By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I agree that elimination of one clone is a good idea. But the gist of your argument I have a problem with - GM should not design their model strategy for the dealers, they should design their model strategy for the customers.
There have been arguments about why the former/current GM brands all need to exist. Each brand supposedly "stands for something". So if we agree that that is the case, then why should each brand need the same type of vehicle? Isn't that kind of shooting the brand strategy in the foot? Example: GMC is "professional grade". So remind me why it is that they have a large family crossover in their lineup? Explain to me why Chevy sends a bunch of cars to rental agencies? Aren't those professional vehicles? Why not have those Impalas be GMC cars that are sold to Hertz, US Government, etc.? And Chevy has the Traverse and Caddy has its blinged-up version and that is about it!
Re: Unions. You know they were very useful in the early days of industrialization. And that value has been provided. But the markets have a way of working themselves out. And the companies who cannot remain competitive in the the marketplace due to being strangled by the unions should die. It SHOULD be a symbiotic relationship. The union adds value in certain ways, and the company adds benefits. When it becomes one-way then all bets are off. It's like the remora and the shark - the shark swims and eats, and the little remora fish gets the scraps and cleans the shark's skin. However if the remora was sucking the shark's blood then there is a point where the shark dies.
Just as the unions ascended, the ones that survive will learn to be beneficial to their hosts rather than destructive. The UAW is taking it hard and the jury is still out as to whether they will survive.
Another luxury Lambda is not needed. The Buick Enclave competes in the luxury market, and it has been a very successful product for Buick. Why? Because it fits in with what Buick should be. It provides a value over competitors like the Audi Q7 3.6 and Lincoln MKT 3.7. The interesting thing however, is that the MKT sells best at the top end. With the Enclave ending around $50,000, it doesn't go head to head with the MKT at the high end. Unlike the MKT, the Enclave performs well up and down the range. With Buick vehicles commanding higher prices than ever and Cadillac (ahem, SRX) selling off cheap price, doesn't it make sense to capitalize on that? (Or put.... it makes sense to extend the possibilities for that upward.)
But now, It looks like Cadillac now wants to be the American Lexus. For instance, the SRX is aimed right at the RX. The rationale is pinned on sales - "look how well it is doing." But Cadillac should not be chasing volume, it only dilutes the brand. It may provide for good short term sales but it won't be the lasting foundation for a successfully, well-regarded Cadillac in the future. That is exactly what Cadillac is going after right now. The longer this kind of thinking pervades at Cadillac, the longer it will be hampered in it's quest to retain it's former glory. Hopefully, the beginning of change will start soon. How about today?
If only Circle W has this view, it means absolute ZERO. Time will tell. GM can not be the "All things to everyone" company ever again.
The brand is well behind the top luxury brands. Don't even think about the standard of the world...unless that is for cloning standards.;)
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
world (CTS-V) and the best sports car for the money (Corvette and Z variants)
Andre, that's definitely true for some. I was talking with my dad about cars this weekend and what he told me mirrors your statement.
He's had good luck with most of the Fords he's owned. Back in 09 when his '00 Taurus with 180k miles on it needed some major work, he decided to trade it in. Ford didn't have anything that really appealed to him at the time. So he looked around and ended up with an '09 Accord EX-L v6. Dad told me if he were to buy today, he'd really like the new Taurus and that he wished it was out when he bought his Honda.
Funny thing is, I asked him about the new LaCrosse and he said, "nice looking car, inside and out, but why in the hell did they put those port holes on it. I don't want to be reminded of the Buick's my dad drove." This was a statement from a 60 year old man.
BTW, got a chance to drive my brother's 2010 Fusion Sport with the 3.5v6. Wow, very nice car for the $. Quiet, smooth, felt solid, and quick. Interior material quality much better than previous Fusions, and I'd say they are better than my dad's 09 Accord that was parked right next to it. If I was spending under $30k for a sedan, it would be tops on my list at this point.
The lessons of the GM bankruptcy
I'm not so sure enough lessons have been learned at GM. One particularly great quote was
"Problems denied and solutions delayed will result in a painful and costly day of reckoning"
When the first Escalade came out, it was predicted to be a flop since it looked so much like a Tahoe. Well, we know what really happened.
For GM, New Promise Balanced by Old Problems
The 2010 Chevy figures should be annualized up around 1.5M if they are included. The drop off, while steep, is nowhere near what AutoObserver is portraying with an inaccurate chart.
For instance, here are the brands they shedded.
HUMMER
Saab
Saturn
Pontiac
First, HUMMER. So for 2 years, they've been trying to sell HUMMER to the chinese before finally just closing the brand. Yay, so what does this eliminate? A pair of gas sucking pigs for gangstas and rap stars. One was nothing more than a rebadged Chevy Suburban (GMT-900, something which Government Motors still has 10 more of in it's stable) and a rebadged colorado pickup which itself is going on 7 years old.
Model count in GM's portfolio? minus 2 vehicles.
Next, Saab. A brand that has been limping along for a decade and a half with minimal effort and maximum failure. Sold. In the end the brand was limping along on 3 models, a rebadged Malibu (9-3) dating back to 2004, yet another Trailblazer clone (9-7) and a 9-5 whose platform goes back to the early nineties and a model that had been around for 11 years in its current form.
Model count" minus 3 vehicles
Saturn? Closed. Gone are the Vue, the Ion, the Aura and the Sky. Great, maybe there is some effort here.... Nope. Look at what's going on at Buick. They in turn get the new Aura (Regal), the new Ion/Cobalt clone (Buicks new small car also based on a Chevy) and are confirmed to be getting a rebadged Equinox clone which is what the Vue was. And all these models are German based Opels plucked for the American market.... just like the Saturns were. Oh, and don't forget the Sky, a poor selling niche model that ran it's 4 year model cycle alongside the Pontiac Solstice.
model count: minus 1 vehicle
Lastly, Pontiac. Call me cynical, but I believe this closing was a sham. A complete coverup to obtain the bailout money. I call it "temporary holding" because I honestly will place money on the hunch that once GM's IPO launches, Pontiac will re-emerge once again.
But, lets look at the portfolio anyways. When Pontiac left us, it was the G6 which was 6 years old, the Torrent-Cheapuinox clone that was also 6 years old, a rebadged Cobalt (G5), the afformentioned Solstice and the G8 which out of the entire lineup was the only vehicle not being dumped into rental fleets.
Again, the G6 made way for the Buick Regal, the Torrent made way for the GMC Terrain and the G8 only sold 20k units which were imported from Australia anyways.
model count: minus 1 vehicle.
So when all was said and done, GM managed to shed 7 vehicles through bankruptcy. Of course many will look at the shedding of 4 whole brands and think "OMG look at the downsizing!!! They're getting smaller like they should be doing!!!"
...when in actuallity it was typical GM "As little as possible". And once Pontiac reappears, it'll be like nothing ever happened. :sick:
Plating improperly applied by the supplier, GM says, can flake or sliver and slice into your hand.
The remarkable thing is that, once you account for the economic cycles, the trend for GM is exceptionally steady -- an exceptionally steady trend downward. There were still bad times thirty years ago -- but they weren't bad enough to threaten GM's survival, and conversely, the good times were much better. These are General Motors' operating margins by decade:
Average Annual Operating Margin, General Motors
1960s: 8.7%
1970s: 5.5%
1980s: 3.0%
1990s: 1.3%*
2000s: -0.5%
* Excludes one-time $20 billion accounting charge for retiree health benefits in 1992.
link title
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Sales of the brands GM shed as part of its bankruptcy filing were off 94% from a year ago, although those brands now make up less than 1% of the company's U.S. sales
That Denali with issues is now holding GMC down to a 32% rise.
Now that we are bailing out Europe we need to ignore our own people. That way the Euro bailout will be more affordable for us.
Here's the most recent sales forecast if that helps you any.
Luck.
(oh, are you looking at all GM or just Chevy?)
"Even today, Scholl casts aspersions on his erstwhile favorite automaker because "it's being run by political hacks." The only thing that could bring him back to the fold, he said, would be if the government completely backed out of running GM."
"There are still a lot of people who are very offended by the fact that they took bailout money," said Rebecca Lindland, head of automotive analysis for IHS Global Insight, Boston. "But here also are a lot of people who are very pro-American, and (who think) now that we've bailed them out, the least we can do is support them."
"That's a lot of people -- 100 million - who aren't devoted to Toyota and Honda and haven't been drinking that Kool-Aid their whole lives," said Lindland of IHS. "That is a lot of potential customers for someone. No reason it couldn't be GM."
Some American Consumers Are In GM's Corner Again
I was looking at all GM, but if 490k chev units is 70% of GM's units, then GM sells 100/70 X 490k =700k units in a year? Not adding up!!! GM sold more than 658k in just 4 months. So in the end, yes, I was looking at all GM, but the AutoObserver story is still way way off base. Maybe they have 2010 data as YTD and ****-2009 data as whole model year or whole year.
Hmm, this is what I got from Yahoo Finance.
GM's sales rose 17 percent, led by a jump in sales of its four remaining brands -- Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac. Those brands got a lift from strong new products, such as the Chevrolet Equinox midsize crossover, Chevrolet Camaro muscle car, and Buick LaCrosse sedan.
Fleet sales spiked to 38 percent of GM's sales. Those sales can hurt resale values and brand image, but the company said it expects to end the year with 25 percent of its sales to fleets. Ford said it will end the year with about 30 percent of its sales to fleets.
Counting on the American people to be anti-GM because they took bailout money? As someone posted a few days ago, less than 3% of the US population are willing to spring for a new vehicle in any given year. GM is trying to have 25% of that 3% lean their way. The odds that a 0.75% of total population size group is politically keen to the bailout pros and cons and comes down on the con side is pretty wishful thinking. 90% of us didn't even vote in the recent primarys.
I still haven't found the effect of the bailout in my new Malibu. I'll keep looking.
CNN.MONEY
May 2010 over May 2009
874,749
Chevy sales through May 2010:
641,062
Source doc:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9NDg1Mjh8Q2hpbGRJRD0tM- XxUeXBlPTM=&t=1
That doesn't mean people aren't aware of GM's situation or have an opinion of it. I probably wouldn't avoid GM because they were bailed out, I simply avoid GM simply because I prefer cars from other manufacturers. If GM builds something I want, I will buy it.
Uh, the fact that new Malibus even exists is a result of the bailout. :mad:
CNN.MONEY
May 2010 over May 2009
Overall sales increased 17% vs. the same month last year. That's what counts for market share and the bottom line. But it should be encouraging that the 4 remaining brands are increasing sales at a good clip.
Regardless it was a good month for Ford and GM.
Your right though, Mulally has been impressive. What he's done with Ford since he took over is IMO, nothing less than incredible.
Too bad :P
If you look a little deeper you'll see that it wasn't necessarily Joe the Plumber giving GM and Foord the good news. It was more like Uncle Sam.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2010-06-02-ford-sales_N.htm?loc=interstitial- skip
"GM's sales rose 17%, led by a jump in sales of its four remaining brands —Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac. Those brands got a lift from strong new products, such as the Chevrolet Equinox midsize crossover, Chevrolet Camaro muscle car and Buick LaCrosse sedan.
Fleet sales spiked to 38% of GM's sales. Those sales can hurt resale values and brand image, but the company said it expects to end the year with 25% of its sales to fleets."
"Ford's sales rose 22%, boosted by strong demand for the F-Series pickup and new Ford Mustang. Sales to rental, government and commercial fleets rose 32%."
Also market-share counts for little compared to the bottom-line. GM was #1 in market-share for decades while they lost their fortune, AND they were still #1 when they went bankrupt.
What might surprise is that GMC, the division often cited as the one GM should lose without hesitation, is the company's second-strongest sales unit. In terms of market share and volume, GMC outsells and out-shares Cadillac and Buick combined
Gotta luv GMC...Go Denali, Go!
Regards,
OW
April sales Malibu = 21,722
April sales Sonata = 21,195
May the Best Car Win!
Regards,
OW
Ford and GM are not going to avoid fleet sales, and if they keep production inline with demand, they won't have to give away products to fleets either. Plus, many companies have started keeping their fleets longer. My wife used to get a new car every 12-24mos, now it's 48 mos. I know other people employed by other companies with company cars that are doing the same thing. This will reduce the number of fleet vehicles being dumped into the auctions.
Frankly this guy astounds many of us everyday at work, if you know what I mean. So people with blind, ignorant loyalty and poor judgment are out there.
Back to the story of GM's great sales victory in May - besides the fact that the numbers were skewed by fleet sales - many government purchases, they are comparing to a month when the news was carrying stories of GM's bankruptcy! So certainly GM will have better sales than last year when their name was mud; spread across the media.
What I see happening here is the same thing the feds are doing with employment, housing, and the economy in general - doing things to make the numbers look better than they really are. They have created a bunch of temporary jobs with the stimulus, kept housing sales up by giving homebuyers $8,000, and now are buying a lot of vehicles to make auto sales look good on the surface. All 3 of those programs are ending and are unsustainable financially. Without this phony-baloney spending spree of the feds, the economy is going to go be retreating to where it should naturally be.
I have an 08 GM car and guess what? I can't roll my windows down for the 3rd time!!
A brand new Catalytic converter installed, new front brakes installed, a new software update for my transmission. All on an 08. Now it is a Pontiac G6, but really should I be having these issues on a model that has been out for a long time? :shades: Smile!! lol ---So, tell me that I should choose another GM product after my lease is up, especially when its sitting next to a 08 VW Jetta that has had no issues at all in my garage. Your right GM!! May the best car win!!
I actually went out on a limb and leased this car. Got a steal of a deal though, so it was almost worth getting rid of my Honda lease for it. My first GM product, and it justifies every reason why my family does not choose GM. They put half effort into their products. I just laughed, while I couldn't roll down my windows. I am like this is so elementary. :sick:
Anyway. lol. Less than a year left, then it is time to look for a new lease. Wish I could get out now!
Frankly this guy astounds many of us everyday at work, if you know what I mean. So people with blind, ignorant loyalty and poor judgment are out there.
I'd consider an Impala, if I needed a car and could get one cheap enough. While it's probably outclassed by just about everything out there, it does have its good points. Roomy front seat, fairly good fuel economy, big trunk, plus the pass-through. And I don't think it's a bad looking car. Just wouldn't be my first choice. And, if I had one, I probably wouldn't be bragging about what an awesome car it is, and how it beats the pants off an Accord, Taurus, etc...
I don't think my mother's 1975 LeMans gave her that much trouble in the first couple years she had it. And I'd like to think that GM knows how to build them better nowadays...even the G6! :sick: