As I started reading this article, I kept thinking how GM would only make a bicycle as a way of disrupting bikes as an alternative to driving, but then I read the following and wondered if they are sincere:
What do you think, is 'this vision of zero crashes, zero emissions and zero congestion' more achievable if GM is truly supportive of it, along with other auto manufacturers?

I would like to think so, but I think another possibilities is that they're setting up yet another narrative where they can claim that they are supportive of alternatives to driving as an industry but the public just isn't interested. This narrative is used all the time whenever they want to change gears from small cars to SUVs or to cite data that LCF grew a little for a while but has now become a failed experiment, etc.

If they really get it and see how reducing auto-traffic, sprawl, hyperpavement, etc. by supporting multimodalism is a good idea, then maybe there is hope on the horizon, but then again maybe they're just painting hope on the horizon to try to get some more investor support in the present.

I have a lot of friends who never ride their bikes for pleasure, but they transport their bikes to big festivals and other events where traffic and parking are wretched. They park a mile or two away from the mayhem and bike to the fest from the car. To me, this is an awesome "hybrid" means of getting somewhere. Obviously, this could be employed for people working in congested downtown areas. Now that there are bike lanes and greenways all over the place (certainly more than 20 years ago) I believe we are closer to seeing non-cyclists purchasing an E-bike as a tool to beat downtown traffic at rush hour.

I might place a bet that GM people are thinking this way. Perhaps a few vehicle models that incorporate a way to easily keep a couple of folding E-bikes at hand, charged, and ready to go INSIDE the motor vehicle. I would if I were them. Market E-bikes to non-cyclists along with their new car! God forbid they should even THINK about anything NON-motorized!!

Hey...it's a start! More motorists living in my world learning about my problems. Sounds great.

Everybody wants a piece of the action. GM should stick to what they do best.

Mass producing electric (and fossil fuel) motorized vehicles is EXACTLY what they do. Bicycles should be a piece of cake. Maybe the price of those bicycles will come down a bit.

Receiving govt bailouts?

I don't think one will negatively impact the other. In dense urban areas, it's already a pita to have a car. No where to park, too many parking tickets, cost of a garage is too high. Millennials in urban areas are using public transit and other options more and not even owning cars to a great degree. By producing e-bikes, they can tap into the market in these dense urban areas as well as sell cars to folks who live in areas where car ownership makes sense. And best case for GM is someone who owns their car AND has their bike in the trunk! It's a win for them either way.

"Make" or import and Market in car dealer ships?

that bring down CAFE standard, average for whole vehicle line?

GM is a failure just like Chrysler is a failure....The best that GM can do is produce bad quality vehicles and keep on receiving government bailouts with tax payers money....Japanese made vehicles from the 1980's and 1990's are way better quality than 2018 vehicles made by GM.

They could have any number of motivations.
It's a growing market and they want to get in on it.
Greenwashing the company to make it seem more environmentally friendly
Burnishing the corporate image to make it seem more hip.
Undermining public transit initiatives
Undermining Uber/Lyfft/ etc.
Probably a few I haven't thought of

One thing I learned from following the bailout is that GM is not of one mind. When a project like the Volt goes ahead there are true believers and cynics and outright opponents. It got made, and into a second model revision, and the engineering of the EV-1 survived to make it into the Volt.

As long it's an improvement, sure. Although I guess like any new enterprise you have to look at any negative aspects too, which remain to be seen.

As I said in the OP, I think they are just hoping to boost their stock value by getting investors who want to invest in a more sustainable future. Basically that amounts to greenwashing, but it's not so much greenwashing to sell a product as it is greenwashing to sell the stock to investors. Maybe it is an investment in marketing the greenwashing strategy of the company itself as being the most effective to investors who want to profit from effective greenwashing schemes/scams.

It's like, "how much more can we get people to invest in building Ram pickups by creating a greenwashed multimodal transportation vision of the future?" They also recently came out in favor of traditional emissions progress standards, which implies they want to limit their competition but at the same time want some leeway to emit some air pollution as needed to promote their combustion line. In short, they certainly don't seem to be backing off on combustion vehicles, so I think all the other electric and ebike stuff is just a way to distract from their pro-combustion business plan.

There may be an overall intent to gain positive public relations, but in terms of the actual potential commercial impact this would be far too small a thing to impact stock prices.

Oh great, now I can have a bike that is constantly recalled and the dummy lights go on for no reason, even after the bike has been to the dealer a few times and they tell me nothing is wrong, you must be driving it wrong

They wouldn't be doing it if they didn't think it would help them directly or indirectly, so if the ebikes themselves aren't going to make much money, then presumably they will somehow help sell cars or have some other spinoff effect, carefully planned.

So what would the toolup time be.... couple of years?
And then the bikes will leak oil.

Nobody's going to buy a GM bike. If they're really serious about expanding their corporation then it would make more sense for them to simply acquire a cycle manufacturer.

I won't be surprised if they produce them in partnership with a bike company.

Another motivation for them might be integrated data capture. If they can track your behaviour while you're biking as well as driving, that increases their ownership of your life.

I think there's growing interest in investing in enterprises that people can feel good about, so that creates an incentive to give people something to feel good about with GM so they'll buy that stock. There are entire funds devoted to sustainability, etc. so GM has probably researched what it would take to get on some of those funds' green lists, because that triggers those funds' managers to buy their stock.

It's fun to pretend you're friendly to sell your stock.

GM sells cars not stocks.

They are a public company and do have interest in stock values. GM does not literally broker their stock but they do offer them for sale through brokers.

Mostly they are buying back stock

Stock is a lot more important to GM than cars. Cars are just a means to an end, which is maximizing shares price.