Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

GM News, New Models and Market Share



  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    edited January 2013
    And, once again I'll post a comment from the Dependability Study...

    "Consumer perceptions of vehicle quality and dependability are often based on historical experiences or anecdotes and may be out of line with the current reality. Consumers should gather as much information as they can on the latest models from a variety of sources to make an informed decision."
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 9,938
    edited January 2013
    Obviously. They're saying you can't always tell how a current car can be from a previous one.

    I've been saying that all along. ;)
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    What it's also saying is perceptions from previous ownership experiences can weigh into evaluations on current models.

    Example: If your previous minivan had a dozen cup holders and your new sedan only has four, that could be viewed AND reported as a problem in the sedan.

    I don't think anyone is suggesting the surveys are trash, but folks need to understand the basis for the surveys, and how the data is compiled and ranked.

    A highly rated car is probably going to be a good car, and a poorly rated vehicle is probably going to have some unhappy owners. Other than that, I wouldn't put place too much reliance on how the vehicles rank individually in a listing of top to bottom, good to bad, etc.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,159
    The thing is - there is NO valid statistical and bulletproof way to know how realible cars are. Even if the manufacturers were to give out their own proprietary information, they might measure it differently from one to the other.

    Yet some reasonable statistical yet imperfect data is better than no data. And JDP and CR are going to be better (not perfect, but better) than the anecdotes of your Aunt Agnes who had her 2008 Carslam Broughm last 250K miles, or your son Sloppy whose engine blew up on his brand new 2012 Punkweeny Racer.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    "Our goal is by the 2015 to '16 time frame to be single-A investment grade," Akerson said in a roundtable interview in advance of next week's North American International Auto Show in Detroit. "Ultimately we have to be profitable in everything we do."

    Akerson: 'We have to be profitable in everything we do' (Detroit News)
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    "We have the oldest portfolio in the industry in this country," Akerson said, a by-product of the bankruptcy-induced interruption in the company's spending on product development. That's in the past, now that GM expects to spend $8 billion annually to fund product development.

    "This is going to be a strong year for product introductions, not only in North America, but around the globe. In 2013 and '14 the sun will be at our backs. These will be good years not only domestically but in our international operations."

    But he added a caveat:

    "It would be foolish not to footnote that there seems to be a lot of macro-economic uncertainty out there," a reference to the New Year's Day tax fight in Washington and the looming budget and debt-ceiling wrangling coming within the next 60 days or so.

    Akerson expressed cautious optimism on the automaker's turnaround of its chronic money-losing operations in Europe, saying he sees "green shoots" of progress extending beyond already announced plant closings and 2,500 job cuts last year. Labor contracts are being reworked; assets are being closed or sold; and, in a distinct echo of Ford Motor Co., production will be matched to demand, not hope.

    The 64-year-old CEO also affirmed GM's alliance with PSA Peugeot Citroën of France; confirmed that GM is determined to place long-term bets on developing markets to build what he called a "rest-of-world manufacturing" presence; said GM is in discussions with the United Auto Workers union about lump-sum pension buyouts, He wouldn't comment further.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 9,938
    Example: If your previous minivan had a dozen cup holders and your new sedan only has four, that could be viewed AND reported as a problem in the sedan.

    I don't believe this in the slightest in a survey called 'dependability', but we can agree to disagree.
  • andres3andres3 Southern CAPosts: 9,661
    in paying back taxpayers every dollar.

    AIG is running commercials thanking tax payers for their support and telling them they made a profit off of them (then in the background is scheming to sue to (govt/you and I as taxpayers) for bailing them out when bankruptcy may have been more profitable longer term).

    I kinda hope they do sue because then they'll present credible arguments as to why bailouts are bad and ill advised.

    If GM on the other hand, does pay everything back.... people will say it wasn't a bailout, but the taxpayers made out with a profit (like some do about Chrysler's first bailout). I can steal all the money from your bank, and return it years later too. You might make a profit but I bet I can beat the profit you settle for in a bailout using that money to make money.
    Toy '16 Audi TTS quattro AWD, Commuter '16 Kia Optima LX 1.6 Turbo FWD, Wife's '17 VW Golf All-Track SE 4-Motion AWD
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    Well, you've identified the real problem with surveys such as this, which is the lack of explanation given as to what is and is not defined as a "problem".

    Really, any survey that leaves so much to the imagination isn't very useful to a buyer, but it does give some "oomph" to the sellers that can use the survey results to toot their horn.

    That's pretty much been my opinion of JD Powers for some time.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 9,938
    You know me, I don't let a survey sway me, but I don't think there's is a whole lot different than CR's. I mean, when the Juke goes from much-worse-than-average to much-better-than-average in one model year, one has to wonder just how different the 2012 is from the 2011--certainly not much from what meets the eye.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    More problems in a model twice as old, is that a big surprise?
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 9,938
    edited January 2013
    In forty years of perusing the mag, don't ever remember a change like that. Truly.

    "Twice as old"= twelve months.
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    edited January 2013
    The one thing CR has going for it is its funding source.

    While I sometimes sense a feeling of bias in some of CR's reviews, at least I'm not worried too much by the researchers being directly influenced by the manufacturer's payments to the reviewers.

    OTOH, this is from ...

    J.D. Power and Associates industry benchmarking studies generally are not funded by the companies that are measured. The company's syndicated studies are funded and owned by the company and based on the aggregated responses of consumer perceptions of product quality and customer satisfaction--not the opinions of J.D. Power and Associates. After the study results are published, manufacturers, retailers, suppliers, and other industry participants can choose whether or not to purchase the study. Ownership of study data is key to the company's independence and unbiased position. This third-party perspective enables J.D. Power and Associates to provide clients and consumers with credible and clear feedback. Although J.D. Power and Associates does conduct custom research for many clients to help drive quality and customer satisfaction improvement, results of this type of proprietary research are owned by the clients that commission the research and the results are not made available to the public.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,625
    edited January 2013
    Didn't I mention this was a dog-of-a tag line for Chevy? Looks like the execs read some of my posts! :blush:

    "Chevy Runs Deep," the previous tagline was ushered in by former marketing chief Joel Ewanick and U.S. agency Goodby Silverstein & Partners. Ewanick brought in the Omnicom shop after he tossed aside longtime Campbell-Ewald and Publicis, and they unveiled the tag during the World Series in 2010. GM was immediately met with wide criticism from car buffs who claimed that "Chevy Runs Deep" lacked substance.

    Jeff Goodby, one of the partners at Goodby, came to the tagline's defense, predicting that it would eventually have legs. Despite continued criticism and a global review, GM said in October of 2011 that it was sticking by its choice. But a year later, amid slips in market share and following the ouster of Ewanick, GM was openly announcing the possibility of axing it.

    "We might transition," Chris Perry, Chevrolet's VP-marketing, told Ad Age sibling publication Automotive News in October of 2012.

    Let's see how long "Find New Roads" lasts. Sounds like a Bimmer ad!

    Burying "Chevy Runs Deep" comes at a time when General Motors is focused on markets like India and Russia, and market share for its largest brand, Chevy, has been slipping. It's also been cutting marketing spending. Domestically, GM spent $1.18 billion during the first three quarters of 2012 compared with $1.30 billion during the same period in 2011 -- a 9.3 percent decline, according to Kantar Media. The marketing spending on Chevy for the first nine months of 2012 was $663 million, down from $746 million, an 11 percent decline, according to Kantar Media.

    So how long can we expect "Find New Roads" to stay intact? Batey has asked Mary Barra and Ed Welburn, GM's heads of product development and design, respectively, to help with making the theme a part of company culture going forward. Unlike those taglines that have come and gone, he predicts this one will stick around for at least a decade.

    Chevy sure "Ran Deep", alright! :lemon: :lemon:

    Here's my Chevy tag line: "Drive One". But who am I?? ;)

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    Ok, I'm sure I can come up with a better marketing tagline for GM. How about "Oh, what a feel..." no wait...Ok, I've got it, "Zoom..."...wait, no...maybe "It's what makes..."....naah, what about "Have you driven a....", maybe "The Ultimate...", this is really hard. :shades:

    Actually, I do have hopes for Chevy's new tagline. It's got potential if they back it right. Here's a hint GM: make it about the cars.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,159
    In forty years of perusing the mag, don't ever remember a change like that. Truly.

    If you read one of my recent posts, it makes complete sense for CR:

    1 - vehicle is older
    2 - rating is a *relative* comparison to the other vehicles of that year. If other vehicles of a different year are more or less reliable, the relative rating can change. Also, a vehicle could have parts that tend to fail at 12 or 15 months.

    Your comment seems to think that the rating says a vehicle has twice as many problems a year later, and that's not the case.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,159
    After the study results are published, manufacturers, retailers, suppliers, and other industry participants can choose whether or not to purchase the study.

    That's called selective data, and is totally unscientific. Sort of like drugmakers publishing the good test results, and withholding the bad test results.
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    edited January 2013
    Yes, I'd like to see the results of a JD Power survey done on Al Capone's Chicago operations back in the 20-30's.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 9,938
    edited January 2013
    I would buy that thinking about Power's results...if they published nothing bad about any of the makers. Did they think up front that Audi, BMW, VW, Subaru, Nissan, and Mini wouldn't buy their results but only Chevrolet and Toyota and some others would?

    And as far as the Juke goes, I'll stand by this statement: in forty years of looking at CR's reliability results, I've never seen this kind of difference. This has to be an example of at least some sample error. That's OK, it's inevitable. Even CR seemed a little embarrassed about it as in the text about the Juke, all they said was "Reliability should be average", with no comment whatsoever about the meteoric (seriously) difference between '11 and '12.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 9,938
    The new Chevy tag line is a dog, like the last one.

    I bet even people 30 and under have heard of "See the your Chevrolet".

    Why not do an updated version? Today's pop stars...vary them for different commercials. Show some of the heritage cars...and they arguably have the best heritage out there...along with new product.

    Seems like a no-brainer to me. Re-invent the wheel, when it's apparent what has worked previously? Loved their magazine ads, too, with a family next to their shiny Chevy at a historic or other vacation spot in the U.S.
Sign In or Register to comment.