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 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
When you're listing an Enclave or Acadia into the mid $40s and consumers can go buy an MDX, M-Class, etc for about the same price, very few people will stick with the Buick/GMC, unless they're desperately looking to avoid a minivan and need the seating capacity of a minivan.
And lets face it, that market is extremely small.
The Enclave is supposed to target the MDX, RX, M-Class, etc., though, although the Acadia is admittedly geared more towards the "mainstream" market consisting of the Pilot, Highlander, CX-9, etc.
Heck, for $50K, you could get an Audi Q7.
If It's their equal , it can be priced like them.
Problem is, nobody has done a comparison test between the Enclave and its competitors yet. (Hint; Steve, get the crew on it.)
Try tweeting Karl.
My idea would be for GM to drop SAAB/Opel/Vauxhall and give the Saturn name to them. Let the three form one European company and market their "Best for US" cars here under the Saturn name. They would have all of the Saturn dealerships (that stay afloat during the transition) with loyal Saturn followers.
I believe this would help the European branch of the family and the domestic one.
I would love to see the Vectra, XR8i and Astra come over as is, and bring the Diesel/Turbo-Diesel engines too.
Unfortunately GM management and the stock holders are more interested in getting BailOut money than doing what has to be done to save GM and the US car companies.
Aura XR because of all the stir I was causing concerning the
separating Rocker Panels. I refused saying that I liked the car too much to give it back. Instead I settled for a generous monetary compensation and kept the car. What a fool I was !!
:mad:
\Mine is still just as much fun and solid as it was the day I brought it home, only it gets much better gas mileage than it did two years ago.
order to fix or reimburse me in 2007, when the company was still
solvent.......imagine what it will take to get warranty service on
it now, when they are completely broke. The rocker panels still allow dirt, water and road debris to enter all over the inside bottom
part of each door, but as yet nothing in the actual passenger
compartment !
I agree about GM's management completely inept
Especially since the Enclave is badged as a Buick and not a Cadillac; many people still don't see Buick as a Lexus equal. (which, outside of the Enclave and forthcoming LaCrosse, it isn't a Lexus equal)
The Enclave is not overpriced in the low $40s, but when you start hitting the $50K mark that's a little pricey, especially when the RX comes rather well equipped under $50K.
And once again, the Q7 option is there, although at $50K, you're not looking at much of a Q7.
A Saturn-Saab tie-up would be interesting, though. The two could combine dealer networks (once the Saab stores move out of the Cadillac-Hummer dealers) and share product platforms, with minimal overlap if Saturn focuses on the low end, youth market while Saab aims a bit higher.
It'd be tough, especially given the economic situation today, but it's an interesting thing to ponder.
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison?styleid=100975629&styl- eid=101109522&styleid=101035082&styleid=101063913&styleid=101037439&maxvehicles=- 5&refid=&op=3&tab=features
Most people do not know they are rebadged Opel cars. That is part of the problem. I think they should have changed their marketing strategy when they became part of GM.
Which cracks me up that GM/Ford keep trying to rebadge these small European cars and sell them over here - you can't do if the quality isn't there. This is the prime example.
Also you can get a Honda/Toyota base car with the same features or more as the Astra for less and get a much better resale value because of the quality reputation.
I just checked Honda Pilot, 3 years, 36000 miles and 5 years 60000 on powertrain. Not good.
I just check Toyo and they are 3 years 36000 miles and 6 years 60000 miles on powertrain.
Buick looks much better, doesn't it?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
People need to make up their minds. They criticize that warranty isn't long enough for GMs. Then when that's shown to no longer be true, it's that the only thing that matters is resale cost. Then when one points out that the real comparison is cost to purchase, which is often below MSRP for cars, it will be some other factor to try to minimize GM's value. Gimme a break.
The reality is that the same cars being touted here as wunderkars because they bring more tradein dollars are held hostage by the new car dealer for more dollars because they are perceived, perceived by some people to have fewer problems or some other positive factor making them worth more in the end; therefore they will pay more in the front end costs. Somehow local dealers of the pop culture foreign brands seem to think they are selling Enron shares.
Then there's the reality of the maintenance costs and the mandatory visits to the dealership for the required service using only their special priced fluids, mechanics, etc., at only the dealership. The posts on the foreign car topics I visit indicate many people are over-maintained at their for profit dealerships. At the same time the ratings from JD Powers are indicated there are trivial differences in numbers of problems between the pop foreign brands and quality US brands, some people still feel they are happy to pay more to buy, maintain, and get possibly more at resale. That is not lower cost.
In the same threads I mentioned above, there are people complaining about seat comfort, VCM hunting, transmission failures, and other things which make it clear that the cars from certain other manufacturers have regressed to the mean. People are even trading their cars because they are told by the companies the cars are supposed to operate that way! Resale resale values may not stay higher as reality of the problems sets in.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Dex-cool ring a bell?
At the same time the ratings from JD Powers are indicated there are trivial differences in numbers of problems between the pop foreign brands and quality US brands,
JD Power only measures "initial quality," not the number of problems over the lifetime of a vehicle. The best data for that seems to be Consumer Reports (not that it's wonderful but it's better than nothing), which tends to indicate that GM, while having improved recently, still has more problems over the lifetime of the car than a Ford or a Honda, or even Hyundai in some cases.
NOT. This is the 3-year study by JDPowers:
3-year study JDP
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Resale value IS a big factor. It's something like considering the neighborhood that you buy a house in. In other words, there are factors external to your car (like reputation) that affect the value, and by extension, your total investment.
The Lexus and Buick might be closely matched in features and MSRP, and in fact the Buick might be just as good a car in every respect but the Lexus is gonna to kill the Buick on resale, to the tune of many thousands of dollars, not chump change.
This is of course a consequence of GM's past work.
You realize that's a bad thing for Buick, right? Means no one is willing to pay that much for it...which means Buick has to discount in order to get people to buy. Which means GM has a harder time making money.
If the Buick was that good, they could say "MSRP, take it or leave it" and people would take it.
In other words, with the Buick, the factory suffers first, then the owner, but with Lexus the factory makes out first and the owner second, at resale time.
So the only "equal part" might be that both the Buick and Lexus owner get good service from their vehicles. There's a positive for both, should it prove true.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
A small thing: does the Buick even give you real wood in the car as Lexus does?
Great point about peopel still think Saturn has a plastic body. People who have fond memories are the folks that owned a S-series, not an Ion, Vue, Relay, etc.
Hopefully Saturn can find a good company to partner with.
That'll take you out to 5 years and will figure depreciation and repair costs in the numbers.
I'd have stepped down by now. Oldsmobile, now Saturn, Hummer, Pontiac, Saab; how much goodwill have you squandered with the American buying public. UAW and pension deals are a pain as well, I get it. But investing in, then killing, 5 car brands in just over 10 years is obscene. How much money was wasted developing Saturn or neutering Saab that could have been spent on a truly awesome Cobalt, Impala or perhaps a Electra/Roadmaster type car to rival the 300/5-series/E-class type rides? For owners, who's to think Buick and GMC aren't far behind (and maybe shouldn't be)? What's the young guy or girl with 40 e-z GMAC payments left on their Aura, H3 or G6 supposed to think? They're resale value is now spiraling down and their car of choice will soon become the brunt of late-night TV jokes. Why would they ever buy GM again? Or think the domestics are even an option?
I'm a car guy and a die-hard domestic car fan. 3 Fords and a Chevy currently and I'd put their quality, reliability and cost of ownership up against a Honda, Nissan or Toyota any day. Not to mention VW or other euro makes. But GM and Chrysler leadership is pathetic and Ford's has only recently improved, just in time it appears. I hope the Big 3 make it, but sure am glad my cars are paid off!
#2 - Right away get rid of all the copies of the same model cars with some cheap [non-permissible content removed] plastic slapped on them its either a Chevy only model or other brand not both. You insult the intelegence of your customer offering multiple versions of the same damn car under different brands. Keep Saturn and only sell Opel euro designs etc in the US.
#3 Stop building multiple cars for each country/region if its a top seller in Europe it sells in the US with no other offering in its segment etc.
#4 get back to the basics - one or two 4drs - one small econo car - one SUV and one truck. Stop making a bazillion versions etc.
#5 You can have a complete pile of junk and if your customer service is #1 people will buy your cars and think they are the best thing since sliced bread. The First saturns proved this. American Auto fails horribly bad 6ways to Sunday when it comes to customer service. Oh and it might be time to rebrand the Buick and the Catalac both are seen as big shi--ty american car Grandpa and Grandma just thought were the rage. Now its Lexus - Infinity and BMW with the occasional MB. Lincolin do they still make those? American Auto needs a fresh face and the old brands aren't going to cut it. Way - Way harder to change a brand image than an actual product. Easier to create an awesome product and a new brand and go from there.
Now I read people posting about problems with their mass market Camry and Accords and the companies tell them that is the way they are supposed to be as far as seat comfort problems, VCM, etc. Something changed. Perhaps in Toyo's area it's the bottom line no longer has lots of profit built in. They are the GM now.
Re #5 Cadillac and Buick. One of my points is that the US makers haven't spent large efforts on image. The media has done what they love to do and that is shape people's opinion, whether it's about politicians or products. They shape the opinion by using bias in their reporting and presentation. As one in charge of GM, I would have twisted arms of the expensive labor unions, UAW for one, and required them to help fund an expansive (and expensive) advertising blitz to overcome the image problem. If a media outlet was biased against US brand cars, they wouldn't be getting advertising dollars.
This goes to the point that Cadillac and Buick have suffered from the image of being purchased by older, more sage, people. That has become a negative rather than a positive in that the older experienced people may have bought the cars with the cute this or fancy that but found they didn't last now they made wise decisions about dependable vehicles. An example of negative is the continual posting of negatives in Edmunds about them. One poster even described people shopping a Buick showroom as toothless. The product line at Buick has shifted and that was a mistake. The leSabre was a price point car and they lost lots of customers who didn't perceive a simpler Cadillac as a replacement. The laCrosse didn't replace leSabre as they had hoped. Some of this is financial in reason, so it's easy for me to critique after the fact. The Enclave is a luxury vehicle that is great, if you want an SUV, but it's ridiculed by some because it says Buick on it! Negatives never give up so that's why I would have had an all out image advertising program. Accord used that technique very well through the years. IN 1989 they showed their Accord driving past gas pumps because the image was that it was economical as an econobox; however I bought a 6 cyl car that got just as good gas mileage or better that was roomier and probably drove better and I know it rode better than the Accord I test drive. But Honda has been able to nurse that image to a willing American population who believes what they see if it's seen often enough.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I did think of that after also as a competitor to the Infiniti G37. When I went and looked at pricing the CTS AWD with the more powerful DI-engine was about $5K more base-price! And the Infiniti has 22 more hp and is lighter and sportier. I haven't been thru the standard and options list, but I think the price disparity becomes even worse for the CTS.
Basically though I would say that for GM to succeed they can not just be close or equal to companies like Infiniti. They need to be 5-10% less at a minimum, to makeup for perceived prestige and legacy quality issues. The CTS AWD 3.6 DI should have a starting point of about $32K instead of its $41K del. base.
Hey, Grandpop didn't get to be old by being stupid!
An example of negative is the continual posting of negatives in Edmunds about them. One poster even described people shopping a Buick showroom as toothless.
Hey! I still have most of my teeth!
The product line at Buick has shifted and that was a mistake. The leSabre was a price point car and they lost lots of customers who didn't perceive a simpler Cadillac as a replacement. The LaCrosse didn't replace LeSabre as they had hoped.
I think of the LaCrosse as more of a replacement for the Century/Regal.
Some of this is financial in reason, so it's easy for me to critique after the fact. The Enclave is a luxury vehicle that is great, if you want an SUV, but it's ridiculed by some because it says Buick on it!
The Enclave is a darn nice vehicle. The Buick name on it means it's also a dependable vehicle.
Negatives never give up so that's why I would have had an all out image advertising program. Accord used that technique very well through the years. In 1989 they showed their Accord driving past gas pumps because the image was that it was economical as an econobox; however I bought a 6 cyl car that got just as good gas mileage or better that was roomier and probably drove better and I know it rode better than the Accord I test drove.
Heck, my 1988 Buick Park Avenue also gets excellent fuel economy on a V-6 as does my girlfriend's LaCrosse.
Honda has been able to nurse that image to a willing American population who believes what they see if it's seen often enough.
If only the American population could see the excellent image we have of Buick. Instead, we've got a bunch of immature people with perpetuating the image of a Buick as an "old person's car."
No, not a "bunch", but the market as a whole.
Daewoo/Holden/Pontiac merge into Holden Brand (3 Brands become 1 brand) These three brands currently sell similar products. Take three regional players and merge them together under the strongest brand which is Holden. This would introduce a new player to the U.S. market and give the former Pontiac brand more vehicles and a new purpose. The internationalization of the auto market requires that these type of brand-mergers become a reality.
GMC and Chevrolet merge into Chevrolet Brand (2 brands become 1 brand) most GMC and Chevrolet Vehicles overlap and are essentially rebadged copies, make it easier and consolidate into the stronger Chevrolet Brand.
Hummer and Saab sold either jointly or separately to a private equity firm or other automaker. (2 brands divested) Hummer and Saab both require huge sums of investment in their product lines, it makes the most sense to sell these two brands either together or separately at market value.
Opel/Vauxhall/Saturn merge to form Opel (3 brands become 1 brand) All of these brands essentially sell similar products. Take these three regional brands and form a strong international player under the Opel brand name. Saturn as a brand in the U.S. has no relevance but the opel logo and insignia could reinvigorate the entire company and product line.
* Possible that Buick as a brand could also be dissolved as they only sell three different vehicles and do not have a strong presence in their operating market. I could see this brand being totally phased out by 2020, the other GM brands would more than make up for the loss in product/branding. This would also allow GM to focus on the core Cadillac/Chevrolet brands and their newly minted international brands of Holden and Opel
Goals:
Reduce duplicative brand management
Reduce duplicative factories producing the same cars under different brand names.
Create strong global players in the automotive business, no more regional brands for GM
Realize economies of scale from consolidation of brand management, advertising, dealership networks.
The above mentioned steps seek to consolidate the GM brand network and dealer network into a more nimble organization. These mergers of core brands eliminate costly dealer-lawsuits from shuttering a brand, while being able to invest in our core surviving brands. The steps outlined above are far overdue and could be the jolt GM needs in order to reinvigorate their core business. The above outlined plan takes 10 brands and marketing strategies and whittles them down to 3 global brands.
The surviving names will be able to receive more attention and investment from GM and will be able to produce more relevant products. By merging brands and product lines the cost to GM can be drastically slashed since most brands carry similar products under different brand names.
The surviving corporate brands would be Buick,Chevrolet, Holden, Opel, and Cadillac, a drastic and necessary shift in response to market realities. I believe the plan put forth is the best way forward for GM and allows it to realize its many core strengths and keep their most prestigious brands. By cutting the brand and dealership network and merging divisions significant synergies and cost savings can be formed it also allows GM to better respond to market shifts and changes in consumer tastes. This way forward plan seems as though the least harsh and one that could provide the quickest results to the company.
This brand consolidation will streamline the entire company allow GM to get rid of non-core factories and duplicative management for its stable of 12 brands and allow the company to better focus on core brands. Toyota does with three brands, what GM attempts to do with 12. GM needs to keep 4 to 5 core brands and then heavily invest in creating a full line up for each of their strength brands. 2-4 good cars per brand does not do well anymore. This is not the 1950’s and GM’s dated brand strategy must go.
There will be immediate and long terms savings goals from factory/management consolidation of these many brands. Since a lot of the brand consolidation mentioned revolves around brands that each sell the same products under different brand name banners the consolidation should be common sense and is long overdue.
In addition to those mentioned steps GM must go through its line up and cut underperformers from production, do you really need 5 types of GMC Yukon’s to choose from? A faster switch to flex fuel automobiles and hybrid power trains will lift the company and boost sales, but GM must also cut most of its behemoth SUVs from the lineup to focus on fuel efficient crossovers. The changes we have experienced with gas prices and the automotive market are here to stay, it is time GM realized that.
I believe if all of the consolidation steps above are taken and GM invests in those core brands and introduces new products while streamlining factories and duplicative management that they will ultimately become a stronger corporation than even Toyota is today.
Daewoo/Holden/Pontiac merge into Holden Brand (3 Brands become 1 brand) These three brands currently sell similar products. Take three regional players and merge them together under the strongest brand which is Holden. This would introduce a new player to the U.S. market and give the former Pontiac brand more vehicles and a new purpose. The internationalization of the auto market requires that these type of brand-mergers become a reality.
GMC and Chevrolet merge into Chevrolet Brand (2 brands become 1 brand) most GMC and Chevrolet Vehicles overlap and are essentially rebadged copies, make it easier and consolidate into the stronger Chevrolet Brand.
Hummer and Saab sold either jointly or separately to a private equity firm or other automaker. (2 brands divested) Hummer and Saab both require huge sums of investment in their product lines, it makes the most sense to sell these two brands either together or separately at market value.
Opel/Vauxhall/Saturn merge to form Opel (3 brands become 1 brand) All of these brands essentially sell similar products. Take these three regional brands and form a strong international player under the Opel brand name. Saturn as a brand in the U.S. has no relevance but the opel logo and insignia could reinvigorate the entire company and product line.
* Possible that Buick as a brand could also be dissolved as they only sell three different vehicles and do not have a strong presence in their operating market. I could see this brand being totally phased out by 2020, the other GM brands would more than make up for the loss in product/branding. This would also allow GM to focus on the core Cadillac/Chevrolet brands and their newly minted international brands of Holden and Opel
Goals:
Reduce duplicative brand management
Reduce duplicative factories producing the same cars under different brand names.
Create strong global players in the automotive business, no more regional brands for GM
Realize economies of scale from consolidation of brand management, advertising, dealership networks.
The above mentioned steps seek to consolidate the GM brand network and dealer network into a more nimble organization. These mergers of core brands eliminate costly dealer-lawsuits from shuttering a brand, while being able to invest in our core surviving brands. The steps outlined above are far overdue and could be the jolt GM needs in order to reinvigorate their core business. The above outlined plan takes 10 brands and marketing strategies and whittles them down to 3 global brands.
The surviving names will be able to receive more attention and investment from GM and will be able to produce more relevant products. By merging brands and product lines the cost to GM can be drastically slashed since most brands carry similar products under different brand names.
The surviving corporate brands would be Buick,Chevrolet, Holden, Opel, and Cadillac, a drastic and necessary shift in response to market realities. I believe the plan put forth is the best way forward for GM and allows it to realize its many core strengths and keep their most prestigious brands. By cutting the brand and dealership network and merging divisions significant synergies and cost savings can be formed it also allows GM to better respond to market shifts and changes in consumer tastes. This way forward plan seems as though the least harsh and one that could provide the quickest results to the company.
This brand consolidation will streamline the entire company allow GM to get rid of non-core factories and duplicative management for its stable of 12 brands and allow the company to better focus on core brands. Toyota does with three brands, what GM attempts to do with 12. GM needs to keep 4 to 5 core brands and then heavily invest in creating a full line up for each of their strength brands. 2-4 good cars per brand does not do well anymore. This is not the 1950’s and GM’s dated brand strategy must go.
There will be immediate and long terms savings goals from factory/management consolidation of these many brands. Since a lot of the brand consolidation mentioned revolves around brands that each sell the same products under different brand name banners the consolidation should be common sense and is long overdue.
In addition to those mentioned steps GM must go through its line up and cut underperformers from production, do you really need 5 types of GMC Yukon’s to choose from? A faster switch to flex fuel automobiles and hybrid power trains will lift the company and boost sales, but GM must also cut most of its behemoth SUVs from the lineup to focus on fuel efficient crossovers. The changes we have experienced with gas prices and the automotive market are here to stay, it is time GM realized that.
I believe if all of the consolidation steps above are taken and GM invests in those core brands and introduces new products while streamlining factories and duplicative management that they will ultimately become a stronger corporation than even Toyota is today.