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.
Options

GM News, New Models and Market Share

1100101103105106631

Comments

  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The General Motors Corp. may drop the Pontiac and GMC brands as a way to cut costs,

    May? May drop? They absolutely SHOULD drop Pontiac, GMC AND Buick too! When are they gonna get it, that having 8 car lines is what has been their nemesis all along! They need to make about 8 CARS, not have 8 car LINES. Maybe then they could focus all their resources on the cars they make, in 2 brands, and make them so well, and competitively, that they can be great again. It's just hard to give up that perceived dominant size of having all those brands, but it has killed them. Here's what I think should remain......

    CADILLAC - and add a Cadillac Enclave to the lineup to replace the SRX, drop Buick.

    CHEVROLET and sell the Corvette and Chevy Trucks there.

    GMC should be all heavy duty trucks as they are now, but not sell light duty trucks anymore.

    That should be the new GM, in the US anyway. I pretend not to know what to do about GM in the rest of the world, I guess if they're profitable in Asia, Southeast Asia and Europe, they should continue operations there as they are.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    scores a 78 (better than average) where 100 is avg on one test and scores a 51 on the other test (much better than avg). It might be able to get the Smart car that did a 420 off of a Mercedes sedan, to do a 540. About 4100 lbs empty. 27 gallon tank.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    I found them economical enough to compete with the latest and greatest from Chrysler and Ford. My first one was used on S. Fl to W.N.C. on numerous vacations, getting 23 trip mileage with the air on. 621 mile range is near tops in any class of vehicle. My dad has a new Pacifica with a smaller 4.0 V6 and he gets 24 trip mileage with 25 years newer tech in a smaller vehicle. The new Large Ford Crossover is called 'amazing' on tv for getting 24 hwy. My last trip was 22.7 mpg with 300 city miles out of 1050 total. Both of my Astros have rear a/c and after owning the first one in S. Fl. from '90 to '94, I had a good enough experience to get another, only 14" longer with captains chairs in middle row. The first one ('87) still got mpg in the 20's with 187k miles on it when I sold it in Nov 2008. It still had no leaks and didn't eat any parts. I never added trans fluid in the near 19 years I drove it. I quit charging the a/c around 2003 when I had 3 other vehicles with air. Not a big deal in E.C. Indiana. We may have the dryest climate E. of the Mississippi. As far as accidents, the first one got hit in the back bumper twice and we backed into poles 2-3 times. A $55 used bumper and a can of white spray paint was required when the back bumper took out a basketball pole but the rear doors couldn't swing out above the bumper. I broke a RR tie mounted vertical with the L front once. Needed a spindle and a steering gearbox as the tire took most of the hit. I was making a sharp left in a downpour. That was the only time we hit something in one. The new one has been hit 4 times while parked in lots. A lead foot driver who only drives 4 miles to a store as avg use will average 14 mpg in winter. I think my dad's '08 Pacifica gets 15 doing that in S. Fl.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    My dad has a new Pacifica with a smaller 4.0 V6 and he gets 24 trip mileage with 25 years newer tech in a smaller vehicle.

    From the specs I've seen, an '08 AWD Pacifica weighs about 300-400lbs more than a '98 Astro 2wd LT which had an EPA rating of 15/19, 16/20 2wd (you got exceptional mileage if you were getting 23 or so), plus the Pacifica has 60 more HP. Chrysler's have generally been below average regarding fuel economy.

    The Ford Flex is not small and also weighs in the 4800lb range with options.
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    That's what I figured. Maybe because of the environment we are currently in, I just can't see this car sales model being successful.

    I think Fiat buying Saturn is the best option. It gives them 2-3 years to get their cars certified and they can buy a few Chrysler plants to help support the operation. At least folks have heard of Fiat.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    If you've not noticed, Buick is only three vehicles any more. The brand sells well in China, so it's not getting axed in a million years.

    So what if GM has a few niche brands instead of major lines? BMW has Mini, with a grand total of two vehicles and does very well, considering.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I am sure China will keep the Buick line and just ship the few we sell from the factory in Shanghai. :blush:
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    Yes! Could you imagine if they spent the money they are spending now, but on much much few cars!!? Well, the cars would stunning!! Awesome!! Even cutting brands, cutting costs will benefit much more cash flow, more bang for the buck. They could begin to really focus on quality and refinement, which is crucial, and yet something they put lower on their list of priorities. This could all equal having each car they have feel solid and feel like its had some thought put into each part of the car. From a switch all the way to the revamped engine. This could leave each car in their smaller line up to have more options and opportunity, all while being practical and efficient. Do things right from the start and do skimp-(within reason), you will have yourself a longer lasting, more attractive package.
    It is like the Saturn Aura for example, a nicer car, but I am not sure it was taken to the level that they had intended on taking it to. It sorta plateaued. More like a good start, but not quite there. If they had taken it to the level they wanted, perhaps selling more.... BUT, Wait there are so many other GM cars out there.... Maybe I don't want an Aura. lol.

    Do it GM, Downsize, and give us what we all want!!
  • stewpidasostewpidaso Member Posts: 45
    alot of dealerships are chevy exclusive or pontiac, buick & gmc exlusive & cadillac seams to mostly be on their own aswell. It makes sense to me to get rid of pontiac, buick & gmc altogether. gm has way to many dealers this business model seems to work well for honda/acura, toyota/lexus & nissan/infiniti. gm needs to focus on keeping it simple chevrolet/cadillac and trim their dealerships down. As for overseas if buick is a hot seller keep it over there if it works. kiss

    what's gonna happen to all these dealerships that go outta biz?
  • stewpidasostewpidaso Member Posts: 45
    I was just thinking if dodge ends up going down the same road as AMC. The 2009 dodge challenger srt8 would be quite a collector car in the future. my $.02
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    The Flex outweighs the Astro by 283 lbs. 2wd to fwd comparison. fwd Pacifica is 412 lbs more than Astro, and 10 inches and 2 inches wider longer too. Pacifica has 60 more HP but only 12 more ft lbs of Torque. Astro has nearly 3000 lbs more towing capacity and is nearly 7-10 inches taller than Pacifica.
    Flex and pacifica have better tires, less frontal area, more aero designs, smaller engines, less towing capability, smaller gas tanks, weigh only 3-400 lbs more and get 1 more mpg with 2008 technology going up against 1985 technology. That is why their mileage is so outstanding.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    he Flex outweighs the Astro by 283 lbs. 2wd to fwd comparison. fwd Pacifica is 412 lbs more than Astro, and 10 inches and 2 inches wider longer too. Pacifica has 60 more HP but only 12 more ft lbs of Torque. Astro has nearly 3000 lbs more towing capacity and is nearly 7-10 inches taller than Pacifica.
    Flex and pacifica have better tires, less frontal area, more aero designs, smaller engines, less towing capability, smaller gas tanks, weigh only 3-400 lbs more and get 1 more mpg with 2008 technology going up against 1985 technology. That is why their mileage is so outstanding.


    Going by what you've averaged s in an Astro to the EPA ratings of a Flex is far from a scientific comparison. EPA ratings show 24 hwy for a Flex and 20 for an 87 Astro. Maybe if you drove a Flex the same way you drove your Astro on the same trip under the same conditions, you would get 27mpg. Who knows. Not to mention newer vehicles have much more stringent pollution requirements to deal with, it's far from an apples to apples comparison. All I can add is I've known one person that had a '98 AWD Safari and he was happy to get 18mpg on the hwy (which is the EPA rating). That's about what I get with my '07 4wd/awd Expedition that weighs 1500lbs more and has and additional 100+HP and 100+ft/lbs of torque and is rated to tow around 3000lbs more.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Will we ever get a straight answer or a piece of news we can count on from the executives at GM?

    GM to keep GMC, Pontiac; no plans to quicken dealer consolidation

    April 16, 2009 - 3:26 pm ET
    UPDATED: 4/16/09 4:48 p.m. ET

    DETROIT -- A senior General Motors executive today denied reports that President Barack Obama's automotive task force has pressured the automaker to dump GMC and Pontiac.

    Company sales chief Mark LaNeve also denied rumors that GM plans to terminate the franchise agreements of poorly performing dealers before June 1 to accelerate its dealership consolidation campaign.

    "The strategy we laid out for you [in February] is still the strategy," LaNeve, GM's vice president of vehicle sales, service and marketing, said today in an interview with Automotive News.

    "Are we working it, tweaking it, examining every aspect of it? Yes, but nothing has changed with our strategy," he said. Reports that "GMC is going away are just unfounded, unsubstantiated and untrue," LaNeve said.

    ......LaNeve said. "They're not pressuring us to give up on anything," he said. "Buick and GMC are very profitable brands, and we have plans to make them even more profitable."


    http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090416/ANA02/904169978/1229-
    (registration link)

    So which is it guys? Is the left hand talking to the right over at the General, or is there a major communications gap there?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    If Buick and GMC are profitable brands then which brands are NOT profitable? Are they saying Chevy should be dumped?

    It is astonishing that a company as big and screwed up as GM, after almost six months of begging at the trough, STILL can't get its story straight.

    Oh, wait, that's right -- they are really screwed up! :P
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Maybe Fritz and Mark could go get coffee, and they could sort out which of the lies are just SO OBVIOUS that they shouldn't bother using them.....

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    "The strategy we laid out for you [in February] is still the strategy," LaNeve, GM's vice president of vehicle sales, service and marketing, said today in an interview with Automotive News.

    That's the biggest problem right there. They have fewer than 45 days, had their CEO forced out, and apparently, it hasn't gotten through yet that that plan IS NOT VIABLE!!!

    LaNeve said. "They're not pressuring us to give up on anything," he said. "Buick and GMC are very profitable brands, and we have plans to make them even more profitable."

    If they're so profitable, why did you guys need multiple bailouts? Maybe Chevy and Caddy are not profitable? We know Hummer, Saturn, and Saab weren't. OH, that's right, EVERYTHING would be profitable if it wasn't for those durn UAW guys holding you to the contract you agreed to, instead of accepting $5 an hour, and pension in the form of GM stock that's about to be wiped out.

    GM deserves to die. It's Darwinism in action...too stupid to survive.
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    Wow!! This is total BULL!! It truly is. That is fine to have this plan, but to act like they have been doing nothing wrong is another issue!! You simply cannot have it both ways, act like you are going to be pro-active, and yet not be open to any changes, painful or not. HELLO? GM, you awake? GM having this attitude will not only keep people from buying from your company, but it will tick people off!! How many more chances are we going to give you to do the right thing. Seriously!! You have our bail out money, and you cannot even spend that right. You keep running full force, sucking every dime, while your executives just keep on rakin in the dough!

    Yeah, your real American, you represent the American people right? I think you have just turned your back on us, and our opinion or hand out does count! At least be honest with us, don't lie to us. Suck it up! Your company should be ashamed of its self. It is not the economy that did this to your company, its your own actions that sooner or later would have caught up with you. Bad economy or Not. Living the high life? While being a second away from bankruptcy? That must feel real good! Living life on the edge.

    You keep messing with us, and you will scare people off for years to come. Remember word of mouth can be either good or bad for your company, and trust me, people do not forget things like this. It will already haunt your company years later, even if your company is back on its feet. It is bad enough people are realizing your competitors are offering much more for their money.

    Your not sorry, you've been doing right since day one right?
    Desperate?

    Are we mad at you GM? .....?
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    http://www.leftlanenews.com/gm-chrysler-to-receive-more-federal-loans.html#comme- nts

    More bailout money please! No signs of progress, just a bunch of talk IMO and yet these goons get more $$$. :mad:

    What a joke
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    I read this article about Microsoft and Apple. See any parallels with Honda/Toyota and GM/Chrysler?:

    "PC makers in the Windows camp have done everything possible to make their products progressively worse by cutting corners to save pennies per unit and boost sales volume. There's good reason Apple is seeing healthy profits while grabbing market share. It refuses to budge on quality and so charges a higher price."
  • fho2008fho2008 Member Posts: 393
    Didn't read the article, but if it's true, right on. Used to be a die hard GM guy, buy American, (had Fords also) now, VW for me.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,923
    Best Buy does SUCK for lack of a better word.

    They are dishonest, dishonorable, lack customer service or appreciation, and have inferior products for high prices.

    Sort of like the GM/Chrysler business model.

    So expect Best Buy to go the way of Good Guys, Tweeter, and Circuit City. Though Good Guys and Tweeter were good business, Circuit City sucked too just like Best Buy.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Very interesting article on Ford's marketing approach for the Fiesta in the US. Huge kudos to show that a US car company CAN be bold and innovative. Mulalley appears to be doing a hell of a job and I hope he is successful:

    http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/04/how-the-fiesta.html

    Ford recently handed 100 Fiestas to 100 people selected from 4,000 applicants. These "agents" -- that's what Ford calls them -- get to use the cars for six months in exchange for completing monthly "missions" with different themes. They'll share their experiences through YouTube, Flickr, Facebook and Twitter accounts Ford created for the campaign.
    ....
    "We've told them to be completely honest -- that's the only way it's going to work," Monty told us. "We won't tell them what to say, nor will we censor or edit any of their content."
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    ".....They have fewer than 45 days, had their CEO forced out, and apparently, it hasn't gotten through yet that that plan IS NOT VIABLE!!! "

    I don't think that this plan is necessarily the problem at this point. THE problem is not having an agreement w/ the unions and bondholders. THIS agreement (when it's done) is the key to improving cash flow, not the brands. They have already announced plans to cut the 1700 dealers they were going to drop in 5 years THIS year. Deals for Saturn, Hummer, and Saab appear to be near, yet no details.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    The thing is, it isn't so much the unions as it is the bondholders. They don't want to budge, they don't want worthless GM stock in exchange....basically, they want their money. Considering the UAW managed to make a deal with Ford, they'd probably make a deal with GM too, if GM showed any possibilities of being viable. As it stands now though, it makes more sense for them to wait too, and end up with stock in "NewGM" whatever that ends up being. Why? Because if they make a deal now, and end up with GM stock, and then the bondholders continue to balk, GM ends up in Ch11 anyway, and the UAW ends up with worthless GM equities that have already been wiped out.

    Then again, that's the difference...Ford looks like it's going to be a going concern. GM, on the other hand...it's all up to the bondholders right now. Everything awaits them. And they get paid first in a liquidation, and they know it, so it isn't really in their interests to make a deal anyway, since they know they'll get paid when "BadGM" liquidates.

    Might have been a bad move to publicize the "microwave" bankruptcy plan.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    ".....They don't want to budge, they don't want worthless GM stock in exchange...."

    But some of the bondholders stand to gain by bankruptcy. They will get a full payout from AIG (via US), and then get whatever the BK judge gives them on top. No incentive to negotiate
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    I don't like best buy but I found they were the best place to get a microhood.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    using reg gas: I have a 4x4 ext cab that I can sometimes get 1 more than the 18 EPA hwy on trips to FL. The Astro can get 4-5 over EPA hwy. My Sonoma gets 5-6 over EPA city or hwy. My Buick used to get EPA hwy (27) on my work commute.

    I used to borrow the lab cars at work for long trips. one Aurora was assigned to a coworker for about 6 mos and he was getting 21 mpg with it and turned it back in. I got it and found about 18 psi in the tires and 3.5 L engine was about 2.5 qts low on oil. I filled them all back up and got 30 mpg on that trip with it. I put rainx on the windshield but I don't know if that helps.
  • torque_rtorque_r Member Posts: 500
    Hyundai would buy Buick from GM and turn it into its luxury arm, supply its dealers with Genesis sedans and the upcoming ultra-luxurious Equus. And Boom! You have a buick that is worthy of its name, something GM can never do for Buick, even if they kept it alive.
    The Genesis and Equus are exactly what Buick should be, big refined luxo-cruisers. How ironic is that?
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    I thought I said something along those lines? :shades:
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    They have already announced plans to cut the 1700 dealers they were going to drop in 5 years

    That is one of the problems. They are probably twice the size they need to be. Toyota sells almost the same number of vehicles on about 30% of the total dealers. GM cutting 1700 dealers represents only about 30% of the total, OVER 5 YEARS! That is NOT an aggressive plan. It is a slow incremental plan. Problem is, GM still doesn't get it. They don't have time for slow and incremental any longer.
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,709
    aint that the truth. I think that GM still thinks it's too big to fail. The car-fairy is going to swoop in(someone like Bill Gates)and just spill about $15B every 3 or 4 months just because their huge bland pick-em-up trucks and SUV's are the real thing. Or something like that. Bonk-bonk on your noggin's GM, anyhome home for thinking about survival?

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    aint that the truth. I think that GM still thinks it's too big to fail.

    It's funny. Way back in about December, I posted that the GM plans are a series of optimistic assumptions, each of which must occur for them to make themselves successful. An unlikely situation. I even challenged 62vette (hope he's ok) on this.

    So months later the US government gets GM's "viability plan". And the US government says that GM's plan is too optimistic, not realistic. Anybody could see this. Except the Board of Directors and Wagoner. Which is why he is gone and they will be leaving.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    They have been breathing this ether for so long now, that they can't comprehend the gravity of their situation. That elephant is just too big to tap dance. And it may mean death to them, as catastrophic as that sounds.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    ".....You have a buick that is worthy of its name, something GM can never do for Buick, even if they kept it alive."

    What makes you say that? They did it before, they can do it again.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    Maybe I should restate it. They are going to rid themselves of the 1700 dealers at the end of this year. 1700 was the total number they had planned on dropping in 5 years.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Buick is mostly gone the way of Oldsmobile. Let me illustrate:

    Step 1: Legacy brands have been selling well - so lets rename them ALL.
    step 2: Change every model to be the car we think they should want, rather than the what they have been briskly buying.
    Step 3: Badge engineer everything GM makes so that Buick sells Minivans & SUVs just like the other 3 div isions, even tho no Buick customer is interested in them.

    This is not ur father's Buick. Drop the brand. Get it over with.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    Sadly, I thought GM had Oldsmobile just about right, when they finally pulled the plug. I thought the Alero, Intrigue, and Aurora were all good looking cars. The new Bravada also seemed like a noble effort, although the Silhouette minivan was a weak link...as were all of GM's minivan efforts at the time.

    The Alero and Intrigue especially seemed like light years ahead of the Calais and the old W-body Cutlass Supreme. The Olds 88 was a pretty decent car to begin with though, so maybe the Aurora wasn't that big of a leap.

    My Dad has an '03 Regal LS, and it's not a horrible car. Build quality is kinda sloppy, and the interior looks a bit low rent for what I think a Buick should be. But it's been reliable. I think the LaCrosse is a big improvement, in terms of interior quality and fit and finish. However, I actually preferred the style of the Century and Regal.

    Similarly, the Lucerne seems like a better put-together car than the LeSabre was, and the interior seems a higher quality. But in this case, I just don't like the name. I think "LeSabre" still had some name equity in it, and they should just have kept calling it that.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Despite Ch. 11 threat, GM bondholders don't blink

    April 20, 2009 - 12:01 am ET

    General Motors' June 1 deadline to achieve a clean balance sheet — or face bankruptcy — was intended to give the company more leverage over unsecured bondholders. Yet negotiations still haven't budged.

    Gridlock
    General Motors has been unable to negotiate concessions from its stakeholders.
    • Bondholders: Don't want to accept GM stock as payment for $28 billion in unsecured debt.
    • UAW: Has not allowed GM to halve a $20 billion debt owed to the union's retiree health care fund.

    .....On Tuesday, April 14, Chairman Kent Kresa told Dow Jones: "We have some deadlines rapidly approaching, and the probabilities are decreasing that we can do [this] outside of bankruptcy."

    CEO Fritz Henderson also struck an urgent note, telling the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. last week that GM hoped to make a deal out of court while preparing for a possible filing.

    .....The auto task force appears to be more open to bankruptcy than GM, taking the view that a managed Chapter 11 is the best option, sources who were not identified told The Wall Street Journal on April 10.

    .....Two additional factors have raised the odds of bankruptcy, wrote JPMorgan analyst Himanshu Patel in a report published April 13.

    First, Patel said, Henderson is less opposed to bankruptcy than Wagoner was. Second, the task force has likely realized that GM's balance sheet is in worse shape than it had thought. So the administration realizes it will have to restructure its own loans to the automaker, the analyst wrote.

    .....The good GM — which presumably would include healthy assets such as the Cadillac and Chevrolet brands — would emerge from U.S. Bankruptcy Court with a clean balance sheet. But it's still a high-risk plan, said Morningstar's Whiston.

    "GM could be a formidable company," he said. "The scary thing is you don't know if GM would come out of bankruptcy. What if consumers refuse to go into its showroom? Then it'll be dead."


    http://www.autonews.com/article/20090420/ANA03/304209966/1128
    (registration link)

    They are never going to get the bondholders and UAW to go along enough to make the difference in the next 40 days. That's not even 6 weeks. They should just go ahead with the good GM-bad GM plan right now and hit the bankruptcy court.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Bankruptcy fears rattle dealers

    Retailers get ready for GM and Chrysler filings


    Many GM and Chrysler dealers are protecting themselves by cutting inventory and factory orders. GM and Chrysler desperately need orders, but dealers are holding back because the automakers are in such bad shape.

    .....In an interview, Mark LaNeve, GM North America vice president of vehicle sales, service and marketing, said dealer orders are down substantially. He did not give a specific figure but said they roughly matched GM's decline in production. GM's first-quarter production plummeted 58.0 percent compared with the first quarter of 2008.

    "A lot of dealers are attempting to reduce inventory," LaNeve said. "I don't believe that's really unique to GM."

    GM's days supply remains too high, he said. On April 1, GM had a 122-day supply. Sixty days is considered the industry target.


    http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090420/ANA06/304209968/1197-
    (registration link)

    This is a process that can only snowball in my view. The bankruptcy approaches, customers drop off even further, more dealers stop ordering inventory, production needs to be cut back even more, until GM isn't producing any vehicles any more. That's why I think they have made a big mistake by drawing this out so long. They should have done a quick government-managed bankruptcy 6-9 months ago before everyone in America had the chance to get the idea that GM was a poisoned automaker where they shouldn't be shopping. Now the damage is done, and the forecasts of people turning away from bankrupt automakers get the chance to be self-fulfilling prophecies.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    There are two folks here at work that have already taken the hit and dumped their GM vehicles over the weekend. One of them traded his late model (2008) Silverado for a Toyota Tundra and the other traded his Buick Lacrosse for a new Maxima. GM has a very dim future around these parts...
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    ...but we told them so. But think of the upside. Lemko can probably buy the entire Buick brand at the liquidation. :shades:

    GM wouldn't be in this pickle if they had just:

    1. Listened to their customers
    2. Built what their customers wanted
    3. Sold their products at a profit

    Nothing out of the ordinary in the business world unless you're a global megacorp who can afford their very own herd of lobbyists. Somehow they think the rules change for them..largely because they've been trying to GET the rules changed for them. But somehow I think even Joe the Plumber, another one of those people who don't know to pay their taxes (gee, there's an AWFUL lot of them these days) knows to listen to his customers, sell them what THEY want rather than what he wants, and do business to make money on the product.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    Was the LaCrosse also an '08 model? Do you know why these two people traded in so soon? Is it because of the bankruptcy fears? Even though they probably took a bath at trade-in time, perhaps they thought they'd better get out now, before it gets worse?

    Still, it doesn't seem like a very financially prudent maneuver.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    I don't know what year the Lacrosse was but she was looking for a new car apparently since the announcements back in December of the possible bankruptcy. Her husband was apparently pushing her to sell it, but ever since the new Maxima came out, she has been oogling it. Oh, and she also mentioned the tax credit she'll be getting for buying a new vehicle this year.

    Now the other guy with the Silverado, I KNOW he is fed up with the bailouts and the whole bankruptcy talk. I've had numerous conversations about how foolish the whole situation has become. He also knows a few folks over at A123 in Watertown, MA who got screwed over by GM going to Korea for the batteries as well as investing in off shore programs with our tax money. :mad:

    ...Well, that and we have a couple of Tundra drivers (former D3 owners actually) here already who probably coaxed him into making the switch... But I know it's deeper than that.

    Still, there are some great deals out there, even companies that aren't at risk of bankruptcy so now is a great time to make the move before the depreciation hit increases.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I thought the name "Park Avenue" also had a lot of equity. Shoot, if the Lucerne CXS was called a Park Avenue Ultra, I might have gone for it over the Cadillac DTS just because of the name!
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I agree. I wouldn't go dumping my Cadillac DTS Performance in favor of a Mercedes S-Class just because I feared GM going bankrupt.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    Park Avenue's not bad, but I guess I always looked at that as more of a trim package than an actual model. At least, in its heyday. The 1991 Park Ave, which was the first year they dropped the "Electra" name, was pretty good for its time, and well-received. But then time passed it by, and the 1997-04 model, it seems, wasn't as highly regarded.

    Still, I like 'em.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Yes, GM's naming scheme is a huge problem. They need to switch back to simpler and less inane names. The Lucerne CXS should have been the only model offered(no V6 offered) and they should have named it Roadmaster or Park Avenue - because both are instantly known for being "The Big Luxo-Buick"

    No Park Avenue CXS or Ultra or anything... One model, one configuration, one name. Simplicity is good. Less costs to make, less buyer confusion, and it sends a clear message of "this is our best - take it or leave it. We don't care about fleet sales".

    edit: Literally just a name. No Buick even. Just "Roadmaster", for instance. They can put it wherever they want - or as I've suggested, move away from a dealership model to one like Mini has - build it and deliver it - everything under a GM badge.(Cadillac possibly excepted here).

    About this, though:
    "GM could be a formidable company," he said. "The scary thing is you don't know if GM would come out of bankruptcy. What if consumers refuse to go into its showroom? Then it'll be dead."

    YAY! More deals for me! Since I buy 3-4 year old cars anyways, the factory warranty is moot. But there will be a huge wad of good GM vehicles for cheap very soon. Their fault, so sorry - time to move on.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    They can put it wherever they want - or as I've suggested, move away from a dealership model to one like Mini has - build it and deliver it - everything under a GM badge.(Cadillac possibly excepted here).

    Now, that is not a bad idea!! A GM dealer who can sell you A Chevy, a GMC truck, a Buick (what's left of them), a Corvette..... and a Cadillac dealer who can sell you a luxury car..... I kind of like that.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Also, virtually no inventory on the lot - maybe 1-2 of each car, new. You want it, test drive the one there first and wait 2-4 weeks. Custom options to your order, too. People blow huge sums on a Mini, and I can't blame them one bit. If you want just A/C and the stability control and the better brakes and suspension, you should be able to get that without the leather, sunroof, and other idiocy. Or if you want it loaded, it really is loaded - to your exact color scheme and bits of chrome that you want.(note - Porsche also is fully customizable from the factory like this)

    See, people will gladly wait 2-4 weeks to get their own custom setup. Mini was genius with this move, because it gives them time to build the car(you can always order a Honda and wait, as well). The customer doesn't *mind* waiting and pays more in options as well.

    Less dealers, less inventory(most dealers make their money on service and used cars anyways - they don't WANT 100 cars in a back lot if they can help it. Win-win-win scenario.

    GM goes from being a dealership to more of an old-fashioned showroom(more like you'd see at an auto show).
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    which was the first year they dropped the "Electra" name, was pretty good for its time, and well-received. But then time passed it by, and the 1997-04 model

    The only model that real car-men like that's named Electra is - (ta-da) Carmen Electra. :D Vroom, vroom! :blush:
Sign In or Register to comment.