GD has divisions that four on combat systems, aerospace, information systems and technology, and marine. GD is known for its expertise in systems and software development in weaponry systems management. General Dynamics Land System (GDLS) is a formidable competitor and is based on the acquisition in 1982 of Chrysler Corporations defense operations. In addition, GDLS has been consistently acquiring electronics companies with expertise in weaponry systems integration and management to further the strength of GDLS' integration to core GD business units.

Opportunities

Acquire electronics companies with expertise in weapons systems integration and management to further make GMD as vertically integrated as GD.

Create a more aggressive lobbying team in Washington D.C. And open up a regional headquarters there to concentrate on government business, thereby increasing the influence GMD has on DoD contracts.

Develop a series of prototype vehicles that match the requirements of the BCT program with the 8x8 configuration and continually refine their MPG ratings to show high levels of fuel economy. In other words accelerate the development of this light armored vehicle as many other nations would want a variation of it, and provide the U.S. Army a prototype before the end of the bidding period. Build in on speculation of the win to show that GMD can conclusively develop the needed vehicle. Even if the contract is not won, GMD will have won credibility from the U.S. Army and the DoD, and second, opened up a significant secondary market.

Underscore the low total cost of ownership (TCO) for the proposed vehicle and also stress the high percentage...

Show the DoD that the supply chain and cost of maintenance - in short the TCO is overwhelming low relative to other competitors.
Threats

GD will most likely attempt to kill the project if GMD decides to bid it on its own entirely.

Completing a joint venture with UD is politically astute yet the company does not seem to have enough expertise and depth of experience in weaponry systems integration, production of light vehicles, or production to be of significant value in a JV.

Partnering with GD could potentially create an entirely new long-term competitor for GMD, as GD would learn how to manufacturer lighter chassis and frame vehicles. As part of the JV, GMD could stipulate that this technology was confidential, yet over time GD may use it anyway, sparking legal battles in the long-term.

GD partners with UD and wins the contract using political clout alone.

Recommendation

GMD has the technical capability and proven track record in producing vehicles like the one needed in the BCT program to succeed on their own, without a JV with GD, GDLS or UD.

GMD needs to go solo on this contract and win it based on showing how their vehicle design will significantly reduce the TCO over the life of the vehicle, in addition to delivering exceptional gas mileage and a high level of parts commonality to make the U.S. Army supply chain more efficient. GMD needs to design processes and systems outside the vehicle as well, giving the U.S. Army what they need in terms of a streamline supply chain and lower logistics cost based on GMDs' parts commonality and distribution expertise.