They also have a lot time of about 64 days. The truth is the ecoboost engines have put Ford comfortably in the lead, engine wise until the next round of GMT's (3 years?).
GM does have one truck that's somewhat fuel-efficient, the XFE model. It has the 5.3 V-8 and 6-speed automatic, and is rated at 15/22. The Ford does as well as 17/23 with the 3.7 V-6 and a 6-speed.
Where GM really comes up short though, is in the cheaper models. Base engine is the 4.3 V-6 and 4-speed automatic, and the EPA estimate is 15/20. With the 4.8 V-8, which only comes with a 4-speed automatic, the rating is 14/19.
I wonder if it would be worthwhile for GM to put the 3.6 V-6 from the Traverse in their big trucks? In the Traverse, it's rated 17/24, and I'd imagine a Traverse weighs as much, if not more, than a base Silverado half-ton. I guess the biggest issue would be getting a transmission for it to mate up to. Since the Traverse is FWD or AWD, it might not adapt to a RWD-only application. That engine is used in the Caddy CTS and STS, with a RWD 6-speed automatic, so maybe that transmission could work?
But, the stupidest thing that The Government can do at this point is to sell the stock. Why? Because they need to keep controlling it and cutting fat from the monster before letting it go. There's still too much of the old GM in the management and designs and I fear that the second that The Government leaves GM to its own fate, we'll see it self-destruct in under a decade.
But, the stupidest thing that The Government can do at this point is to sell the stock. Why? Because they need to keep controlling it and cutting fat from the monster before letting it go. There's still too much of the old GM in the management and designs and I fear that the second that The Government leaves GM to its own fate, we'll see it self-destruct in under a decade.
And if they keep posting profits like that, the UAW will demand all of it, or more.
Note that $1.6B of that $3.2B is in a 1-Time gain from selling stock in Delphi, and I believe a different article I saw had some other stock-sale. So GM made $1.6B for the quarter on operations.
Remember GM posts revenues when they "sell" a vehicle to a dealer. Now if the dealers are having increased inventories that means future sales are going to be lower. 114 day supply on dealers' lots, of GM's top seller - the Silverado, is not encouraging.
So the devil's in the details. I hope GM does well, so we never have to hear about another bailout again. If the economy does go back into recession soon (layoffs are going back up as announced today), is GM ready? are they ready to stand on their own 2 feet?
Looks like the profit missed expectations due to missing cost targets. All fluff in the spin but at the end of the day, the challenges remain real.
General Motors Co. (GM)’s first-quarter North American profit disappointed investors as increased spending on sales incentives, marketing and engineering costs reduced the benefit of soaring revenue.
While North American sales in the quarter rose $2.82 billion, higher operating expenses cut the company’s profit by $700 million, GM said today. The rising costs denied investors the results they expected and contributed to the stock’s biggest decline in more than two months, Adam Jonas, an analyst with Morgan Stanley, said in a telephone interview.
“The market thought that they would beat the consensus by more than 5 percent,” said Jonas, who’s based in New York. “Nobody owns GM to meet numbers. They own GM to beat numbers by a significant amount.”
GM fell $1.02, or 3.1 percent, to $32.02 at 4 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, the biggest decline since Feb. 24. The shares have slid 13 percent this year.
Retaining customers of a brand is hard when you kill the brand.
"So far this year, about 70% of customers who traded in a Pontiac this year replaced their car with a non-GM model; with Saturn that number rises to 71%. Ford, which killed its Mercury division last year, isn't doing any better. About 65% of the Mercury owners who have bought new cars this year have defected to auto makers other than Ford.
In January and February, GM offered extra discounts of $1,000 to owners of its defunct-brands, putting more Pontiac and Saturn owners into other GM brands. Buyers who opted to stay with GM those months climbed, especially for Pontiac, which hung on to 57% of customers who traded in their vehicles, according to Edmunds.com. But the effort was controversial as Wall Street questioned whether the incentives were a sign that GM had returned to the old strategy of pushing market share over profits, which helped push it into bankruptcy court."
First time for a long time that some one said Gov is good for private industry GM. (not to mean any thing but usually the opposite was said !!)
The worst thing that you can do once you are put in charge of something is to leave the job half done. Especially if it's The Government in charge. Now that it's their baby, they need to make it work properly before throwing it back into the marketplace. Otherwise they'll be bailing it out a second time in the future.
I dare you to find first posts (not replies or follow-up posts) on any Edmunds forum by GM-appreciators, about poor quality of Sonatas. (I'll admit to saying I hate the styling though.)
You have the mike and the last word here.
I'll have you know I was just driving behind one the Sonatas this morning, that was part of the 60-car recall. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
"So far this year, about 70% of customers who traded in a Pontiac this year replaced their car with a non-GM model; with Saturn that number rises to 71%."
I can attest to that. In April, 2010, I owned 3 Saturns. Today I only have 1 - one was traded in for a MINI, the other for a Mazda.
Two primary reasons why this happened:
1) GM simply didn't make anything that appealed to us when the time came for a new car.
2) Getting competent service done for our Saturns at "Authorized Saturn Service Providers" was, shall we say, challenging.
I was sort of thinking of you when I saw that - remind me, it's your wife that really liked the whole Saturn buying experience? Or maybe I have you confused with some other chronic car buyer.
Open mike about what? I've never owned a Hyundai so I have no opinions about their quality other than they have come a long, very long way from the Excel. I have owned Government Motors products before and like so many others, got burned by them.
My criticism of GM comes from actual experience, not what i read on internet forums. :shades: If I ever own a Hyundai and it turns out to be a big pile of doodoo then I'll vocalize about it. I've owned 7 Hondas, 2 Subies, a bunch of Fords, a Nissan and a mercedes. All of them were excellent, and none of those companies put out a product that I wouldn't consider again.
But yup, Hyundais got a problem there. I don't know what else you want me to say :confuse:
Thing is, it is still cheaper to not have a car payment with my paid-for Grand Marquis and deal with the psychopathic fuel prices than have payments on even the most fuel-efficient vehicle and deal with the insane gasoline costs.
Yes, but just because it's cheaper doesn't mean it's right! Afterall, by buying a fuel efficient car built in America, your helping American workers, by buying all that fuel from the Middle East, you are shipping all our wealth overseas!!! :P
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
>you and circlew are a bastion of balance and open-mindedness,
ROFLMAO.
I suspect new people expecting to find valid comments on GM, News, Models, etc., quickly pick up on the birther movement postings here. I doubt that many pay attention to repetitive thousandth posts about I Hate GM.
I doubt that many pay attention to repetitive thousandth posts about I Hate GM.
I don't think the problem is that people hate GM.
I think the problem is that GM hates people. GM hates consumers. GM hates auto reviewers and car magazines. GM hates scientific objective opinions from the likes of Consumer Reports (at least until lately).
The only thing GM likes and loves is money, bailouts, bonuses, overpaying themselves, and marketing that borders on fraud.
I leave out that they love profits, because apparently that isn't important to them as long as they keep getting a paycheck and bonuses.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I was sort of thinking of you when I saw that - remind me, it's your wife that really liked the whole Saturn buying experience? Or maybe I have you confused with some other chronic car buyer.
Yep, that was probably me ... when we bought our first Saturn - an '03 L300 in the fall of '02 - my wife commented that it was one of the easiest buying experiences she'd ever had. I suspect that was one of the reasons we kept going back - an '05 and '08 VUE, plus the '06 ION which we still have.
Not so much for product - though I do feel it was competitive, not class leading - but because the customer experience was so superior.
The plastic side panels - on all but the '08 VUE - didn't hurt either.
So what has your experience been with the Mini and Mazda? Are they better, worse, etc., than the Saturns? And how did the buying experiences compare? (just curious).
this means nothing. you need to show the % who go elsewhere after buying a pontiac say 5 yrs ago and then compare it to the recent 71% number. If the change was from 65 to 71%, for instance, then that is not a major change.
Why work so hard to come up with reasons why a company with 27% sales growth (which is almost the best in the entire car industry), and still has the biggest market share in NA of any manufacturer, has problems. If they have problems, then they all have problems.
The string of great releases by GM running back to 2007 impresses enough customers for them to manage the 27% growth and retain top spot in market share. From the recent news, people are willing to pay higher prices for GM in the last qtr.
The text below is from GM's April 2011 sales report.
"Month-end dealer inventory in the United States stood at about 577,000 units, up about 3,000 units compared to March and about 149,000 higher than April 2010."
As I understand it, GM counts everything "sold" to the dealers..if so, there are 577,000 units padding the sales numbers. Ford sold more than Chevy but in the midwest, there are twice as many Chevrolets in inventory compared to Fords and that doesn't include GMC. Buick and Caddy.
For 28 years I bought GM exclusively..six new vehicles and one with 8k on it. I have bought my last one. The shady reporting of sales is only the last in a long line of events that soured me on GM.
So what has your experience been with the Mini and Mazda? Are they better, worse, etc., than the Saturns? And how did the buying experiences compare?
MINI (purchase) - the only dealer in Colorado (at the time we bought ours) is a no-haggle store that also sells BMW and Honda. The car is for the daughter, so she did the initial contact with the sales team after finding an in-stock unit that met her needs. The sales process was pretty painless, and they walked my daughter through every feature of the car, including pairing her phone to the Bluetooth system.
MINI (service) - It has only been back to the dealer twice in the past 13 months - the first time was to have the clear bra installed, the second to replace a tire that got shredded. Both were handled without problem. I'm expecting to take it in for its first service shortly.
MINI (vehicle) - I've only driven her car (base model, auto trans) a handful of times, and I can certainly see why they are so popular. I've also test driven both an S convertible and an S Countryman, and the turbo certainly makes everything just that much more fun.
Mazda (purchase) - The Mazda dealer we bought from is more of a traditional dealer in terms of the sales process. Lots of negotiation and back and forth. We love the car (CX-7 GT AWD). We've got a road trip planned for the end of May - Colorado to Sedona, AZ and back, so I'm curious how it will do on the interstate in terms of mileage.
Mazda (service) - Only one visit to the dealer - oil change, tire rotation and an alignment. Service department is top notch. They comped me the first oil change and the alignment will be submitted as a warranty claim, so I only paid $20 for the rotation.
Mazda (vehicle) - Compared to our '08 VUE, the Mazda is a bit bigger, especially width. Both the wife and I can share the center console arm rest. It's certainly more sporty in ride and handling than the VUE, which is to be expected.
But that "shady reporting" is helping to spin the idea that GM is doing better than they actually are.
Just like the Volt is flying off the lots so fast and they can't build enough of them.
Yet there are 569 of them have gone unsold sitting on dealer lots... :sick:
I know the usual suspects will tell me to put away the tinfoil hat or something, but as a reader of numerous auto sites including and outside of Edmunds, I truely believe there is a huge internet blitz going on to gain support for Government Motors and to "police" any negative views or comments that are posted. And the same to prop up the success of products that aren't doing as well as we would think... cough Volt! cough.
I don't disagree that their efforts are improving and the new product is showing significant improvement over the old stuff btw, but instead of letting the product tell the story... :sick:
We are on the same page and my hat is a new shiny one. There are 13300 unsold Cruze on lots within 500 miles and most were counted in the 25k reported sold last month. That is a huge little white lie, imo. These numbers do not include any coastal cities (right or left coast) or most of Texas and Florida. I have seen exactly 4 of these on the roads near here.
any proof that this "shady reporting" is true? i cant find anything to prove it or disprove it, just curious if gm really reports different than everyone else Wow 569 unsold volts across america. how many unsold toyota blundras?
Be careful! You will be joining my club here that owned GM for over 40 years and know how bad the products have been up until 2008...the year before they paid the piper.
My comment is: Why are you bringing up an old recall from Sept. 2010? Yes, this was reported and discussed previously and Hyundai makes mistakes.
Now you are welcome to comment on this since you have the inside line.... The Chevrolet Cruze may be relatively new to the market, but that doesn't stop it from the recall bug. The Detroit News is reporting that General Motors is recalling 154,112(!) Cruze models to ensure proper installation of the intermediate steering shaft covers. Automatic transmission-equipped models will also be checked for proper installation of the transmission shift linkage.
GM says it hasn't yet received any complaints about the issue and no accidents have been reported. The automaker tells The Detroit News that the vast majority of recalled vehicles will not need to be repaired – the automaker simply wants to inspect the vehicles "to give customers additional peace of mind about the quality of the Cruze."
Beyond the Cruze recall, GM has also issued a pair of smaller actions. The automaker is recalling 8,723 examples of the 2011 Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana vans for potential brake leaks. Also being recalled are 6,303 2011 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon models that are suspected to have a windshield wiper nut that wasn't tightened to specification during the build process. None of the vehicles in this batch of recalls are reportedly responsible for any accidents as a result of the defects.
Did that Sonata all of a sudden veer off the road?? :surprise:
I recall you had no comment on the Sonata recalls whatsoever back then, until asked directly. As usual, you were doing nothing but bashing every GM product then...on a GM site.
Did you initiate a similar comment on a Hyundai Edmunds site about those Sept. '10 recalls? I think it's a rational question. Bringing only the GM recall up without mentioning a competing product for context, shows 'the right side of your face' as Agnes Moorhead would say in my favorite old flick, "Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte".
A little balance goes a long way.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Since I own a GM and not a Hyundai, It is appropriate for me to post as the forum indicates. (I acknowledge Hyundai Kia made junk in the past but have improved much faster than GM as their sales gains indicate...that is for the corporation and the products offered.)
I post on the Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-9 forums.
Any other questions?
I will stick to commenting on the products GM makes. They promote world class but deliver far less. They have improved since TOTAL FAILURE but they are NOT the best automotive mfg company out there and their products are far from top quality and the best value. Not even close....it took a nuclear crisis for GM to regain the top sales notch, not to remind about the bailout and eliminating debt. Their retail market share has declined as well.
Be careful! You will be joining my club here that owned GM for over 40 years and know how bad the products have been up until 2008...the year before they paid the piper.
I'm only 41, so it would probably be awhile before I join that club. I've had GM cars that are 40+ years old, though! :P
I've never had a GM car that was bad enough to make me want to desert GM completely and never look back. Yet, at the same time, if I was to buy a new car, there's a very good chance it wouldn't be a GM product. Not that I'm afraid of their cars, but I'm just starting to find more appealing choices elsewhere.
Now, if I was to go with a smaller car, I would consider the Cruze, although I'd still check out the competition. A bit bigger though, and I think I'd pick an Altima, Fusion, or Accord over a Malibu. And, one more step up (I still hesitate to call them full-sized cars), I'd probably pick a Charger or 300 over a Lucerne or DTS (sorry Lemko!)
And if it was a truck, my first choice would probably be a Dodge Ram.
I'd probably pick a Charger or 300 over a Lucerne or DTS (sorry Lemko!)
And if it was a truck, my first choice would probably be a Dodge Ram.
Me too. The Lucerne is to outdated for my tastes. Probably a good car to pick up used though.
I really like the 300. Good power, RWD, and attitude. As for trucks, that would be a tough choice. I really like the ram, but since they went with rear coil springs it just doesn't have enough payload capacity. A 4x4 Ram Quad cab SLT only offers about 1,430lbs of cargo capacity. An F150 4x4 Supercrew offers up to 1960lbs.
It's only a big deal for me because of our camper. It has over 1,200lbs of tongue weight. With a Ram I wouldn't have any reserve capacity for cargo or people for that matter. That's one area where tow ratings are misleading (particularly for 1/2 tons). Sure you can tow 10k plus, but if your trailer has a tongue weight of 15%, you've just used up all or exceeded the cargo capacity of the tow vehicle. Plus you have to look at what the rear axle weight rating is too.
I've been thinking of going to a pickup for my next vehicle. Right now it looks like Ford has the best engine line up. But I definitely like the looks of the Ram by far. I really like the torque output of the 3.5 Ecoboost, but I will wait to see if any teething pains show up.
really tells me nothing...the question was does gm report sales any different than everybody else? Dealer inventory is just what dealers ordered and received. you and others here like to keep throwing this out there that gm counts sales as soon as the cars are at the dealer. i simply stated i cant find anything to prove or disprove this claim. or if it is true, that all auto makers dont report this way
Even if every company reports inventory as sold, GM has more than double the Ford numbers. For the record, Ford has never been an option for me...the mid size Fusion that is offered is bland and has weird tail lights. I was as loyal as any GM owner and until the bailout... bought their cars. I had good luck with few repairs or problems until after 100k where the hardware started falling off some of them. My reasons for boycotting are political for the most part. All of the auto makers are shady with the numbers, just seems GM is worse.
Not true. Reading the report carefully shows how any trolls eager to bash GM misconstrued the English.
"General Motors records revenue when vehicles are shipped to dealerships."
That means GM has the vehicle charged to the dealer and it represents _income_ to the corporation, which pays the costs + some net.
"It is probable that in an effort to pad their earnings prior to their IPO, GM made sure they shipped as many vehicles to dealerships as possible and continues to do so going in to fourth quarter earnings."
In other words they moved as much inventory as possible out of GM's plants to the dealerships to increase their corporate value sheets. Instead of sitting with billed costs for parts for assembly, they assembled them and "delivered" them to the dealerships.
I always understood this was called "floor planning," where the dealers had the cars and owed GM for them and were paying interest on the vehicle even though they had not paid GM for the vehicle.
This works the same for all manufacturers, I assume.
Nowhere does it say GM called the vehicles not sold to customers "sold." LMAO.
He used to have a PT Cruiser. I already knew his experience with that would be horrible because the PT Crusier was a Neon with a more appealing body and sheet metal layout (for some).
He did say that the car was horrible. He did say it was very expensive to replace the automatic transmission, which is where I jumped in and said I wished I could have warned him because my Chrysler auto tranny only lasted 60,000 miles, so I could have warned him about the horrific quality issues prior to them costing him half his retirement. He's 27 years old.
He owns a Scion (box car) now. End of story on why the bailouts were a bad idea. Lost customer for life.
P.S. In Eureka CA went to a wedding last year and one of the people there was complaining about a failed tranny in their Pacifica (another Chrysler :lemon: ) They said they were having a hard time getting the dealer/manufacturer to pay for all of it (low miles vehicle), and it was taking them over a month to get the job done (because so many trannies had failed that Chrysler was OUT OF replacement TRANNIES) HILARIOUS!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
DETROIT (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Co. may reduce production of pickups after inventories rose last month, Mark Reuss, president for North America, said today.
"We're going to do something about it, but we haven't made those calls yet," Reuss said in a telephone interview. Buyers shifted away from trucks last month, "but no one month makes a trend, so we've got to see where this one holds," Reuss said.
GM's truck inventory rose to more than 275,000 at the end of April, or about 111 days of supply, Don Johnson, GM's vice president of U.S. sales, said yesterday on a conference call.
Here is the link for the full article for your reference.
Here is some data for your review. GM is rising, meaning inventory is building. The data is based on previous month volume. Please note P/U trucks at GM which are building at an alarming rate as gasoline prices rise.
Automotive News -- April 11, 2011 -
Lean inventories will begin to hamper U.S. auto sales this month, a situation that will worsen as global production slows as a result of Japan's earthquake and tsunami.
"Most likely lean small-car inventories will be a headwind on the industry's sales rate," Ford sales boss Ken Czubay said.
Automakers started the month with a 54-day supply of light vehicles, down from 60 days on March 1. And that was before deliveries to dealer lots start to dry up because of closed assembly plants in Japan and global production cuts caused by shortages of Japanese parts.
The first U.S. dealers to be affected will be Japanese-brand stores, as deliveries of vehicles assembled in Japan stop or are sharply curtailed this month.
Toyota is working to make sure U.S. dealers have high-demand vehicles such as the Prius, said Bob Carter, head of Toyota Division.
"While there may be spot shortages here or there, we are prioritizing distribution efforts to minimize those," Carter said.
DTS: Figure is based on the number of days needed to sell all vehicles in inventory based on the previous month's daily selling rate. May include vehicles in dealer stock, and those in shipping from the factory to the dealer.
Ford Fiesta: 15,600 43 80 Ford Focus: 14,700 23 47 Ford Fusion: 36,800 36 45 Ford Mustang: 16,100 51 116 Ford Explorer: 14,600 32 30 Ford F Series: 136,700 69 82
Like it or not, GM is building inventory again at a faster rate than competition. Not Good.
Nowhere does it say GM called the vehicles not sold to customers "sold." LMAO.
Based upon what you posted, I think GM records a "sale" as a delivery to a dealer. At that point the dealer owns the car and owes GM the money, regardless of if or when the vehicle is sold to a private buyer. So if the dealer inventories have been stacking up, then GM would be recording record sales and revenues (which may not yet be collected from the dealers). For GM, the "customer" is the dealer, correct? And for the dealer, the private buyer is the customer.
So unless I'm incorrect, that would mean that cars "sold" are those delivered to dealers. Does anybody know for sure that this is the case?
so, you are claiming that 50% of all soc sec benefit money is taken back from the recipients by the gov. as taxes? Are you sure? I'll have to google this.
the only way the padding sales argument works is if GM just recently started including dealer inv. as sold units. If that is the way it has always been, then your argument requires you to find the difference in inventory at dealer lots from year to year over several years to then claim the increase in inventory as hedging the numbers
Comments
GM does have one truck that's somewhat fuel-efficient, the XFE model. It has the 5.3 V-8 and 6-speed automatic, and is rated at 15/22. The Ford does as well as 17/23 with the 3.7 V-6 and a 6-speed.
Where GM really comes up short though, is in the cheaper models. Base engine is the 4.3 V-6 and 4-speed automatic, and the EPA estimate is 15/20. With the 4.8 V-8, which only comes with a 4-speed automatic, the rating is 14/19.
I wonder if it would be worthwhile for GM to put the 3.6 V-6 from the Traverse in their big trucks? In the Traverse, it's rated 17/24, and I'd imagine a Traverse weighs as much, if not more, than a base Silverado half-ton. I guess the biggest issue would be getting a transmission for it to mate up to. Since the Traverse is FWD or AWD, it might not adapt to a RWD-only application. That engine is used in the Caddy CTS and STS, with a RWD 6-speed automatic, so maybe that transmission could work?
But, the stupidest thing that The Government can do at this point is to sell the stock. Why? Because they need to keep controlling it and cutting fat from the monster before letting it go. There's still too much of the old GM in the management and designs and I fear that the second that The Government leaves GM to its own fate, we'll see it self-destruct in under a decade.
It's the one from Government Motors. You know, the model that followed the Cavalcade. It's offered along with the Rentabu. :shades:
And if they keep posting profits like that, the UAW will demand all of it, or more.
Remember GM posts revenues when they "sell" a vehicle to a dealer. Now if the dealers are having increased inventories that means future sales are going to be lower. 114 day supply on dealers' lots, of GM's top seller - the Silverado, is not encouraging.
So the devil's in the details. I hope GM does well, so we never have to hear about another bailout again. If the economy does go back into recession soon (layoffs are going back up as announced today), is GM ready? are they ready to stand on their own 2 feet?
(not to mean any thing but usually the oposite was said !!)
General Motors Co. (GM)’s first-quarter North American profit disappointed investors as increased spending on sales incentives, marketing and engineering costs reduced the benefit of soaring revenue.
While North American sales in the quarter rose $2.82 billion, higher operating expenses cut the company’s profit by $700 million, GM said today. The rising costs denied investors the results they expected and contributed to the stock’s biggest decline in more than two months, Adam Jonas, an analyst with Morgan Stanley, said in a telephone interview.
“The market thought that they would beat the consensus by more than 5 percent,” said Jonas, who’s based in New York. “Nobody owns GM to meet numbers. They own GM to beat numbers by a significant amount.”
GM fell $1.02, or 3.1 percent, to $32.02 at 4 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, the biggest decline since Feb. 24. The shares have slid 13 percent this year.
GM Disappoints
We do not buy products that meet the competition after 40 years of not keeping up...we buy products because they BEAT the competition every time.
Many miles before GM sleeps.... :shades:
Regards,
OW
"So far this year, about 70% of customers who traded in a Pontiac this year replaced their car with a non-GM model; with Saturn that number rises to 71%. Ford, which killed its Mercury division last year, isn't doing any better. About 65% of the Mercury owners who have bought new cars this year have defected to auto makers other than Ford.
In January and February, GM offered extra discounts of $1,000 to owners of its defunct-brands, putting more Pontiac and Saturn owners into other GM brands. Buyers who opted to stay with GM those months climbed, especially for Pontiac, which hung on to 57% of customers who traded in their vehicles, according to Edmunds.com. But the effort was controversial as Wall Street questioned whether the incentives were a sign that GM had returned to the old strategy of pushing market share over profits, which helped push it into bankruptcy court."
Owners of Defunct Brands Ride Off (WSJ)
(not to mean any thing but usually the opposite was said !!)
The worst thing that you can do once you are put in charge of something is to leave the job half done. Especially if it's The Government in charge. Now that it's their baby, they need to make it work properly before throwing it back into the marketplace. Otherwise they'll be bailing it out a second time in the future.
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2011/hyundai/sonata/recalls/index.html
I dare you to find first posts (not replies or follow-up posts) on any Edmunds forum by GM-appreciators, about poor quality of Sonatas. (I'll admit to saying I hate the styling though.)
You have the mike and the last word here.
I'll have you know I was just driving behind one the Sonatas this morning, that was part of the 60-car recall. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
I can attest to that. In April, 2010, I owned 3 Saturns. Today I only have 1 - one was traded in for a MINI, the other for a Mazda.
Two primary reasons why this happened:
1) GM simply didn't make anything that appealed to us when the time came for a new car.
2) Getting competent service done for our Saturns at "Authorized Saturn Service Providers" was, shall we say, challenging.
It's hard being the owner of an "orphaned" make.
My criticism of GM comes from actual experience, not what i read on internet forums. :shades: If I ever own a Hyundai and it turns out to be a big pile of doodoo then I'll vocalize about it. I've owned 7 Hondas, 2 Subies, a bunch of Fords, a Nissan and a mercedes. All of them were excellent, and none of those companies put out a product that I wouldn't consider again.
But yup, Hyundais got a problem there. I don't know what else you want me to say :confuse:
Yes, but just because it's cheaper doesn't mean it's right!
Afterall, by buying a fuel efficient car built in America, your helping American workers, by buying all that fuel from the Middle East, you are shipping all our wealth overseas!!! :P
ROFLMAO.
I suspect new people expecting to find valid comments on GM, News, Models, etc., quickly pick up on the birther movement postings here.
I doubt that many pay attention to repetitive thousandth posts about I Hate GM.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I don't think the problem is that people hate GM.
I think the problem is that GM hates people. GM hates consumers. GM hates auto reviewers and car magazines. GM hates scientific objective opinions from the likes of Consumer Reports (at least until lately).
The only thing GM likes and loves is money, bailouts, bonuses, overpaying themselves, and marketing that borders on fraud.
I leave out that they love profits, because apparently that isn't important to them as long as they keep getting a paycheck and bonuses.
Yep, that was probably me ... when we bought our first Saturn - an '03 L300 in the fall of '02 - my wife commented that it was one of the easiest buying experiences she'd ever had. I suspect that was one of the reasons we kept going back - an '05 and '08 VUE, plus the '06 ION which we still have.
Not so much for product - though I do feel it was competitive, not class leading - but because the customer experience was so superior.
The plastic side panels - on all but the '08 VUE - didn't hurt either.
Sounds like naughty Sonatas behaving like the Chevy Cruze!
So what has your experience been with the Mini and Mazda? Are they better, worse, etc., than the Saturns? And how did the buying experiences compare?
(just curious).
Why work so hard to come up with reasons why a company with 27% sales growth (which is almost the best in the entire car industry), and still has the biggest market share in NA of any manufacturer, has problems. If they have problems, then they all have problems.
The string of great releases by GM running back to 2007 impresses enough customers for them to manage the 27% growth and retain top spot in market share. From the recent news, people are willing to pay higher prices for GM in the last qtr.
I'll give you 50% :P
"Month-end dealer inventory in the United States stood at about 577,000 units, up about 3,000 units compared to March and about 149,000 higher than April 2010."
As I understand it, GM counts everything "sold" to the dealers..if so, there are 577,000 units padding the sales numbers. Ford sold more than Chevy but in the midwest, there are twice as many Chevrolets in inventory compared to Fords and that doesn't include GMC. Buick and Caddy.
For 28 years I bought GM exclusively..six new vehicles and one with 8k on it. I have bought my last one. The shady reporting of sales is only the last in a long line of events that soured me on GM.
MINI (purchase) - the only dealer in Colorado (at the time we bought ours) is a no-haggle store that also sells BMW and Honda. The car is for the daughter, so she did the initial contact with the sales team after finding an in-stock unit that met her needs. The sales process was pretty painless, and they walked my daughter through every feature of the car, including pairing her phone to the Bluetooth system.
MINI (service) - It has only been back to the dealer twice in the past 13 months - the first time was to have the clear bra installed, the second to replace a tire that got shredded. Both were handled without problem. I'm expecting to take it in for its first service shortly.
MINI (vehicle) - I've only driven her car (base model, auto trans) a handful of times, and I can certainly see why they are so popular. I've also test driven both an S convertible and an S Countryman, and the turbo certainly makes everything just that much more fun.
Mazda (purchase) - The Mazda dealer we bought from is more of a traditional dealer in terms of the sales process. Lots of negotiation and back and forth. We love the car (CX-7 GT AWD). We've got a road trip planned for the end of May - Colorado to Sedona, AZ and back, so I'm curious how it will do on the interstate in terms of mileage.
Mazda (service) - Only one visit to the dealer - oil change, tire rotation and an alignment. Service department is top notch. They comped me the first oil change and the alignment will be submitted as a warranty claim, so I only paid $20 for the rotation.
Mazda (vehicle) - Compared to our '08 VUE, the Mazda is a bit bigger, especially width. Both the wife and I can share the center console arm rest. It's certainly more sporty in ride and handling than the VUE, which is to be expected.
Just like the Volt is flying off the lots so fast and they can't build enough of them.
Yet there are 569 of them have gone unsold sitting on dealer lots... :sick:
I know the usual suspects will tell me to put away the tinfoil hat or something, but as a reader of numerous auto sites including and outside of Edmunds, I truely believe there is a huge internet blitz going on to gain support for Government Motors and to "police" any negative views or comments that are posted. And the same to prop up the success of products that aren't doing as well as we would think... cough Volt! cough.
I don't disagree that their efforts are improving and the new product is showing significant improvement over the old stuff btw, but instead of letting the product tell the story... :sick:
Wow 569 unsold volts across america. how many unsold toyota blundras?
Not sure what that means but it's nice to see everyone using Edmunds' handy inventory feature.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Now you are welcome to comment on this since you have the inside line....
The Chevrolet Cruze may be relatively new to the market, but that doesn't stop it from the recall bug. The Detroit News is reporting that General Motors is recalling 154,112(!) Cruze models to ensure proper installation of the intermediate steering shaft covers. Automatic transmission-equipped models will also be checked for proper installation of the transmission shift linkage.
GM says it hasn't yet received any complaints about the issue and no accidents have been reported. The automaker tells The Detroit News that the vast majority of recalled vehicles will not need to be repaired – the automaker simply wants to inspect the vehicles "to give customers additional peace of mind about the quality of the Cruze."
Beyond the Cruze recall, GM has also issued a pair of smaller actions. The automaker is recalling 8,723 examples of the 2011 Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana vans for potential brake leaks. Also being recalled are 6,303 2011 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon models that are suspected to have a windshield wiper nut that wasn't tightened to specification during the build process. None of the vehicles in this batch of recalls are reportedly responsible for any accidents as a result of the defects.
Did that Sonata all of a sudden veer off the road?? :surprise:
the vehicles could roll away after the driver exited without warning
Chevy Runs Deep....even when you walk away! :sick:
Regards,
OW
Did you initiate a similar comment on a Hyundai Edmunds site about those Sept. '10 recalls? I think it's a rational question. Bringing only the GM recall up without mentioning a competing product for context, shows 'the right side of your face' as Agnes Moorhead would say in my favorite old flick, "Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte".
A little balance goes a long way.
I post on the Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-9 forums.
Any other questions?
I will stick to commenting on the products GM makes. They promote world class but deliver far less. They have improved since TOTAL FAILURE but they are NOT the best automotive mfg company out there and their products are far from top quality and the best value. Not even close....it took a nuclear crisis for GM to regain the top sales notch, not to remind about the bailout and eliminating debt. Their retail market share has declined as well.
They bash themselves. :shades:
Regards,
OW
I'm only 41, so it would probably be awhile before I join that club. I've had GM cars that are 40+ years old, though! :P
I've never had a GM car that was bad enough to make me want to desert GM completely and never look back. Yet, at the same time, if I was to buy a new car, there's a very good chance it wouldn't be a GM product. Not that I'm afraid of their cars, but I'm just starting to find more appealing choices elsewhere.
Now, if I was to go with a smaller car, I would consider the Cruze, although I'd still check out the competition. A bit bigger though, and I think I'd pick an Altima, Fusion, or Accord over a Malibu. And, one more step up (I still hesitate to call them full-sized cars), I'd probably pick a Charger or 300 over a Lucerne or DTS (sorry Lemko!)
And if it was a truck, my first choice would probably be a Dodge Ram.
And if it was a truck, my first choice would probably be a Dodge Ram.
Me too. The Lucerne is to outdated for my tastes. Probably a good car to pick up used though.
I really like the 300. Good power, RWD, and attitude. As for trucks, that would be a tough choice. I really like the ram, but since they went with rear coil springs it just doesn't have enough payload capacity. A 4x4 Ram Quad cab SLT only offers about 1,430lbs of cargo capacity. An F150 4x4 Supercrew offers up to 1960lbs.
It's only a big deal for me because of our camper. It has over 1,200lbs of tongue weight. With a Ram I wouldn't have any reserve capacity for cargo or people for that matter. That's one area where tow ratings are misleading (particularly for 1/2 tons). Sure you can tow 10k plus, but if your trailer has a tongue weight of 15%, you've just used up all or exceeded the cargo capacity of the tow vehicle. Plus you have to look at what the rear axle weight rating is too.
I've been thinking of going to a pickup for my next vehicle. Right now it looks like Ford has the best engine line up. But I definitely like the looks of the Ram by far. I really like the torque output of the 3.5 Ecoboost, but I will wait to see if any teething pains show up.
you and others here like to keep throwing this out there that gm counts sales as soon as the cars are at the dealer. i simply stated i cant find anything to prove or disprove this claim. or if it is true, that all auto makers dont report this way
Even if every company reports inventory as sold, GM has more than double the Ford numbers. For the record, Ford has never been an option for me...the mid size Fusion that is offered is bland and has weird tail lights. I was as loyal as any GM owner and until the bailout... bought their cars. I had good luck with few repairs or problems until after 100k where the hardware started falling off some of them. My reasons for boycotting are political for the most part. All of the auto makers are shady with the numbers, just seems GM is worse.
We know that much. :P
Regards,
OW
Not true. Reading the report carefully shows how any trolls eager to bash GM misconstrued the English.
"General Motors records revenue when vehicles are shipped to dealerships."
That means GM has the vehicle charged to the dealer and it represents _income_ to the corporation, which pays the costs + some net.
"It is probable that in an effort to pad their earnings prior to their IPO, GM made sure they shipped as many vehicles to dealerships as possible and continues to do so going in to fourth quarter earnings."
In other words they moved as much inventory as possible out of GM's plants to the dealerships to increase their corporate value sheets. Instead of sitting with billed costs for parts for assembly, they assembled them and "delivered" them to the dealerships.
I always understood this was called "floor planning," where the dealers had the cars and owed GM for them and were paying interest on the vehicle even though they had not paid GM for the vehicle.
This works the same for all manufacturers, I assume.
Nowhere does it say GM called the vehicles not sold to customers "sold."
LMAO.
Thanks to GS42 for the link to an article.
http://nlpc.org/stories/2010/12/13/gm-using-inventory-fudge-earnings
However, I note it from a tinfoil hat site that bashes GM--probably where some here get their material?
To wit:
"Related:
GM's Smoke and Mirrors Accounting
GM IPO Land Mines
CNBC: Flaherty Says Open GM IPO to All (But Retail Investors Should Not Buy)
GM IPO: Buyer Beware
Government Motors' Chevy Volt Sparks Criticism
How Can Auto Bailout Succeed When Its Based on Fraud?
GM's Stagemanaged IPO (Investor's Business Daily)
Obama is Wrong About Auto Bailout
CNBC: Flaherty Slams GM Acquisition of AmeriCredit (video)
SEC Must Ban Auto Czar Steven Rattner From Securities Industry
Nonunion Delphi Retired Employees Get Shaft in Auto Bailout
Consumers Beware: Ally Bank is GMAC
Flaherty: Obama's Actions on Auto Bailout are Unconstitutional (CNBC video)
Obama Arranges Takeover of GM and Chrysler; Auto Workers Union Gets Huge Stake
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
He did say that the car was horrible. He did say it was very expensive to replace the automatic transmission, which is where I jumped in and said I wished I could have warned him because my Chrysler auto tranny only lasted 60,000 miles, so I could have warned him about the horrific quality issues prior to them costing him half his retirement. He's 27 years old.
He owns a Scion (box car) now. End of story on why the bailouts were a bad idea. Lost customer for life.
P.S. In Eureka CA went to a wedding last year and one of the people there was complaining about a failed tranny in their Pacifica (another Chrysler :lemon: ) They said they were having a hard time getting the dealer/manufacturer to pay for all of it (low miles vehicle), and it was taking them over a month to get the job done (because so many trannies had failed that Chrysler was OUT OF replacement TRANNIES) HILARIOUS!
DETROIT (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Co. may reduce production of pickups after inventories rose last month, Mark Reuss, president for North America, said today.
"We're going to do something about it, but we haven't made those calls yet," Reuss said in a telephone interview. Buyers shifted away from trucks last month, "but no one month makes a trend, so we've got to see where this one holds," Reuss said.
GM's truck inventory rose to more than 275,000 at the end of April, or about 111 days of supply, Don Johnson, GM's vice president of U.S. sales, said yesterday on a conference call.
Here is the link for the full article for your reference.
GM mulls cut in truck output
Regards,
OW
Automotive News -- April 11, 2011 -
Lean inventories will begin to hamper U.S. auto sales this month, a situation that will worsen as global production slows as a result of Japan's earthquake and tsunami.
"Most likely lean small-car inventories will be a headwind on the industry's sales rate," Ford sales boss Ken Czubay said.
Automakers started the month with a 54-day supply of light vehicles, down from 60 days on March 1. And that was before deliveries to dealer lots start to dry up because of closed assembly plants in Japan and global production cuts caused by shortages of Japanese parts.
The first U.S. dealers to be affected will be Japanese-brand stores, as deliveries of vehicles assembled in Japan stop or are sharply curtailed this month.
Toyota is working to make sure U.S. dealers have high-demand vehicles such as the Prius, said Bob Carter, head of Toyota Division.
"While there may be spot shortages here or there, we are prioritizing distribution efforts to minimize those," Carter said.
--------------------------------------------------
Days-To-Sell Inventory Figures - April 1, 2011
DTS: Figure is based on the number of days needed to sell all vehicles in inventory based on the previous month's daily selling rate. May include vehicles in dealer stock, and those in shipping from the factory to the dealer.
Mfgr/Stock/DTS 04.01.11/DTS 03.01.11
Chrysler: 42,200 51 71
Ford: 410,200 52 63
GM: 573,900 75 60
Honda: 209,000 47 64
Hyundai/Kia: 120,100 31 40
Mazda: 71,000 62 94
Nissan: 172,900 39 48
Subaru: 36,600 37 41
Toyota: 329,500 50 65
Buick LaCrosse: 17,800 99 85
Buick Regal: 12,800 95 78
Cadillac CTS: 17,800 123 62
Camaro: 24,900 75 94
Corvette: 5,900 137 143
Chevy Cruze: 37,500 56 44
Chevy HHR: 5,000 18 22
Chevy Impala: 16,900 25 25
Chevy Malibu: 48,000 83 56
Chevy Equinox: 26,300 48 30
Chevy Silverado: 124,400 103 83
Chevy Traverse: 23,100 76 52
GMC Sierra: 48,200 112 89
GMC Terrain: 13,600 58 34
Ford Fiesta: 15,600 43 80
Ford Focus: 14,700 23 47
Ford Fusion: 36,800 36 45
Ford Mustang: 16,100 51 116
Ford Explorer: 14,600 32 30
Ford F Series: 136,700 69 82
Like it or not, GM is building inventory again at a faster rate than competition. Not Good.
Regards,
OW
LMAO.
Based upon what you posted, I think GM records a "sale" as a delivery to a dealer. At that point the dealer owns the car and owes GM the money, regardless of if or when the vehicle is sold to a private buyer. So if the dealer inventories have been stacking up, then GM would be recording record sales and revenues (which may not yet be collected from the dealers). For GM, the "customer" is the dealer, correct? And for the dealer, the private buyer is the customer.
So unless I'm incorrect, that would mean that cars "sold" are those delivered to dealers. Does anybody know for sure that this is the case?
the only way the padding sales argument works is if GM just recently started including dealer inv. as sold units. If that is the way it has always been, then your argument requires you to find the difference in inventory at dealer lots from year to year over several years to then claim the increase in inventory as hedging the numbers