyst with Oliver Wyman, said any plant can be retooled for any need. That's especially true, he said, given GM's apparent transfer of equipment out of Janesville.
Left uncertain is what product GM has in mind for either Spring Hill or Janesville. From Whitacre's comments, it's unclear whether the automaker thinks it might need capacity to build existing vehicles or whether the added capacity would be devoted to a new product.
GM is reportedly looking at several possible additions to its lineup, including a new midsize pickup and a stretched version of its European minivan.
GM dropped its last minivan, the Chevrolet Uplander, in 2008. The automaker also is looking at a new midsize pickup entry to replace the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon that will be phased out in 2012.
Jesse Toprak, vice president of industry trends for the car pricing website TrueCar, doesn't look for production any time soon in Janesville.
"There's a long way to go before GM is capacity constricted," said Toprak, who in the 1990s ran the Hembrough Auto Group in Janesville before joining Edmunds.com. "The industry would have to sell 12.5 million to 13 million vehicles before GM needs to worry about capacity."
Based on July's sales, the U.S. market is expected to reach annualized sales of 11.98 million. That's higher than last year's total sales of 10.4 million, but still far from the peak sales of 16.9 million in 2005.
Toprak suspects Whitacre's comment was more of a buildup to the pending stock sale.
In a competition between Janesville and Spring Hill, Toprak gives the edge to the Tennessee plant because it still has about 1,000 employees and a flexible powertrain and stamping operation.
"But until the plant in Janesville is demolished, there's still some hope," he said. "I really think the best hope for Janesville would be trucks and SUVs based on the Chevy Volt technology, but that's three to five years away, if it takes off."

Sep 4, 2010 at 8:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Hey Zoom, how can you say the tier 2 employees are NOT a factor YET?; $13 and hour, ZERO pension costs as they have ZERO pension, and their annual healthcare deductible is $3500 for a family plan-practically self-insured, and almost no vacation costs either. Tier 2 hiring started several years ago. You got into some of that "fuzzy math" back in 2000?! :-)
Aug 12, 2010 at 4:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Sorry, Fedora_Linux, but those images look like the mutant offspring of a '54 Ford and a Nash Metropolitan to me.
Aug 12, 2010 at 4:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Wow imagine that people are demanding to buy union made vehicles again.Who woulda thunk it.
Aug 12, 2010 at 2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Good one Northman!
Aug 12, 2010 at 1:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
So far, most of GM's roughly 2000 "new hires" across the country have been call-backs of existing employees. The two-tier wage system hasn't really been a factor yet.
Aug 12, 2010 at 1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Goodness! Such Negativity! Who knows if Janesville will ever open and, if so, to what extent? Will former employees be able to transfer back? Who knows? Will the wages be less? Who knows? Etown, perhaps if you think it bad to live in the past, perhaps you could live for the future?Doomed?
Aug 12, 2010 at 12:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
face it even if they do come back it will be limited production, i even bet they wont let any of the old employees transfer back . they will use the new tiered pay scale to bring in new ones at a lower pay scale , with no extra pay should these jobs go south again. what needs to happen is the ones forced out of this area need to focus on rebuilding their families lives, if you keep living in the past your doomed
Aug 12, 2010 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
You're both close. It should be,
"Sorry, comments for this story have been incited by the site staff."
Aug 12, 2010 at 10:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Packolies, good one! I think a better comment would be: Sorry, this story should be disabled by the site staff.
Aug 12, 2010 at 9:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Miracles do happen I guess and pigs do fly?
You never know though do you?
Aug 12, 2010 at 8:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
Sorry, comments for this story have been disabled by the site staff.
Aug 12, 2010 at 7:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Put Reggie Hansen's Mud Flap factory in the old GM building!
Aug 12, 2010 at 7:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
I hope GM does put a product in the Janesville plant. Why would anyone talk negative about jobs coming back into the area? I'm not going to hold my breath but I'm still going to hope. I hope to win the lottery too!
Aug 12, 2010 at 7:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
O her we go again.
Aug 12, 2010 at 12:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
jv92: I think you dropped a letter in the final sentence of your comment. It should read: "Seriously, SHE'S just not that into you!"
Aug 11, 2010 at 10:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Where do I apply?
Aug 11, 2010 at 9:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Gazettes version of a push, pull or drag story.
Aug 11, 2010 at 8:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Why must we beat a dead Chevy? Over and over again with the hope and dissapointment and the what ifs and the dissapointment.....
Aug 11, 2010 at 7:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Responsible Reporting. Thats all we need in Janesville. No point in dragging things around by the tails.
Until there is an anouncement? One should just let it go.
Aug 11, 2010 at 6:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
What's worse? A divorcee who moves on or one that holds out hope only to be continually broken-hearted? Seriously, he's just not that into you!
Aug 11, 2010 at 6:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Our city council and local union leadership act like jilted and bitter divorcees! "I don't care if he comes back! I don't need him (GM) anyway. I'm just moving on with my life" or worse "I'm so old and ugly, why would he want to come back?".
How about having some hope and acting reasonably positive as an alternative to appearing to be SO negative, that you give GM the impression you don't want them back?
OBVIOUSLY, we've been on the short list for awhile and will likely get a product in the next 5 years. So city council, perhaps you really shouldn't completely move on as you keep insisting.
There's a reason why they didn't give specifics - it's because it hasn't been decided. So until the announcement has been made, please try to put on a somewhat hopeful face. Come on - do it for the kids.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.