2012aveo , Your conclusion point sense sense - Certainly the lagging manufacturers can/will close the gap with the leading edge manufacturers including the #1 leading-edge company GM. This tends to happen and has happened before. But your correct conclusion has nothing to do with your one-dimensional/incorrect/xenophobic analysis of the actuarial/international/workplace facts about engineering workplace & student populations in USA.
heh heh. you are funny, autocritic. thanks for making it so much more likely I'll buy a GM car or truck today!
i recommend that folks boycott boycotts.
It's impossible to ignore GM cars - they make some of the best/top quality and best performing cars for USA and the world, and they never forgot how to design a car that: - stops when you hit the brake. - shifts to neutral when you shift to neutral - has an ignition switch that can be turned off. (btw, 1980s Audi 5000 could do all those things too. There was nothing wrong with those cars - a few mm of pedal-placement change was just to placate the press - to try to blame something other than driver-error.)
Lemko you should feel guilty unless you immediately have your DTS compressed into a 3 foot cube. go out and get a great deal on one of the identified dangerous Toyotas and Lexi.
circle W, maybe the 'nameplate' pontiac wasn't desirable to folks who desire nameplates. but think of those of us who desire the best value&performance CARS instead of nameplates , and then try driving a 04->06 GTO or 20-09 G8 and tell yourself those are not desirable cars for us automotive performance & value enthusiasts !?
For some reason, I had thought the '04-06 GTO was a letdown, performance-wise. But in googling it, seems it was good for 0-60 in around 5 seconds...not exactly something to whine about!
I really didn't like the styling when they came out. Just seemed too anonymous, like a big Cavalier coupe with a Pontiac front-end grafted on. But now, looking back, I like 'em more now than I did when they were new!
I sat in a few at auto shows and such, but never drove one. I was impressed with the comfort and room of the front seat. Plenty of stretch-out room for me. And the quality of the interior was definitely a step up and very un-GM-like at the time!
But in googling it, seems it was good for 0-60 in around 5 seconds...not exactly something to whine about!
I really didn't like the styling when they came out. Just seemed too anonymous, like a big Cavalier coupe with a Pontiac front-end grafted on. But now, looking back, I like 'em more now than I did when they were new!
No, they definitely weren't slow. I think the 5.7 was used in the 04, then they went to the 6.0L in 05 or 06 can't remember. The styling was completely lame IMO. Did kind of look like a big Cavalier. The interior was probably the best available in a GM product at the time. It never really did anything for me, but I can see how it could appeal to someone. It just didn't appeal to enough people. I don't think I've ever seen a car go from market adjustment over sticker to fire sales so quick. I think everyone that wanted one, pre-ordered it, then they had to discount them big time.
People tend to forget that the original GTO was a performance version of the rather pedestrian-looking 1964 Tempest. The GTO's styling didn't catch up with its performance excitement until 1965. I believe, if given the chance to evolve, the 04-06 GTO would've had exciting styling to go with the performance. There's a guy in my neighborhood with a G8 and it still catches my eye almost a year after he bought it.
Heck, this might be your last chance to own a new Pontiac. If I knew there were going to be no more new Buicks or Cadillacs, I'd immediately run out and get one and the most awesome one I could afford!
People tend to forget that the original GTO was a performance version of the rather pedestrian-looking 1964 Tempest. The GTO's styling didn't catch up with its performance excitement until 1965.
I understand that, but original was based of a car that was already known and wasn't originally hyped like the 04-06. Regardless the car looked boring. Also importing it from Holden was expensive. It was a bad idea to use the GTO name. People's idea of a GTO wasn't the original you are talking about.
Regardless it's gone. Just like the Solstice that overly hyped and under delivered. Sales of the Solstice/Sky flamed out quick too. Though, the Solstice looked cool on the outside, but in GM fashion, lame on the inside, not to mention heavy and clumsy.
I never thought the '64 Tempest was pedestrian looking, though. Even as a plain-jane stripper 2 or 4-door sedan, the car still had a tough, handsome look about it.
I always thought the 1965 was too pretty looking to be a GTO...it just didn't look tough enough! But by '66-67 IMO, they got it just right, balancing the tough and good-looking.
Do you actually believe that GM will EVER pay the whole bailout back? Because I don't, for even one second. Plus, even if they do, it still means I will be stuck with a car that doesn't meet my standards. So what reason is left? (please leave "patriotism" out of the options)
(HA! Like they'd even think of hiring former UAW people)?
No car company in it's sane state of mind will consider hiring UAW people. As I've stated long ago in the UAW thread, the trashy ones can go to hell for all I care. The qualified ones can leave UAW and find work elsewhere, and I bet many other companies will welcome them with open arms. Stuck with UAW? Then leave the state. go to where the money is cuz the money is sure as hell not coming to you.
Well, if I can't get a Cadillac or Buick anymore and am forced to get some (censored) import, I will be stuck with a car that doesn't meet my standards. :mad: Heck, I wouldn't mind the downfall of GM so much if my alternatives were something like Packard, Hudson, or Nash rather than Toyota, Honda, or Nissan.
Well, if I can't get a Cadillac or Buick anymore and am forced to get some (censored) import, I will be stuck with a car that doesn't meet my standards.
Better hope GM's lastest offerings sell well and the aspiring Chineese continue to buy Buicks.
I'm as patriotic as anyone, and used to think the way you do. GM all the way...2005...how about a 4 cyl in a midsize GM car? No.
Ford? I'd never buy a Ford, well I did. Ford credit, well they (censored a few times over)
And after taking our $ for thier stupidity, money I dont think will be paid back, I dont know if I'll go back to GM.
They are doing some things right, new ads are what they should have done years ago. Showing how thier cars trucks compare to the competition, but I think we heard this before, wasnt Saturn the import fighter?? Look what they did with that. A smaller GM should be a good thing. Time will tell.
And I do have a GM product, havent had any problems with it, if and when I need parts they will be available for many years, they still make the 4.3 V6!
Suppose GM and Chrysler come up with some truly fantastic vehicles?
Story of their lives and DEATHS! Waited too long for that. They are currently fighting for and providing cars that just meet the competition not beat them.
I'm not interested in a four-cylinder in any car. In fact, a six is too much of a compromise for me, though the 3.8 V-6 in both my 1988 Buick Park Avenue and my wife's 2005 Buick LaCrosse are ultra-reliable, very fuel-efficient engines.
I had an oddball black 1987 Chevrolet Caprice Classic with the 4.3 V-6. It was my first new car. It was hardly a hot rod at a stoplight drag race, but it was nice and smooth and delivered great fuel economy.
As long as there is a GM, I'll keep coming back. I'm extremely happy with my latest GM acquisition - my black 2007 Cadillac DTS Performance. In fact, I think it is too nice to be driving around this city!
Really? I can understand not being enamored of the junky chop-block V6s and the crudbomber 60-degree six from the Citation, but in a magical fairy-tale land where GM offered a torquey 5-liter inline six in a large RWD car, you'd turn that down out of principle?
I have been saying for years that GM should take the 4200 vortec inline six destroke it to 3900 so it can rev a little easier and use it in a large rwd/awd car.
I think Lemko would like the 2.3 liter four cylinder turbo in a 9-5.
260 hp @ 5,300 rpms and 258 ft-lbs or tire shredding torque at 1,900 rpms.
Well, the problem is different standards means different preferences. How are you gonna convince anyone of different standards to buy GM?
The only GM car worthy of consideration in my personal case are CTS and Vette. I'm not in for a 2 seater and for the same price (or even less in Infiniti's case) CTS falls way behind Infiniti, BMW, and Audi on my list. G8 was a decent vehicle, but it's dead now.
Again, there are more of us who distrust GM and those who do.
I think the Caddy CTS is the standard of what we should expect for a regular car. If they put this much thought and consideration into other cars, then they would have a much better outcome as a whole. I personally, don't see all the glitz and glame of the CTS, its so overpriced for a car that seems to be so normal. It is certainly not worth the premium price tag. It seems like for GM, what you pay is what you get exactly, and in order for one to get premium, you pay the price! Other company's have managed to even make a base model car and still accomplish a premium appeal. Sure it may not have the leather, heated seats, moonroof, but when you drive it, it feels solid and show attention to detail. The gap between base model and premium is so huge with GM, your just not sure where exactly those lines are. I should NOT have to buy a CTS to get premium. And, whose to say the CTS is premium anyway?
I can name many cars substantially lower in cost and have better bang for its buck, and would make you feel like your driving a much more expensive car than you are. If a company can accomplish this, then they are doing all the right things.
The CTS for me, would be an example of several of company's car too, such as a base model BMW, the price tag on that baby in which does speak base model. It is so overpriced. Most GM car's at this time are not priced according to their values.
You have restated my case and a lot of others on here regarding the pricing for GM. It gets back to the horrible business model and price strategy that sent GM downhill from the early '70's....nothing has changed much except they threw their debt onto our backs and closed a couple of plants. They can't even give away the brands that haven't profited for years!
All of the premium products they sell cost more than the competition and only a few of those models now MEET the competition on quality, durability, reliability and desirability.
Just when they import a car with excitement such as the G8 (what a name!!) after a failed marketing strategy of the GTO return), they cancel it instead of re-badge it to Chevy (Impala) which would have invigorated that division with a worth premium CAR! Typical GM!! A 5-year-old could run GM's brands better than that!
I will definitely vote otherwise with my wallet for the foreseeable future.
That big picture cut off some of what you were saying but I gather you think the CTS is over priced.
Have you priced it in comparison to the same BMW or Mercedes?
A 535i with all the same equipment as a CTS 3.6 premium is nearly $62,000 MSRP.
The CTS 3.6 premium is only $51,285 and GM is showing 2,000 dollars of customer cash. I have driven the new 535i and while i love that twin turbo engine I do not like the new five series. I can't imagine it is 12,000 plus dollars better then the CTS 3.6.
A similar E350 is about $57,000 MSRP so not nearly as over priced but the Merc is not going to be as sporty as either the Caddy or BMW. The Merc is down on power and probably heavier then both.
A Lexus GS350 is about the same MSRP at 49,000ish but styling wise it doesn't do anything for me. I find most lexus seats to be uncomfortable too so it would have to overcome that. Performance wise it is probably pretty close to the 535i and the CTS for acceleration but I doubt it handles as well. No manual avaliable in the GS or the E350 either.
"Everyone else is doing it too" isn't much of an excuse.
For a long time, transaction prices on vehicles in the US were suppressed by a combination of competition, domestic overproduction, and a strong dollar. All those factors have faded away, and the increasing globalization of the one-time domestics means that the weaker dollar has a greater impact on their pricing here than it might have in years past.
".....I have been saying for years that GM should take the 4200 vortec inline six destroke it to 3900 so it can rev a little easier and use it in a large rwd/awd car."
See, this is where lem and I think more alike. I would've taken that 4200 engine (which is pretty smooth in my wife's Rainier) and ADDED 2 cyl. They could've dropped it in a Buick and called it the Fireball 8 (I know, I know, that's not exactly creative)
"......All of the premium products they sell cost more than the competition "
They do?? Are you STILL comparing the CTS to the Coroller Skate sized 3 series?? A comparable Lacrosse CTS w/ nav is $4500 LESS than an ES350 W/O NAV!!!
Hell the Camaro is almost $2500 CHEAPER than a 6 cyl Genesis coupe!!!
"......The new Sonata is still heads and tails over anything GM makes in the category."
How can you make that claim?? From a picture?? That car isn't even in production yet, and won't be here for a year. By then, EVERYTHING, Accord, Altima,Camry, Malibu, will be AT LEAST 3 model years old (5 in the case of the Camry), which is ancient.
Oh, and a 200 hp 4 cyl WON'T cut it in this class.
That's crazy talk. You really need to compare the Malibu to the Accord and Camry. I've owned both the Toyota and the Honda. The new Malibu is at MINUMUM on par to either and in many ways better. Let's face it, the Accord and Camry are very, very, very boring. Go drive a Malibu. Take it out for a few hours and you'll see what I mean. You have the same story with the Traverse/Equinox compared to the Pilot/CRV and Highlander/RAV4.
GM has played catch up to the imports for years, but with these particular models, they have surpassed everyone's expectations. I work at a Chevy dealership. I'm the finance manager. When Accord and Camry shoppers come in and look at the Malibu... they buy a Malibu. Period.
No I compare the CTS with the Infinity M35. The CTS Premium costs $49K plus almost $3K more for good tires. I'll do another later. I'm not knocking the car just the pricing.
The Genesis is $10K cheaper than the CTS Premium. You already know the Gen has 50 HP more as well as more interior room.
I would not consider the Camaro a premium car...although it is compared to any other Chevy outside of the 'Vette.
The LaCrosse is the only Buick car that is premium and there are NO Chevy premium cars because that's the value division, remember? The other Buick car is a forlorn boringmobile of yesterday.
Like all GM's take a look at the tricky way there are so many variants of the same model where the option game is played. Same old pricing strategy that let's the competition win over and over and over...
Car prices in the US are the cheapest feature for feature in years right now.
I was talking to some Volvo Customers in service back a few months ago when were closing out the 2009 S60s. They bought a base 850 back in 1996 or 1997 and paid around 30,000 for it when the sticker was a little over 30,000. And by base I mean base no leather, no heated seats, no sunroof and manual transmission.
With 204,000 miles on the car they are thinking about replacing it but were concerned that the new Volvos aren't as safe because the cost the same or less then their Volvo.
A similar S40 would sticker for well under 30,000 and they could buy one then in the mid 20,000 dollar range. The S40 would be a little smaller then their 850 but they didn't want leather and you can't get a S60 without leather anymore.
A S60 with leather, sunroof, climate package and automatic trans would have stickered around 35,000 but cause they were on serious close out at the time you could buy one for nearly 10,000 dollars off.
More airbags then their 850, a stronger chassis, stability control, more powerful engine with about the same gas mileage and an automatic over a manual for 5,000 dollars less.
You can see why they would be concerned initially but technology has forced down the cost of cars. Raw materials have gone up and so has labor but better manufacturing and lower cost electronics knocked most of that out.
"Toyota has been posting losses recently, and its costs of borrowing have been increasing as well. American companies only wish they could borrow at the distressed levels that Toyota sold bonds in February: 2.012%. But due to its high cost of borrowing the Japanese government is stepping in to loan Toyota a sum of money, and it is expected Honda and Mazda will follow suit. "
"Toyota has been posting losses recently, and its costs of borrowing have been increasing as well. American companies only wish they could borrow at the distressed levels that Toyota sold bonds in February: 2.012%. But due to its high cost of borrowing the Japanese government is stepping in to loan Toyota a sum of money, and it is expected Honda and Mazda will follow suit. "
Great point. But there are a few differences:
1. The article says that only Toyota is getting a loan, and that hasn't even happened yet. 2. The Honda and Mazda mentions are speculation at the current time. 3. Toyota is getting financing, has not been in BK, and would be expected to be able to actually pay back the loans due to their decent financial condition.
A M35 with the nav package and a CTS premium which comes with Nav standard are within $1,200 dollars of MSRP price. Caddy is showing a $2,000 dealer cash right now so it is actually about 900 dollars cheaper then the Infiniti.
I would guess Infiniti has similar incentives on the M but they just aren't advertising them directly. I bet transaction prices on the M35 and CTS are within a few hundred dollars of each other when compared like to like.
The only two vehicles in the same size class as the CTS that are significantly cheaper are the GS350 and the Genesis. If you want a really sports sedan I just don't see you cross shopping a squishy lexus with the M, CTS or 5 series. I am sure it does get cross shopped but not as much as the others.
As far as Hyundai has come they are still a brand that needs to sell on value so of course they will be much, much cheaper then any other competition.
For GM, a loan from the government so that they can go bankrupt and then survive bankruptcy and slaughter their divisions (even though they did not go nearly far enough).....and with a low likelihood of ever being able to repay the loan.. that's my definition of bailout.
For Toyota, a company with a very good reputation (notwithstanding the emerging acceleration fiasco), in a downturn... wanting a lower interest loan.... that's a special deal in my book. To me, bailout means it prevents total failure. Toyota is a long way from total failure.
Just so you know I'm not a particular Toyota fanboy, I think their cars are boring and ugly, and I see them becoming the "Japanese GM".... they've just not sunk nearly that far.
OK,It should be-''GM became BK"...No difference. Huge waste of money ..The GM CEO`s get millions in bonuses even when they are faltering and the taxpayer has to pay this!! Sheesh!! :shades: And there is support for this !! GM is as pathetic as it gets. It is the goodwill of American people it still exists inspite of decades of horrible cars. Just look at Toyota - It is being raked over the coals over the floormat issue.
Don't forget that GM still has 17% of the market.. Big enough to make a profit..Hyundai with 3% share is making profits..GM now is Govt/Gimmicky/Goner motors..We taxpayers nicely paid for the retirement benefits and expenses for these inefficient incompetent greedy lazy GM execs. :lemon:
"......I would not consider the Camaro a premium car..."
You talk premium, yet you show a Sonata?? As far as the Genesis, you do realize that it has the advantage of being built in Korea where the labor is far cheaper than it is here or Japan or Germany?
Agree with most of your comments. The point is the pricing strategy is lame. AFAIC, the options are an integral part of the value proposition. A CTS should be a CTS not 10 different iterations of one model with additional options on each.
The price is always higher and then the incentives kick in because sales are not adequate. Self-defeating and confusing to customers....not designed to gain market share, afaic.
The Sonata will take sales from Camry, Accord AND Malibu. It is not a Premium car.
Premium was in reference to the CTS, LaCrosse the Enclave and the top line SUV's Escalade, Denali. These vehicles are the overpriced candidates....then must be heavily incentiveized to move. Horrible pricing strategy.
I realize the advantage Korea has. Do you realize how brilliant the marketing Hyundai has vs. GM??
".....The Sonata will take sales from Camry, Accord AND Malibu."
What makes you so sure? Do you realize that a full 40% of Sonata sales go to the rental car market, as opposed to 25% for the Malibu and next to nothing for the other 2? It wont even offer a 6 cyl. which is generally the Malibu's bread and butter sales.
As far as the CTS LaCrosse and Enclave are concerned, there are very little in the way of incentives offered, because they are VERY competitive cars. The Escalade and Denali have big incentives because they guzzle gas.
As far as their pricing strategy, in some cases I see your point. When I was considering my LaCrosse, my wife actually wanted me to get the Camaro, as the RS would be about 10K less than the CXS. I told her it was impractical for a family car (token back seat) and took her to a Chevy dealer to show her. They had a Traverse LTZ on the showroom floor that she sat in, and I almost S#@T myself when I saw the sticker at OVER $48K!!!!! I said that is Enclave territory. How can they price the Chevy that much, but they do.
BTW I looked at the CTS Premium on Edmunds. The AWD version lists only Tricolor paint schemes, a compact spare, and a block heater as options, so everything else must be "standard", and there are only $2K in incentives available. List price; $53,640 (base price, $51,820) Edmunds true cost to own; $49,662 w/ incentives.
Comments
Your conclusion point sense sense - Certainly the lagging manufacturers can/will close the gap with the leading edge manufacturers including the #1 leading-edge company GM. This tends to happen and has happened before.
But your correct conclusion has nothing to do with your one-dimensional/incorrect/xenophobic analysis of the actuarial/international/workplace facts about engineering workplace & student populations in USA.
i recommend that folks boycott boycotts.
It's impossible to ignore GM cars - they make some of the best/top quality and best performing cars for USA and the world, and they never forgot how to design a car that:
- stops when you hit the brake.
- shifts to neutral when you shift to neutral
- has an ignition switch that can be turned off.
(btw, 1980s Audi 5000 could do all those things too. There was nothing wrong with those cars - a few mm of pedal-placement change was just to placate the press - to try to blame something other than driver-error.)
Lemko you should feel guilty unless you immediately have your DTS compressed into a 3 foot cube. go out and get a great deal on one of the identified dangerous Toyotas and Lexi.
but think of those of us who desire the best value&performance CARS instead of nameplates , and then try driving a 04->06 GTO or 20-09 G8 and tell yourself those are not desirable cars for us automotive performance & value enthusiasts !?
I really didn't like the styling when they came out. Just seemed too anonymous, like a big Cavalier coupe with a Pontiac front-end grafted on. But now, looking back, I like 'em more now than I did when they were new!
I sat in a few at auto shows and such, but never drove one. I was impressed with the comfort and room of the front seat. Plenty of stretch-out room for me. And the quality of the interior was definitely a step up and very un-GM-like at the time!
I really didn't like the styling when they came out. Just seemed too anonymous, like a big Cavalier coupe with a Pontiac front-end grafted on. But now, looking back, I like 'em more now than I did when they were new!
No, they definitely weren't slow. I think the 5.7 was used in the 04, then they went to the 6.0L in 05 or 06 can't remember. The styling was completely lame IMO. Did kind of look like a big Cavalier. The interior was probably the best available in a GM product at the time. It never really did anything for me, but I can see how it could appeal to someone. It just didn't appeal to enough people. I don't think I've ever seen a car go from market adjustment over sticker to fire sales so quick. I think everyone that wanted one, pre-ordered it, then they had to discount them big time.
I understand that, but original was based of a car that was already known and wasn't originally hyped like the 04-06. Regardless the car looked boring. Also importing it from Holden was expensive. It was a bad idea to use the GTO name. People's idea of a GTO wasn't the original you are talking about.
Regardless it's gone. Just like the Solstice that overly hyped and under delivered. Sales of the Solstice/Sky flamed out quick too. Though, the Solstice looked cool on the outside, but in GM fashion, lame on the inside, not to mention heavy and clumsy.
I always thought the 1965 was too pretty looking to be a GTO...it just didn't look tough enough! But by '66-67 IMO, they got it just right, balancing the tough and good-looking.
(HA! Like they'd even think of hiring former UAW people)?
No car company in it's sane state of mind will consider hiring UAW people. As I've stated long ago in the UAW thread, the trashy ones can go to hell for all I care. The qualified ones can leave UAW and find work elsewhere, and I bet many other companies will welcome them with open arms. Stuck with UAW? Then leave the state. go to where the money is cuz the money is sure as hell not coming to you.
Better hope GM's lastest offerings sell well and the aspiring Chineese continue to buy Buicks.
Ford? I'd never buy a Ford, well I did. Ford credit, well they (censored a few times over)
And after taking our $ for thier stupidity, money I dont think will be paid back, I dont know if I'll go back to GM.
They are doing some things right, new ads are what they should have done years ago. Showing how thier cars trucks compare to the competition, but I think we heard this before, wasnt Saturn the import fighter?? Look what they did with that. A smaller GM should be a good thing. Time will tell.
And I do have a GM product, havent had any problems with it, if and when I need parts they will be available for many years, they still make the 4.3 V6!
Story of their lives and DEATHS! Waited too long for that. They are currently fighting for and providing cars that just meet the competition not beat them.
Regards,
OW
The G8 was great and then they CANCELLED IT!
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
I had an oddball black 1987 Chevrolet Caprice Classic with the 4.3 V-6. It was my first new car. It was hardly a hot rod at a stoplight drag race, but it was nice and smooth and delivered great fuel economy.
As long as there is a GM, I'll keep coming back. I'm extremely happy with my latest GM acquisition - my black 2007 Cadillac DTS Performance. In fact, I think it is too nice to be driving around this city!
Really? I can understand not being enamored of the junky chop-block V6s and the crudbomber 60-degree six from the Citation, but in a magical fairy-tale land where GM offered a torquey 5-liter inline six in a large RWD car, you'd turn that down out of principle?
I think Lemko would like the 2.3 liter four cylinder turbo in a 9-5.
260 hp @ 5,300 rpms and 258 ft-lbs or tire shredding torque at 1,900 rpms.
The only GM car worthy of consideration in my personal case are CTS and Vette. I'm not in for a 2 seater and for the same price (or even less in Infiniti's case) CTS falls way behind Infiniti, BMW, and Audi on my list. G8 was a decent vehicle, but it's dead now.
Again, there are more of us who distrust GM and those who do.
Oh wait, that would cut into the V8 sales.
I can name many cars substantially lower in cost and have better bang for its buck, and would make you feel like your driving a much more expensive car than you are. If a company can accomplish this, then they are doing all the right things.
The CTS for me, would be an example of several of company's car too, such as a base model BMW, the price tag on that baby in which does speak base model. It is so overpriced. Most GM car's at this time are not priced according to their values.
All of the premium products they sell cost more than the competition and only a few of those models now MEET the competition on quality, durability, reliability and desirability.
Just when they import a car with excitement such as the G8 (what a name!!) after a failed marketing strategy of the GTO return), they cancel it instead of re-badge it to Chevy (Impala) which would have invigorated that division with a worth premium CAR! Typical GM!! A 5-year-old could run GM's brands better than that!
I will definitely vote otherwise with my wallet for the foreseeable future.
Why pay more for less? May the best car win!
Regards,
OW
Have you priced it in comparison to the same BMW or Mercedes?
A 535i with all the same equipment as a CTS 3.6 premium is nearly $62,000 MSRP.
The CTS 3.6 premium is only $51,285 and GM is showing 2,000 dollars of customer cash. I have driven the new 535i and while i love that twin turbo engine I do not like the new five series. I can't imagine it is 12,000 plus dollars better then the CTS 3.6.
A similar E350 is about $57,000 MSRP so not nearly as over priced but the Merc is not going to be as sporty as either the Caddy or BMW. The Merc is down on power and probably heavier then both.
A Lexus GS350 is about the same MSRP at 49,000ish but styling wise it doesn't do anything for me. I find most lexus seats to be uncomfortable too so it would have to overcome that. Performance wise it is probably pretty close to the 535i and the CTS for acceleration but I doubt it handles as well. No manual avaliable in the GS or the E350 either.
For a long time, transaction prices on vehicles in the US were suppressed by a combination of competition, domestic overproduction, and a strong dollar. All those factors have faded away, and the increasing globalization of the one-time domestics means that the weaker dollar has a greater impact on their pricing here than it might have in years past.
See, this is where lem and I think more alike. I would've taken that 4200 engine (which is pretty smooth in my wife's Rainier) and ADDED 2 cyl. They could've dropped it in a Buick and called it the Fireball 8 (I know, I know, that's not exactly creative)
Here is another image that makes the point. GM is NOT beating this design.
Regards,
OW
They do?? Are you STILL comparing the CTS to the Coroller Skate sized 3 series?? A comparable Lacrosse CTS w/ nav is $4500 LESS than an ES350 W/O NAV!!!
Hell the Camaro is almost $2500 CHEAPER than a 6 cyl Genesis coupe!!!
How can you make that claim?? From a picture?? That car isn't even in production yet, and won't be here for a year. By then, EVERYTHING, Accord, Altima,Camry, Malibu, will be AT LEAST 3 model years old (5 in the case of the Camry), which is ancient.
Oh, and a 200 hp 4 cyl WON'T cut it in this class.
GM has played catch up to the imports for years, but with these particular models, they have surpassed everyone's expectations. I work at a Chevy dealership. I'm the finance manager. When Accord and Camry shoppers come in and look at the Malibu... they buy a Malibu. Period.
And still, GM is in BK and in no way can ever repay the loans.Period !! :P
I don't know what world you live in, but GM EXITED BK in July.
BTW, did I thank you for the $12K for my Lacrosse???
Ifinancechevys....keep posting here, we need the help.
The Genesis is $10K cheaper than the CTS Premium. You already know the Gen has 50 HP more as well as more interior room.
I would not consider the Camaro a premium car...although it is compared to any other Chevy outside of the 'Vette.
The LaCrosse is the only Buick car that is premium and there are NO Chevy premium cars because that's the value division, remember? The other Buick car is a forlorn boringmobile of yesterday.
Like all GM's take a look at the tricky way there are so many variants of the same model where the option game is played. Same old pricing strategy that let's the competition win over and over and over...
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
I was talking to some Volvo Customers in service back a few months ago when were closing out the 2009 S60s. They bought a base 850 back in 1996 or 1997 and paid around 30,000 for it when the sticker was a little over 30,000. And by base I mean base no leather, no heated seats, no sunroof and manual transmission.
With 204,000 miles on the car they are thinking about replacing it but were concerned that the new Volvos aren't as safe because the cost the same or less then their Volvo.
A similar S40 would sticker for well under 30,000 and they could buy one then in the mid 20,000 dollar range. The S40 would be a little smaller then their 850 but they didn't want leather and you can't get a S60 without leather anymore.
A S60 with leather, sunroof, climate package and automatic trans would have stickered around 35,000 but cause they were on serious close out at the time you could buy one for nearly 10,000 dollars off.
More airbags then their 850, a stronger chassis, stability control, more powerful engine with about the same gas mileage and an automatic over a manual for 5,000 dollars less.
You can see why they would be concerned initially but technology has forced down the cost of cars. Raw materials have gone up and so has labor but better manufacturing and lower cost electronics knocked most of that out.
Guess you won't be buying Toyota, Honda, or Mazda?
http://www.xomba.com/toyota_honda_mazda_getting_bailout_japanese_government
"Toyota has been posting losses recently, and its costs of borrowing have been increasing as well. American companies only wish they could borrow at the distressed levels that Toyota sold bonds in February: 2.012%. But due to its high cost of borrowing the Japanese government is stepping in to loan Toyota a sum of money, and it is expected Honda and Mazda will follow suit. "
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Great point. But there are a few differences:
1. The article says that only Toyota is getting a loan, and that hasn't even happened yet.
2. The Honda and Mazda mentions are speculation at the current time.
3. Toyota is getting financing, has not been in BK, and would be expected to be able to actually pay back the loans due to their decent financial condition.
I would guess Infiniti has similar incentives on the M but they just aren't advertising them directly. I bet transaction prices on the M35 and CTS are within a few hundred dollars of each other when compared like to like.
The only two vehicles in the same size class as the CTS that are significantly cheaper are the GS350 and the Genesis. If you want a really sports sedan I just don't see you cross shopping a squishy lexus with the M, CTS or 5 series. I am sure it does get cross shopped but not as much as the others.
As far as Hyundai has come they are still a brand that needs to sell on value so of course they will be much, much cheaper then any other competition.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Well let's just agree to disagree.
For GM, a loan from the government so that they can go bankrupt and then survive bankruptcy and slaughter their divisions (even though they did not go nearly far enough).....and with a low likelihood of ever being able to repay the loan.. that's my definition of bailout.
For Toyota, a company with a very good reputation (notwithstanding the emerging acceleration fiasco), in a downturn... wanting a lower interest loan.... that's a special deal in my book. To me, bailout means it prevents total failure. Toyota is a long way from total failure.
Just so you know I'm not a particular Toyota fanboy, I think their cars are boring and ugly, and I see them becoming the "Japanese GM".... they've just not sunk nearly that far.
Don't forget that GM still has 17% of the market.. Big enough to make a profit..Hyundai with 3% share is making profits..GM now is Govt/Gimmicky/Goner motors..We taxpayers nicely paid for the retirement benefits and expenses for these inefficient incompetent greedy lazy GM execs. :lemon:
You talk premium, yet you show a Sonata?? As far as the Genesis, you do realize that it has the advantage of being built in Korea where the labor is far cheaper than it is here or Japan or Germany?
The price is always higher and then the incentives kick in because sales are not adequate. Self-defeating and confusing to customers....not designed to gain market share, afaic.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Premium was in reference to the CTS, LaCrosse the Enclave and the top line SUV's Escalade, Denali. These vehicles are the overpriced candidates....then must be heavily incentiveized to move. Horrible pricing strategy.
I realize the advantage Korea has. Do you realize how brilliant the marketing Hyundai has vs. GM??
Regards,
OW
What makes you so sure? Do you realize that a full 40% of Sonata sales go to the rental car market, as opposed to 25% for the Malibu and next to nothing for the other 2? It wont even offer a 6 cyl. which is generally the Malibu's bread and butter sales.
As far as the CTS LaCrosse and Enclave are concerned, there are very little in the way of incentives offered, because they are VERY competitive cars. The Escalade and Denali have big incentives because they guzzle gas.
As far as their pricing strategy, in some cases I see your point. When I was considering my LaCrosse, my wife actually wanted me to get the Camaro, as the RS would be about 10K less than the CXS. I told her it was impractical for a family car (token back seat) and took her to a Chevy dealer to show her. They had a Traverse LTZ on the showroom floor that she sat in, and I almost S#@T myself when I saw the sticker at OVER $48K!!!!! I said that is Enclave territory. How can they price the Chevy that much, but they do.
BTW I looked at the CTS Premium on Edmunds. The AWD version lists only Tricolor paint schemes, a compact spare, and a block heater as options, so everything else must be "standard", and there are only $2K in incentives available. List price; $53,640 (base price, $51,820) Edmunds true cost to own; $49,662 w/ incentives.
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2010/cadillac/cts/101196232/optionsresults.html?actio- n=2
A comparable BMW 335xi Bases for $42,300, and can be optioned out to OVER $57,000!!!! (non M series) TCO; $54,600
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2010/bmw/3series/101200942/optionsresults.html?action- =2