Paddock Padlocks Ex-Dealers From Returning
Just in case your television has been off for 20 minutes and you haven’t seen a Paddock Chevrolet commercial since then, their slogan is “A World-Class Dealership with Small-Town Values.” Apparently, those Ken-Ton-based principles include making government-influenced closures of once-fellow dealers permanent. Amanda Carpenter’s recent Hot Button column in the Washington Times referenced a familiar local automobile merchant.
An arm of General Motors Corp. has asked surviving GM dealers to put in writing their opposition to bipartisan legislation that would restore franchise agreements to dealers that received pink slips from the government earlier this year, a demand that sparked accusations of ‘coercion’ from one of the bill’s chief proponents…
In a July 6 letter obtained by the Washington Times the GM National Dealership Council’s Chairman Duane Paddock said the Council “strongly opposes this bill” and “would appreciate your signature of support at the bottom where it is designated.” It requested recipients to fax the signed letter by 5 p.m. the next day to the NDC. “It is extremely important you do this immediately. Our voices need to be heard,” the letter stated.
To recap, the victimized businesses were shut down in a manner that appeared to be arbitrary, political, or both; of course, it happened after we took a majority ownership in GM. Basically, the Paddock-led council is doing its best to ensure former fellow dealers don’t return. If it’s up to him, those owners bullied out of commerce stay bullied.
As with everything automotive these days, the shutterings reeked of shadiness. If the purged dealers were so unprofitable to begin with, wouldn’t they have eventually closed on their own? More importantly, it’s one thing for a private corporation to excise useless limbs, but doing so only after Washington’s approval is just creepy. And Paddock wants to keep it this way.
It used to be that Paddock’s greatest foul was turning Kenmore’s portion of Delaware Avenue into a parking lot; now, it turns out he is doing what he can to make sure that there are worse kind of lots, namely vacant ones, across the nation.
Spearheading an effort against re-opening businesses is a disheartening move, especially from someone who’s thrown money at Republicans.
Of course, with so many big spenders on both aisle sides, who knows what backing a Republican means anymore?
Luckily, we can let Paddock know what we think of his efforts to shred, burn, and flush others’ franchise agreements. Namely, patronize the dealership belonging to the gregarious Billy Fuccillo instead. Even better, buy a Ford: they never moaned for federal money.
The only other alternative is to keep whatever vehicle is currently in the garage for perpetuity. Someday, owners can show them to grandchildren and tell stories about the days when the government didn’t own car companies. Those vehicles will also serve as proof that internal combustion engines and cigarette lighters were once available.
Written by guest blogger Anthony Bialy.
Tags: Duane Paddock, GM, Paddock Chevrolet
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment
So, if I understand you correctly, you’re personalizing the blame to Duane Paddock because he’s the head of the dealership association that now represents the remaining dealerships handling the remaining marques sold by post-bankruptcy GM.
If you had printed the entire letter, which is available here, you’d see that this is an effort to not re-open a business decision that new GM has made regarding the number, and identity, of dealerships.
I don’t know why you didn’t link to or reprint the entire letter, as it’s readily available with a simple google search.
The only time I ever saw anyone make an accusation of partisanship regarding dealership closings, it had to do with Chrysler, and those were never corroborated or proven.
Oftentimes Republicans agitate for bankruptcy for governmental entities so as to abrogate union contracts. What GM has done here in its bankruptcy reorganization is abrogate many of its dealership contracts in an effort to make its dealership network work better. That’s a private business decision made as part of a bankruptcy proceeding, not some Presidential decree that Obama made.
GM and its too-broad dealership network have been criticized by industry analysts for years as being unsustainable, as evidenced by the recent carpocalypse. Bankruptcy permits GM to terminate contracts, and according to the dealership council’s letter, the process was done objectively and confidentially.
Unless you or the Washington Times have evidence to the contrary, this would seem to be a lot of sound & fury, signifying nothing.
The rapid GM bankruptcy will permit that company to actually compete with foreign marques that produce domestically like Hyundai, Honda, and Toyota. Why congress would want to screw that up is beyond me.
[...] searches and basic knowledge are always helpful before reaching a conclusion about something. My takeaway from this post is that criticism of the GM and Chrysler bailout/bankruptcies is important because Obama was [...]