(Given GM's track record on meaningful innovation, that might be a good thing.)

GM announced last week that in order to lower their cash burn rate...they're cutting back on their R&D efforts for models 3+ years away from production.

Oct 30, 2008 (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) --  General Motors' future product development spending in 2009 and 2010will be restricted to products with the highest priority -- small cars,crossovers and similar vehicles -- officials at the company say. - Pittsburgh Post - Gazette/Trading Markets

Ok...so, what have they been doing in recent years? Well, the Corvette was a primary focus.

One of the victims is the next-gen, C7 Corvette. All development on thenew version of GM's flagship sports car has been put on hold. Link.

See my earlier point about meaningful innovation. GM Flagship - Corvette. Compare that to Toyota whose flagship is their Prius. It's not because Toyota designated the car their flagship. It's because so many customers drive that flag. Their customer designated the Prius THEIR flagship.

Given that GM had lost touch with the American consumer, and its workers, and had arrogantly continued to pursue innovations on ...Camaros and Corvettes, it makes sense for them to close their R&D.

Still, it's interesting that America's premiere corporation (until now) suspends investing in its future with R&D and innovations.  And new, innovative, high-mileage models like the VOLT  aren't due to be available until...2010. 

What are they doing in the meantime?

1. I guess they expect the market to suspend itself and wait for GM to catch up. 

2. They want us, the American consumer/taxpayer, to bail them out with federal funds.

I love irony, don't you?

GM's current status came from dismissing our desires for higher mileage, smaller, less expensive models. Now, they're asking us, the sames one they ignored for so many years, for our tax dollars to bail them out.

I'd say yes to the bailout only for the jobs. There's no reason to punish their workers for the arrogance of their leadership. On the other hand, we can't expect better results from that same leadership, can we? You can't give free money to the leaders who created the situation where they have to ask for money from the same people whose wishes they ignored...and in so doing created their need for our handout.  If we do allow a federal bailout of GM and not demand a change in leadership then we should expect to be back in this same position in...less than 20 years. And along the way we'll face more handout requests from companies following the same path.