Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Just like we don't need 4 GMC Acadias. At least the Avalon is actually bigger than the Camry.
Quality is not good enough: Buick is now world class at the top with Lexus for both short and long term.
Dealership is not good: Buick is at the top of dealership satisfaction
Interior is not good enough: Looks pretty darn good now with top notch materials
Exterior is plain: Looks pretty stylish now
Ride and handling sucks: Now it has high tech real time adjustable dampers(will have to wait for ride to see how it works.
It does not have high tech: Now it does
It is loud: Now quietest of all midsize/entry level marques
Does not have high tech modern headlamps:now it does and they even swivel
Does not have high tech taillights: Now it has LED taillights
AWD is not available: now it is
powertrain out of date: aluminum overhead cam V6 with DI
MPG sucks: Very competitive now
It's not made in the US: now it is
The badge is out of date.
62, we realize you are pro-GM, but let's look at this seriously. Buick has a certain image, and brand images take a long time to change. Even if most of what you say is true (I haven't checked but have no reason to disbelieve) -- most of these changes are very recent, no? Is it really that unreasonable that brand image is still stuck with models a few years older?
Look at the shoddy reputation (deserved) of Hyundai starting in the 1980's. Well in 20 years they've now produced the car of the year, the Genesis - and they STILL have their old reputation to overcome. It's changing but they are still not looked at like Lexus, Honda, or Toyota. Buick's and GM's changes for the better are far more recent than Hyundai's. It looks like you believe that with a new product announcement people are going to wipe their previous observations clean and immediately embrace the new image of Buick, due to a product just shown but not even on the market yet.
Why do you think we were all complaining in these forums 4 or more years ago? GM still has a lot of "crappy" (per previous discussion) models in their lineup. Opinion is changing but is going to take a lot of time, assuming the product continues to move towards excellence. So "my god it never ends" is a bit premature. We've been saying "my god it never ends" about the crappy products from GM for a long time. It may be the case that they(crappy products) are going to end soon, but the jury is out. It is not unreasonable for people to be skeptical given the history.
If that is going to be UAW labor then I can see another world of hurt. Assuming the Volt actually sells much. If it does then the UAW will probably strike.
I'd frankly put the new Buick as a direct competitor to the Lexus or E class. It's fast, and that magnetic ride technology is the same that's used in the Corvette. It really transforms the car into a serious European feel/ride.
Yes, Gm has some of the best cars. The problem is that they also have tons of detritus and bloat that's causing them to keep sinking. And, no GM doesn't need a small car. THey would do best in fact by avoiding the cheap and small cars entirely. They can't win against them, and they make no profit. Jaguar for instance never went the budget route, either, and did fairly well for decades. Porsche as well, in their own way.
I'd rather have a GM with 20 unique and hot cars that we all want and lust after, and nothing else.
Great comments, but gotta disagree here. IMHO one of the reasons Toyota and Honda are so successful is that they have not neglected their entry-level cars - they are generally better than the competition's. Honda, particularly, has done a great job with the Fit and the Civic. The first car for a teenager builds brand loyalty and that translates often to many more new car sales in the future. If the entry-level car is junk then the driver is going to look for something else next time.
There is also a lucrative small premium car segment that GM has completely ignored. There are a lot of sales of A4s, BMW3s, Lexus IS's, high end Jettas, TSX's, even Mini Coopers -- and GM has nothing in this segment. Most of those vehicles are priced evenly with some of GMs midsized or large cars. GM would certainly be able to generate a profit from a small car that sells for $35K.
I'd rather have a GM with 20 unique and hot cars that we all want and lust after, and nothing else.
Completely agree. GM has focused on quantity (lots of divisions, lots of models, lots of rebadges, lots of rental fodder). They are beginning to focus as much energy on the vehicles themselves rather than how many models they can make. Fewer excellent vehicles will make them more successful. Look at Honda - not that many models, yet very successful.
>but it can go a bit far
But some of the bias is from feelings about cars from the 70s and 80s, perhaps earned. But it's almost a religion for a few people. They don't look at the current actual product; instead they constantly criticize almost like politics. What's interesting is the difference in forums and how they'll allow GM-bashing continually but in contrast will step in to squelch long-lasting criticism of Honda and Toyota, e.g., sludge discussions. The feeling is that GM deserves continuing criticism for the past.
A big factor in the willingness to forgive faults of the foreign models from the past and present is in how the companies handled the 80s and 90s sales of their cars. I was listening to 3 dealer owners/managers being a part of a discussion during the bail out discussion on a Louisville radio station. They pointed out the car sale was the difference; for the foreign brands (then) it was arch important to keep the owner bringing the car back to the dealer for the service and proper maintenance (and fixes of things to avoid having to issue recalls). Counterpoint to this was the US brands who sold the car and the car was sometimes serviced properly and often wasn't. Then when things failed because of not having been repaired or maintained, the car company is blamed. The three described the foreign car sale as the PROCESS of ownership rather than just the sale, hence the better feeling about the cars on the part of the owners.
In other words the US manufacturers goofed in competing with the new foreign brands of that era by not making it a requirement to bring vehicles back for regular service to handle the things that needed changing along with the oil change.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I prefer to take my vehicle to the dealers for service. I believe BMW, MB & VW are now offering free service through the warranty period. GM should consider that. My last GMC was serviced free by the dealer with coupons sent out. I would rather they just offered it when the car is purchased. Toyota way overcharges for their service. They also very nicely tell you they will not fix things that need to be addressed. I don't believe I will use them for future non warranty service. Last time they charged me $60 for generic 30 weight oil. Wanted an additional $70 for no name synthetic. Previous GM PU trucks were generally serviced for a very nominal fee and sometimes waved, even though I bought the truck out of state. My last 20 years experience with the domestic service was much better than the last two vehicles from Toyota.
Loud? Heck, there are a lot of adjectives to describe a Buick, but "loud" isn't one.
MPG sucks? Sheesh, I'm getting 29 MPG out of a 21 year-old car and my girlfriend's car is doing better.
The badge sucks? Sheesh! What the heck do the others look like? Toyota's looks like it was drawn with a Spirograph and Nissan's looks like a hamburger!
To erase the shoddy image and so called perception, GM needs to show improvement up to a certain degree, and that line is higher than others which didn't mess itself in the past. In this regard GM hasn't done enough.
GM at least needs either:
1) class leading products
2) top notch customer service
to persuade people to forget GM's past mistakes. Is it done yet? Nope, none of them.
Some GM products are getting better, but none leads the class yet (except maybe Tahoe). CTS and Corvette are world class, but do they lead? Nope.
Customer service improved, yes (on par with toyota, I can believe that). But why compare it with Toyota (which is falling apart)? Why not compare it with the top of class Honda?
Hyundai, 10 years ago sold cheap cars with below par quality. Started off low as the bottom feeder. They constantly put up huuuge effort to raise their quality. Result: now they have decent quality cars, improved customer service, and increasing popularity. This is the success they've earned. All this from a company which started roughly only 3 decades ago, now the 5th largest car company in the world.
Then we have the 100 year old GM. 10 years ago selling not so cheap cars with similar below par quality. Barely put any effort at all over the years until just recently. Alas, most the effort they did revolved around perceived "patriotism", cost cutting, lies and propagandas. What we get now, pretty much the same old GM we saw 10 years ago. 90% crappy cars, 9% decent, 1% world class. Customer service, improved meagerly, popularity? well the annual drop in market share shows everything. Result? Same old GM that can't survive without begging taxpayers for money. A century worth of experience got beaten up by Hyundai's measly 20 years experience. See the difference? You call that deserving anything?
GM's service didn't improve much to the level it became on par with Toyota, it's because Toyota's falling service quality that allowed GM to catch up. Compare it with Honda for better comparison, which still maintain it's stellar customer service. Why do people always pick the easier preys? You'll never lead that way.
If there's any car company in US that deserve more than it gets right now, it's Hyundai, not GM.
That's not good business, but that would fit with what our friend has met with the local Toyota dealer with no competition for 80 miles north and east and 20 miles south and 30 miles to the west; they do as they please because people feel they _have_ to buy a Toyota and many people won't travel that far to shop. On the other hand there are 6-7 Chev dealers within a 20-mile radius of the Chev dealer next to the Toyo deal.
>GM should consider that. My last GMC was serviced free by the dealer
That's a Five Star idea for GM. It would allow selling at a high price for value added. With the 100K miles powertrain warranty that really adds to the value.
I recall in the 80s and 90s that people who bought certain foreign brands were told they had to get the cars service at the dealer or else the car would "blow up." And they wouldn't honor the warranty because the car hadn't been there for the oil changes and lubes and other fixes. I knew people who were scared to not get their car serviced at the dealer.
On the other hand people with Chevies expected to just have the local garage change the oil when they remembered at 7500 miles, e.g. In that period 4000 was a long oil change interval for the oils and the engines of the era. I recall someone who worked for me who had a Chev that wore a cam lobe. The oil had been changed at 7500 miles + intervals. You could see the wear on the lifters.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
More than half say they try to buy American-made products if the price is competitive, and 14% say they will go out of their way to buy American. Six percent say they will only buy American-made products and they will do without if an American-made product is not available.
Let's look at the keywords here: "more than half will buy American if the price is competitive", GM's pricing is not exactly competitive, it's competitive so far because of the healthy discounts. The real keyword is IF, if GM needs profit, discounts must be lifted, when that happens price will be much less competitive.
The next keywords: "American-made". Honda Accord is American made in Ohio. If you insist that American made means domestic brand, remember that Ford is American, and it has the more public trust and confidence than GM-Chrysler.
"Seeing the domestic automakers' recent struggle has ignited a heightened sense of patriotism among some American car shoppers, and the latest Kelley Blue Book Marketing Research indicates that people are pulling for the Big Three to survive and thrive," said Jack R. Nerad, executive editorial director and executive market analyst for Kelley Blue Book and kbb.com.
Will they keep their words and buy domestic? We shall once again see if the sense of patriotism will prevail over the sense of logic and reality. History has shown that logic wins most (if not all) of the time.
I'll be patient and wait for the results. :shades:
We'll check on Hyundai when they're 100 years old. I'm not sure what 100 years has to do with anything here, but I'll play the silly number game on years.
I disagree with the tenet that in 1998 GM was selling below par quality. The propagandists would have you believe that, but last I recall Honda had transmission problems and Toyota had sludge in that period.
>still maintain (sic) it's (sic) stellar customer service.
Hmmm. Check in on the Odyssey and VCM discussions re customer service. The higher profit per vehicle the foreign companies enjoy due to their having come to the automotive party late without any legacy costs of older employees allows them a built-in warranty so they replace transmissions up to 100k free and have built up some customer resentment over their handling of seamless VCM action and vibration. Our neighbor across the street is on his 8th Honda product (all Acuras) and they have never seen a dealer service box. He uses an independent HonAc service store--he avoids that stellar customer service current owners are getting).
As for GM having poor quality, I would determine it was greatly improved in 1989 and has continued up from there. And I've owned the products, properly serviced them, and they have served me well. So it's time to break the chain of negativity passed on because it's chic to say negative things about all GMs. If you had a particular model that failed you, whether it is because of poor build or your failure to properly service the car,, I feel sorry for your problems, but don't ascribe your experience to all GMs. People owning HoToys started having more problems in 03 as their quality regressed to the mean.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
You totally missed the point, what I'm saying is with a cenury worth of experience GM should've learned the lesson mush earlier instead of too late like now. We gave them too many chances to improve they get spoiled and lazy. The same with employees, you go too easy on them and they'll bite you back in the butt.
As for GM having poor quality, I would determine it was greatly improved in 1989 and has continued up from there.
Nope, I believe the quality improved significantly in around 2005. GM before then had too many crappy products that belong in the dumpster, Aztek, Cavalier, Malibu, GrandAm, GrandPrix, Trailblazer (and it's clones), MonteCarlo, just to name a few.
Significant improvement compared to past GM, but not significant enough to lead the class. I've owned 2 Hondas so far (98 Civic and 06 Acura TSX). And yes my '98 Civic got that problematic auto back then, but it was immediately recalled and replaced under warranty. Domestics don't do that, and if they do, they usually wait for a serious problem to come up before fixing it.
I was impressed not by Honda's quality, but by their customer service. The way they fix things, quick, hassle free, and professionally was, and still is the best as shown with Acura's. Toyota I'm never impressed with, their quality is falling and customer service is below par by my standards, marginal at best. Vette's article shows GM's Chevrolet service is about on par with Toyota, yes I agree. Toyota going down, Gm going up so it's only natural that GM finally caught up.
Toyota and Honda have tranny problems, so? GM of that time had even more problems. No product is trouble free, it's "how problematic" and "how the company handles it" that really matter. I've said this earlier, GM has improved in the former part, but the latter GM still needs to work on. Improvement in just one area isn't nowhere near enough to shake off the old image.
GM needs to find it's way...somehow. The new Malibu is proof it can be done!
Oh nonsense. The sludge discussion dragged out 5,500 posts - what more can you add? Sludge still comes up in all the various Toyota discussions around here.
And the last I checked the Odyssey transmission problems discussion was still going strong too.
Any data?
Vette's article shows GM's Chevrolet service is about on par with Toyota, yes I agree
I supplied the data? When was this? Can you show me where this was?
My 1998/99 pre strike Suburban was a great vehicle. Wish I had held onto it. By contrast the 1994 Toyota PU I bought for my son was not so great. Clutch failed at 11,000 miles. Not covered. Some kind of timing belt failed at 60k miles. Not covered. Total engine failure at 107k miles. I don't consider that a great vehicle.
My current Sequoia is a very nice vehicle to drive and ride in. Two issues the dealer would not fix. JBL CD player skips on many discs that were fine in my 2005 GMC Bose player. Their response it plays our test disc. The pneumatic tailgate lifters do not go up when the temp drops below about 35 degrees. Toyota response we have to see it happen to change the lifts. Well after you drive 35 miles to the dealership it is warm inside the vehicle. Not life changing just annoying. And there are other little gripes. So GM does not get any worse marks than Toyota on customer service. My experience over 45 years of new car buying I would rank Toyota near the bottom and GM near the top. Too bad GM does not build anything I want to buy.....
I could not get by the insufferable arrogance of the sales people to even consider buying a Honda. I guess some people will put up with that to buy a name. I understand snob sales in a Rolls or Ferrari store. Not in a lowly Honda dealership.
The GM dealer was closed the Sunday we cruised that shop.
I did miss that as your point.
>GM should've learned the lesson mush earlier
The late 70s and through mid 80s GM continued to put out the profit based car rather than redesigning for world competition in some models. The MBAs in charge of things and the shareholders seemed to think the small econobox competition would go away. They got no support from the unions in improving assembly quality either.
The econobox competition didn't go away and it evolved into more "normal" cars for the people to buy.
>Aztek, Cavalier,
The list is doing what I mentioned earlier--it's using blanket blame. I have ridden in Rendevous's. They are nice--not a Lexus, but more than adequate. I know people who bought a second one. Same for Cavaliers: I owned a Skyhawk. Not perfect but I was more satisfied than I would have been with a Honda of the era. The later plastic Cavaliers should never have seem the cost-cutting light of day. BTW my Skyhawk had a 1.8 OHC motor. I've had many of the autos you mentioned as loaners from my Buick dealer through the decades (you missed the Metro, which I think would be great to have now). Some weren't perfect but were adequate. The loaners are tradeins from the dealer's used lot. Typically they had a few years and 70K miles and ove,r but were too good for the wholesaler that picked up the high mileage tradeins. Gem among the cars was a 1995 Park Avenue that started with 90K and last I saw was at 160K. The dealer had maintained it with new struts, etc., and it was doing fine. I saw it later owned by a local person in our area (all the loaners were for sale.)
Not all GMs were junk; furthermore some problems are the result of poor maintenance by owners. But GM
could haveshould have done better business management through those decades.2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Ahhh. That's a different and a good point. That's back to the process of selling the car which includes maintaining it and correcting it during the ownership "experience." Honda and Toyota had that down much better. They also had much better profits per car because of their lower assembly costs and related factors. Agree that GM should have been working to reduce those labor and other costs to allow more working room for the unspoken warranties.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Honda/Toyota have 3 stars while all GM are 4 stars with the exception of Cadillac/Hummer which got 5.
http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2008250
http://gmtv.feedroom.com/ (video should be available Tuesday) Sundays press show is also available today.
General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner took the stage again this morning at the 2009 North American International Auto Show in Detroit to announce the automaker’s decision to partner with South Korean firm LG Chem to produce battery cells for the upcoming Chevrolet Volt - and potentially the upcoming Cadillac Converj. Wagoner also announced the automaker’s plans to create a large battery development center, likely in Michigan.
GM chose LG Chem over A123, a Boston-based battery supplier, though the automaker says it will continue to work with A123 in the future.
Wagoner said that the automaker will add more battery engineers when it opens a 31,000 square foot battery development center in the United States. The center, which will be the largest in the U.S., is planned for Michigan, though a final decision on location has not been chosen.
The automaker will also partner with the University of Michigan to create an advanced battery lab and an engineering department curriculum designed to feed directly into the burgeoning battery-electric industry. The battery lab will be located in U of M’s Ann Arbor campus.
Did someone say they are going to offer a Hummer 3 with diesel? :shades:
Don't hold your breath on batteries being built here. I think that LG had the inside track for months. The A123 was to get Congressional support. Those batteries will come out of China or Korea, would be my bet. A123 will soon fold as they will not get any of that money without a contract for the Volt battery.
And the research center if built here will just be a scam to get some of that $25 billion in alternative money. GM and Chrysler have already requested $22 billion. Not much left in that kitty, if they hand it out as requested.
And LG will be building the batteries in Michigan for GM.
In a major economic development for Michigan, General Motors Corp. will build a lithium-ion battery pack manufacturing plant in the state, GM Chairman Rick Wagoner said today.
Wagoner said the batteries GM manufactures will be used in the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid, expected to go on sale late next year. Location of the plant has not been determined.
"Yes, GM is getting back in the battery business," Wagoner told journalists.
GM used to make automotive batteries under the Delco brand.
Wagoner said GM has selected Korean battery maker LG Chem to make the individual battery cells used in the packs GM will manufacture. LG Chem has a partnership with Compact Power in Troy to make battery cells.
I thought just a couple of days ago GM was saying that they would not need more money even in their worst-case scenarios? Funny how that story is changing, but not surprising.
As part of the survival strategy submitted to Congress last month, GM said it intends to focus U.S. product and marketing resources on Buick, Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC. Today at the auto show, Clarke said the company will be able to execute the plan, even as the global credit crisis chills merger and acquisition activity.
"We have to re-engineer the way we're doing business in many regards," Clarke said. "We're going to be a smaller company."
Meanwhile, Pontiac will dwindle to a five-vehicle line, Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said here in a separate interview today. The cars: the G8, G5, Vibe, Solstice and Solstice hardtop coupe.
In the viability plan -- submitted as part of GM's effort to win $13.4 billion in federal bailout loans -- GM also said it would consider options for Saturn, without saying whether the line would be sold or shuttered.
"We've entered into a very, very open and candid dialogue with our Saturn retailers,'' Clarke said. Saturn, launched 19 years ago, has been successful in terms of brand attributes, he said. But "it just hasn't been a good business for us."
Saturn's only annual profit came in 1993.
GM will be able to work within state franchise laws as it whittles its dealer count, Clarke said. GM has calculated the estimated costs, he said, without elaborating.
In the viability plan it submitted to Congress, GM said it planned to go from 6,600 dealers to 4,700 by 2012.
Well it looks like the G6 is gone so look for the Insignia to become a Malibu next year?
I supplied the data? When was this? Can you show me where this was?
Uh, it was about 200 posts back, post #3100 something I believe. You said Chevy and Toyota are virtually tied, well I agree and not in a bad way. GM is going up, Toyota's going down, it's that simple.
As for top class Honda, I only read and hear reviews from customers or potential customers (fairly, only from WA, CA, FL, OR, or MA where I can get infos from) who mostly rate Honda as much superior to Toyota in service quality. Also from my own experience as a customer. Toyota's falling service quality can be found all over the newspapers since 2001, you can easily find them on reader's letters section.
Mercedes-Benz is a rolemodel that suffers the disease called "ARROGANCE", along with, sadly, D3 and Toyota. And I fear BMW may become the next.
That, imidazol, is so right on spot. UAW is one of the groups I consider as lazy incompetent bums. Like I said, they can drop dead for all I care.
Not all GMs were junk; furthermore some problems are the result of poor maintenance by owners. But GM could have should have done better business management through those decades.
Yes, I agree. CTS, Corvette = world level. Malibu, Tahoe, Silverado, Traverse, G8 = decent. Vue and LaCrosse = so-so. Astra = potential but become a trash thanks to overpricing. 2010 Camaro and Equinox = potential goodies.
Homework #1: do something about the rest of the lineup.
Meanwhile, Pontiac will dwindle to a five-vehicle line,
GM also said it would consider options for Saturn, without saying whether the line would be sold or shuttered.
So Hummer is for sale with no takers, Saab is quietly for sale (again with no takers), now Pontiac is supposedly going away, but will still be around as five models, and Saturn is undecided?
It has been obvious from the get-go that GM had too many brands and too many models and needed to downsize in order to be viable. This just sounds like smoke and mirrors. So what is it?
Saab makes 1 decent vehicle, the 9-3. The 9-5 is archaic, while the 9-2x and the 9-7x are sad clones that ironically are dressed in very fine clothes. I admit I think the 9-7 is the best looking among the Trailblazer brothers. Saab has potential imo (though not as much as Hummer), but it deserves better owner.
This just sounds like smoke and mirrors. So what is it?
IMO this simply proves that reality is undeniable, once again.
About 10K overpriced! :mad:
Preparation for the plant, to be located in Michigan, is to begin early this year, with production tooling to be installed midyear. Output is expected to start in 2010.
Until GM's battery facility is operational, Volt's battery cells will be supplied by LG Chem Ltd.'s Compact Power Inc. unit, based in Troy, Mich. A joint engineering contract with Compact Power and LG Chem is expected to speed up development of the Volt's lithium-ion battery technology. GM has been testing battery packs for the Volt, powered by cells from LG Chem, for the past 16 months.
"The design, development and production of advanced batteries must be a core competency for GM, and we've been rapidly building our capability and resources to support this direction," Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner said at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, where the Volt concept was rolled out two years ago.
Mr. Wagoner said more than $1 billion has been committed to the Volt. Uncertainty over its future widened in December after GM delayed construction of a Flint, Mich., factory slated to build the car's engine.
Batteries have been one of the biggest hurdles for U.S.-based electric- and hybrid-vehicle manufacturers. Batteries have been made in volume in Japan, South Korea and elsewhere in Asia, and auto makers have been concerned that if battery supplies tighten, expensive Asian battery-making capacity may go to Asian auto makers first.
GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said the new plant initially would produce battery packs using cells produced by LG in Korea.
The Chevrolet Volt, an extended-range electric vehicle that delivers up to 40 miles of gasoline- and emissions-free electric driving, will use battery packs manufactured in the United States by General Motors, Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner announced at the North American International Auto Show.
GM will establish the first lithium-ion battery pack manufacturing facility operated by a major automaker in the United States to produce the Volt's battery pack system. It consists of lithium-ion cells that are grouped into modules, along with other key battery components.
The Volt's lithium-ion battery cells will be supplied by LG Chem. Compact Power Inc., a subsidiary of LG Chem based in Troy, Mich., will build battery packs for Volt prototype vehicles until GM's battery facility is operational. A joint engineering contract with Compact Power and LG Chem also has been signed to further expedite the development of the Volt's lithium-ion battery technology.
I don not know but it looks like the prototype packs will be made by Compact Power here in Michigan using cells made in Korea and then GM will start making their own production packs later. The Lutz statement makes it sound like the production cells will be made here.
But in reading other statements it looks like there will be an effort to get Li-ion cell manufacturing here in the states.
Why not make everything in US to support more jobs? So much for patriotism, so one sided...
I'm not sure I agree. I believe Saab belong in the near luxury level, along with Buick, Chrysler and Acura TSX. Should be priced accordingly, though I agree that it's overpriced (alas, not by 10k :P ).
Thank you for saying it out loud! Which ones are the lies and which are the truth? When GM went up to Washington, they said they would become a 4-brand organization, with Pontiac a "niche brand".
Now Saturn's fate (a 5th brand) is "undecided", Pontiac is suddenly a 5-model lineup (hardly "niche"), and they can't sell Saab or Hummer because no-one's buying????
Lies, lies, and more lies. I'm so glad Ford didn't take the money (yet), gives me one domestic brand to root for (for now). :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
6.1 Marketing and Retail Operations—Today, General Motors competes in the United States with 8 brands. Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick, and GMC represent the company‘s core brands, accounting for 83% of current sales. The company will focus substantially all of its product development and marketing resources in support of these brands. This will result in improvements in awareness, sales, and customer satisfaction for these 4 core brands. Significant efforts have been expended to combine the Buick, Pontiac and GMC (BPG) brands into a single dealer distribution network, with approximately 80% of these brands‘ combined sales sold through BPG-branded stores. This channel will be fully competitive in terms of total entries offered, with Pontiac serving as a specialty/niche brand with reduced product offerings solely intended to complement Buick and GMC models and reinforce the channel as a whole. Hummer has recently been put under strategic review, which includes the possible sale of the brand. GM will also immediately undertake and expedite a strategic review of the Saab brand globally. Finally, Saturn, which has performed below expectations, has a unique franchise agreement and operating structure. As part of the Plan, the company will accelerate discussions with Saturn retailers and explore alternatives for the Saturn brand.
As indicated in Table 5, the Plan focuses the company‘s resources in the U.S. around a smaller, more profitable set of nameplates (40 by 2012) with further consolidations in GM‘s dealer network planned to get to a more profitable and stronger dealer network.
For 2008 GM has 48 nameplates and will reduce to 40 by 1012 (chart 5).
6.1 Marketing and Retail Operations—Today, General Motors competes in the United States with 8 brands. Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick, and GMC represent the company‘s core brands, accounting for 83% of current sales. The company will focus substantially all of its product development and marketing resources in support of these brands. This will result in improvements in awareness, sales, and customer satisfaction for these 4 core brands. Significant efforts have been expended to combine the Buick, Pontiac and GMC (BPG) brands into a single dealer distribution network, with approximately 80% of these brands‘ combined sales sold through BPG-branded stores. This channel will be fully competitive in terms of total entries offered, with Pontiac serving as a specialty/niche brand with reduced product offerings solely intended to complement Buick and GMC models and reinforce the channel as a whole. Hummer has recently been put under strategic review, which includes the possible sale of the brand. GM will also immediately undertake and expedite a strategic review of the Saab brand globally. Finally, Saturn, which has performed below expectations, has a unique franchise agreement and operating structure. As part of the Plan, the company will accelerate discussions with Saturn retailers and explore alternatives for the Saturn brand.
As indicated in Table 5, the Plan focuses the company‘s resources in the U.S. around a smaller, more profitable set of nameplates (40 by 2012) with further consolidations in GM‘s dealer network planned to get to a more profitable and stronger dealer network.
For 2008 GM has 48 nameplates and will reduce to 40 by 1012 (chart 5).
Pontiac will be down to only 4 models: G8, G5, Solstice and Vibe. As they said "to complement Buick and GMC". Buick/GMC have no G8 RWD vehicles, no small cars and no sports car. For the Buick/Pontiac/GMC dealership channel to be viable they need some small cars. I will agree that the G5/Vibe would not be my choice and hopefully something else will take it's place that is more Pontiac in the near future.
I see no smoke and mirrors here.
No problem. In my experiences over many years with Caddy, Pontiac, Olds Chevy and now GMC, there are far better choices out there. Not all of GM. Never had a Saturn and Buick of late has improved...but still boring so far.
Just one opinion. Don't read this if you can't bear admitting GM has failed in my view. As m4d_cow has eloquently stated, the brand has been failing for years and the market share proves it...unless we are on some parallel world where deception is revered over honesty.
Regards,
OW