Lutz Responds to GM Minivan Debacle

[Flybrian]

December 07, 2006

Whither the Minivan?

By Bob Lutz

GM Vice Chairman

Lots of minivan talk going on… let me just make one thing clear: Nobody said GM is getting out of the minivan business forever. We simply pulled a minivan option out of the running for one of our archtectures. We reserve the right to initiate whatever future product programs we feel the market desires, up to and including new generations of minivans if we deem them necessary and desirable.

That’s really the key to everything, of course: the market. And we think the case for another new entry at this point in a market is trending away from minivans just doesn't make a lot of sense.

Look, the minivan was a great idea, and a fine product. It pulled Chrysler out of the frying pan during some desperate times. But obviously in recent years a stigma has attached itself to the minivan and won’t let go. Same thing happened to station wagons in this country before the minivan came along.

And beyond that stigma, the minivan is hurt by the many other choices available to customers. SUVs have been conquesting minivan sales for years, and now crossovers will take even more.

Our new trio of crossover utilities — the GMC Acadia, Saturn Outlook and Buick Enclave — should not be compared to minivans; they are a totally different animal. But do we expect them to take sales from minivans? Absolutely. Just like we expect them to take sales from traditional SUVs.

These vehicles can carry eight people comfortably, have plenty of hauling space, and have a fuel-efficient 275-hp V6. And they have better road manners and vehicle dynamics than any minivan I’ve ever driven. Not that I’m comparing. But if I were, I know what would win!

These three crossovers will do nicely in the market for us, I believe, and, for now, we don’t see the need to offer minivans any longer, for many reasons. Do you?

Posted by Lutz on December 7, 2006 04:13 PM

-----------------

C&Gers, make your voices heard by responding on the FastLane blogs:

Wither the Minivan?

[regfootball]

eggs many.

baskets, one.

nice arguments, but look at how many odysseys and siennas and caravans sell.

this is likely more to do with not having $$$$$ to develop the model than WANTING to exit the market, I suspect.

I guess Lutz' wife never had a van with power sliding doors and hatch. That first time a new mom works that keyfob on a rainy day and not have to to touch the hatch or doors.......he probably never had kids in daycare either....LOL

I still think it wouldn't be hard for GM to sell 100,000 vans a year. If it were competitive.

We'll chase 30,000 kappas a year but can't make a case for a proven people hauler......

Edited December 8, 2006 by regfootball

[ellives]

eggs many.

baskets, one.

nice arguments, but look at how many odysseys and siennas and caravans sell.

this is likely more to do with not having $$$$$ to develop the model than WANTING to exit the market, I suspect.

I guess Lutz' wife never had a van with power sliding doors and hatch.  That first time a new mom works that keyfob on a rainy day and not have to to touch the hatch or doors.......he probably never had kids in daycare either....LOL

I still think it wouldn't be hard for GM to sell 100,000 vans a year.  If it were competitive.

We'll chase 30,000 kappas a year but can't make a case for a proven people hauler......

225280[/snapback]

I think he made a reasonable case. There are only so many dollars to develop products. He is basically saying there are top quality products on the market today in the Siennas and Odysseys so putting new money into an already covered segment doesn't make sense when there are new segments where there is market opportunity so why not invest in those and have a better opportunity to make the money back.

[ocnblu]

Uncle Bob always reads my mind. :AH-HA_wink:

[dford]

So by Bob's logic, Toyota shouldn't waste its time and money on the Tundra, since the Big 3 have the segment covered???? Get real. I guess GM should give up on the Camaro too, Ford's got it covered. Give up on the Malibu too, Toyota's got it covered.

GM execs are afraid that they don't have the engineering chops to develop a competitive minivan, to they gave up. How hard is it to develop a box on wheels? Even Hyundai figured it out.

[ellives]

So by Bob's logic, Toyota shouldn't waste its time and money on the Tundra, since the Big 3 have the segment covered???? Get real. I guess GM should give up on the Camaro too, Ford's got it covered. Give up on the Malibu too, Toyota's got it covered.

GM execs are afraid that they don't have the engineering chops to develop a competitive minivan, to they gave up. How hard is it to develop a box on wheels? Even Hyundai figured it out.

225298[/snapback]

"don't have the engineering chops....?" It's time for YOU to get real. Any company that can build a Z06 for the price they sell for can build anything.

Obviously you didn't understand the point of the article. The mini-van is a declining market so why chase a declining market when there are growth segments to pursue?

[SimonDavid]

So by Bob's logic, Toyota shouldn't waste its time and money on the Tundra, since the Big 3 have the segment covered???? Get real. I guess GM should give up on the Camaro too, Ford's got it covered. Give up on the Malibu too, Toyota's got it covered.

GM execs are afraid that they don't have the engineering chops to develop a competitive minivan, to they gave up. How hard is it to develop a box on wheels? Even Hyundai figured it out.

225298[/snapback]

I totally agree

anyway if they really are so hard up for cash why not just import this :

Sure it's based on the old Venture, but it's a nice evolution. and future development of it will probably be paid for by profits generated within China.

So then you have

Aveo, Astra, RWD Pontiac and a minivan as imported niche products

[ZL-1]

Lots of minivan talk going on… let me just make one thing clear: Nobody said GM is getting out of the minivan business forever. We simply pulled a minivan option out of the running for one of our archtectures.

225264[/snapback]

This means they're evaluating other options.

These three crossovers will do nicely in the market for us, I believe, and, for now, we don’t see the need to offer minivans any longer, for many reasons. Do you?

225264[/snapback]

This means they're pulling out of the minivan market for an indefinite period of time.

Perhaps importing a future minivan from GMDAT and/or Europe is something that is under evaluation. An EpsilonII-derived S-Max competitor could find volume in Opel plus Saturn iterations, and some GMDAT thing could be marketed as a global Chevrolet.

Or maybe they are throwing the towel.

[Dragon]

So by Bob's logic, Toyota shouldn't waste its time and money on the Tundra, since the Big 3 have the segment covered???? Get real. I guess GM should give up on the Camaro too, Ford's got it covered. Give up on the Malibu too, Toyota's got it covered.

the difference is, right now Toyota has goodwill in the market (desereved or not), while GM doesn't

[griff7774]

So some of you are saying GM should build minivan just so they compete. Are you going to miss having GM minivan that much? How many of you actully own or dive minivans?

[Drew Dowdell]

It would be one thing if GM was making minivans like Chrysler, but does anyone really miss the dustbusters? Will anyone really miss the current U-boats?

Lutz is right, there is little to no room left for mini-van growth. They have the same stigma as wagons did in 1992.

[griff7774]

It would be one thing if GM was making minivans like Chrysler, but does anyone really miss the dustbusters? Will anyone really miss the current U-boats?

Lutz is right, there is little to no room left for mini-van growth. They have the same stigma as wagons did in 1992.

225324[/snapback]

Amen

[Drew Dowdell]

More to the point, it's DCX that should be worried about minivans. Sure they make the top seller, but that also means they have the furthest to fall. They need to have an alternative in place to have a nice soft landing.

[Cadillacfan]

It's not a new occurance that the minivan segment has been cooling off for a while and the companies that don't have competitive vans and aren't doing so hot right now (GM and Ford) are looking at priority segments that they need to devote money to in order to make profits. Crossovers and mid-size sedans. It's a wise decision on both companies to drop out. When the segment picks up again, they have the platforms to do it.. so it's not like they won't be completely unprepared.

[z28luvr01]

GM's problem is going to be marketing the Lambdas to people who insist they need a minivan. They fell flat on their face trying to convince people that the Colorado's I5 was every bit as good as a V6. In this era of $3/gal. gas, SUV-like vehicles have as much of a stigma as the minivan or the station wagon. The Lambdas look like great vehicles, but I think they'll be a hard sell to minivan buyers.

[G. David Felt]

GM's problem is going to be marketing the Lambdas to people who insist they need a minivan. They fell flat on their face trying to convince people that the Colorado's I5 was every bit as good as a V6. In this era of $3/gal. gas, SUV-like vehicles have as much of a stigma as the minivan or the station wagon. The Lambdas look like great vehicles, but I think they'll be a hard sell to minivan buyers.

225338[/snapback]

Hat to say it, but while over all you are right on the stigma's. Question to ask is do we need the cheap Minivan Buyers?

Most minivan buyers maker less than 45,000 a year and while DCX has the bulk of the segment, that segment excluding the over priced Honda van that goes to higher income families. DCX sells the bulk of their minivans in the low end category.

I agreee with Lut'z. In brining GM back to a profitable growing company. do not waste R&D dollars on this segment. Focus on the growing segments.

Crossovers and Sedans along with the new GMT900 platform for the markets. After all, China is a growing hotbed, might as well get the products that are selling like hotcakes in there also. I think Lutz is spot on this time about minivans.

Also like someone else mentioned. How many people on this site really drive a minivan. I myself will never own a van or minivan. Do not like the layouts or designs, etc. I for one will stick to my Suburban and CTS.

[aaaantoine]

I drove a Venture for a while until I SmartBought the Cobalt. Now my mother in-law drives it. While it isn't very competitive, it adheres to the initial minivan concept. It's has people- and cargo-moving capabilities like a passenger van, but drives more like a car. Minivans were crossovers before manufacturers started building CUVs.

What I think GM should do is take the unique traits of minivans and try to apply them to crossovers. Not to build a complete minivan replacement, but something that would get customers to think twice about buying a minivan.

Sliding doors are underused in a society where some people don't think twice about slamming their door into the adjacent car (of which my car has already been a victim... numerous times ). Removable or flat-folding seats greatly increase cargo capacity, and I'm glad to see them in the Lambdas. Higher rooflines in general allow for more cargo capacity.

Customers still have to make a compromise between style and utility, and it will always be that way until boxes become en vogue. The Lambdas look great, but unless they raise the roof about 10 inches, add sliding doors, and shave $5,000 off the sticker, they will never properly replace the minivan.

[Drew Dowdell]

They fell flat on their face trying to convince people that the Colorado's I5 was every bit as good as a V6.

225338[/snapback]

The I5 is every bit as good as a V6.... it is the rest of the truck that lost the sale.

There are those who agree with the stigma of a minivan and don't want one yet still need the utility. Those same people also have heart failure when they see the EPA sticker on a Tahoe or Suburban. These people are willing to pay Tahoe/Suburban money for a people hauler, but don't want the look/stigma of a minivan or the gas mileage of an SUV. These are the people GM is targeting with the Lambda. The Outlook bases around 28k, a much higher transaction price than a 19k Lumi^h^h^hVent^h^h^hUplander. GM has effectively moved into a more upscale market. Why all the hubub?!

[Drew Dowdell]

From the Autoweek review:

Not only is it easy to get into, we’d gladly ride in that third row all day—if we wanted to watch a DVD on the optional entertainment system, the third row might be our first choice. Little wonder that GM is having second thoughts about its plan to derive a minivan from this platform—sliding doors would not improve access to the third row by much, unless you made the minivan bigger still.

[Northstar]

GM can market the Lambdas to minivan buyers:

"The look of an SUV, the ride of a car, and the functionality of a minivan allow for great looks, great handling, and superb entry-and-egress."

If an engineering major can come up with something like that of the top of his head, I'm sure the marketing folks can do something thoroughly convincing.

Plus, how many people would really rather have a crossover than a minivan? How many people buy minivans because the entry/egress isn't as easy in SUVs/crossovers? If the Lambdas are as functional as minivans, I see no reason why they won't steal sales.

[evok]

From the Autoweek review:

225369[/snapback]

Spoken like true simpletons.

First, off the minivan market is still huge, contributing to over 1,000,000 sales a year.

Second, the sliding doors are the most import difference between a van and traditional 4 door wagon.

Why you might ask? Simple, try loading children and child safety seats in a tight parking space with a vehicle that has traditional opening doors compared with the minivan sliding doors. Access might be easy in the lambdas with the big doors, but that alone because of the size and geometry of the doors makes it more difficult when you are parked next to someone at the mall.

Sorry, minivans have a stigma but they are more functional for a mom loading her family when it comes time to run errands.

[sciguy_0504]

There are two sides to this argument and they have already been aired in this thread. For now, it is best GM focus 100% on the segments that matter, segments that have tons of sales and make money. Once GM is in the clear it can focus on building a good traditional minivan.

[Petra]

I'd be curious to know how much it would really cost to engineer a Minivan off of the Lambda platform. This is one case where that sort of badge engineering would not be so bad, because, rather than starting off with a mediocre product and cloning it (like in the case of the TrailBlazer - 9-7X), they would be starting off with an excellent product and tailoring it to meet the needs of a specific customer. That is what smart companies do. Honda, for example, has done it in reverse, engineering the Pilot off of the Odyssey's platform, then evolving the Ridgeline even further off that same design.

I also think there is a huge potential market for MPV-type vehicles in the States, like the Mazda5. They are perfect for budget-minded Minivan buyers, new families, or people who just need a little extra space from time to time but don't want to sacrifice car-like ride, handling & fuel economy. I'm sure that GM has some sort of MPV in the European market, they are huge over there. So, I ask again: How hard would it be to bring that over here and slap a Saturn badge on it? And, furthermore, would it be so much to ask for GM not to be late to a new vehicle segment for once? Introducing an MPV into the American market would pretty much make them a segment leader right now.

[97regalGS]

Spoken like true simpletons.

First, off the minivan market is still huge, contributing to over 1,000,000 sales a year.

Second, the sliding doors are the most import difference between a van and traditional 4 door wagon.

Why you might ask?  Simple, try loading children and child safety seats in a tight parking space with a vehicle that has traditional opening doors compared with the minivan sliding doors.  Access might be easy in the lambdas with the big doors, but that alone because of the size and geometry of the doors makes it more difficult when you are parked next to someone at the mall.

Sorry, minivans have a stigma but they are more functional for a mom loading her family when it comes time to run errands.

225391[/snapback]

don't forget about dads! we drive them too.

If Hyundai can come to market with 2 competitive minivans(Sedona/Entourage) then sure as hell GM can figure out a way to do the same.

[Drew Dowdell]

don't forget about dads!  we drive them too.

If Hyundai can come to market with 2 competitive minivans(Sedona/Entourage) then sure as hell GM can figure out a way to do the same.

225428[/snapback]

They came to market with one competitive minivan. The Sedona/Entourage are just as much a badge job as the GM vans.

[daves87rs]

I'm not understanding why people are defending the minivan market.

This Market is dead.

Even Honda and toyota will catch on.

Even the poor will see that minivans, no matter what brand, have no resale value.

Sliding doors are nice, granted you have more than two kids

Not that hard to open a door-or park farther away.....

Even if GM got close, it would still be a waste of money...everyone else is TOO far

ahead...that's when you cut your losses and run...Even Ford figured that one out...

I agree the DCX could be in trouble-they need to hurry the new stuff out...

A few more new crossovers, and there won't be a point to the minivans anyways..

And unless GM could keep em cheap (unlike HOnda ot Toyota)-they will be out of the pricepoint of a young family anyways....

And don't expect the Korean twins to stay hot long either...

[Carguy]

I still think there is a place for a TRUE MINIVAN in GM. Chevy and Saturn both should have new 3.6L powered LAMBDA based minivans allong with some other international GM brands. There is no need for a Pontiac Buick or GMC minivan though. And no premium luxury Caddy vans eather just Chevy and Saturn would do fine.

[DetroitNut90]

I've said it before: there is no substitute for a minivan's flexibility. They offer good passenger room, good cargo room, good fuel economy, and a nice smooth ride. No, driving one won't get your blood pumping, and your neighbors won't become jealous of you when you buy one. There are reasons why people buy minivans over SUVs. They're just something that you come to appreciate once you've owned one for a while.

Oh well...if GM's not going to build one, I guess we can always go to Chrysler when the Venture needs replacing, assuming they didn't screw the RT vans up too bad (a la Sebring).

Edited December 8, 2006 by DetroitNut90

[regfootball]

So by Bob's logic, Toyota shouldn't waste its time and money on the Tundra, since the Big 3 have the segment covered???? Get real. I guess GM should give up on the Camaro too, Ford's got it covered. Give up on the Malibu too, Toyota's got it covered.

GM execs are afraid that they don't have the engineering chops to develop a competitive minivan, to they gave up. How hard is it to develop a box on wheels? Even Hyundai figured it out.

225298[/snapback]

EXACTLY. YOU HIT THE NAIL ONT HE HEAD. It's called GIVING UP.

[regfootball]

Spoken like true simpletons.

First, off the minivan market is still huge, contributing to over 1,000,000 sales a year.

Second, the sliding doors are the most import difference between a van and traditional 4 door wagon.

Why you might ask?  Simple, try loading children and child safety seats in a tight parking space with a vehicle that has traditional opening doors compared with the minivan sliding doors.  Access might be easy in the lambdas with the big doors, but that alone because of the size and geometry of the doors makes it more difficult when you are parked next to someone at the mall.

Sorry, minivans have a stigma but they are more functional for a mom loading her family when it comes time to run errands.

225391[/snapback]

see, someone still gets it. Yet Lutz don't. My reminder, minivans are still one of the best products for BRAND ENTRY and BRAND LOYALTY to WOMEN buyers (who control our pants zippers and our cash).

Honestly, I guess unless you have small kids and a wife in that age, you just don't get it that a certain percentage of those groups want the sliding doors and the largest capacity available. The new lambdas are really nice, but they still are not minivans.

Its like someone who is bitching if they came out with a car shaped like the corvette, but was FWD. i would say, it's a sporty two door, that's what you want. The respondent would say, its not RWD, YOU DON'T GET IT.

same thing.

We chase segments to sell 5,000 XLR's at prices no doubt much lower than list, but chasing 100,000 (REAL MARKET SHARE) van sales a year cannot be done. Fricking sad.

The Lambdas will cannibalize the Tahoe and Trailblazers more than they will anyone who was buying a DCX van, Odyssey or Sienna.

Edited December 8, 2006 by regfootball

[regfootball]

I'm not understanding why people are defending the minivan market.

This Market is dead.

Even Honda and toyota will catch on.

Even the poor will see that minivans, no matter what brand, have no resale value.

Sliding doors are nice, granted you have more than two kids

Not that hard to open a door-or park farther away.....

Even if GM got close, it would still be a waste of money...everyone else is TOO far

ahead...that's when you cut your losses and run...Even Ford figured that one out...

I agree the DCX could be in trouble-they need to hurry the new stuff out...

A few more new crossovers, and there won't be a point to the minivans anyways..

And unless GM could keep em cheap (unlike HOnda ot Toyota)-they will be out of the pricepoint of a young family anyways....

And don't expect the Korean twins to stay hot long either...

225443[/snapback]

clueless.

ever try to shop for a used minivan? you can't find them.....its because they sell like a day after they are listed on line or in the paper.

used vans in good shape command premium bucks. any van that has lost its value is because it been rode hard and put away wet.

GM could sell 30,000 vans a year for handicap conversion alone, if they try. Even more to school districts, churches, and mentally handicapped places.

If GM is just laying in the woods to do it later, fine. But to dismiss the segment is just cheesy BS. If the product is good you can increase the segment. GM is just being lazy here.......that's fine if the other products they put out in lieu of it don't turn out to be cheesy crap.

[Camino LS6]

Hmm.

GM has never built a minvan that didn't quickly find the back of the sales pack and I'm guessing that they are hedging their bets a bit here. If they don't have something stunningly good to bring to this segment, better that they stay out until they do. Toyota has enough spare cash to go tilting at windmills in segments where they are clearly outclassed (Tundra) , but GM doesn't and another minivan flop would keep them out of that game for a very long time. Maybe forever.

I think that this is the right choice, right now. I also doubt that GM will be out of the minivan business for very long - witness the rumors of European GM minivans coming here. Timing and an outstanding product will be essential. Hurrying another lackluster offering into production would be far worse than bowing out for a while.

[shesellschevys]

GM's market share does seem to be a bit lower than some of their competition, but I don't really agree that they should dump the vans entirely. I think there is definitely a market for the base model vans (cheap, reliable transportation for a family with 2 or more kids).

Why does GM oversaturate their own market, as small as it is? Why have FOUR VANS?? To have a Saturn, Buick, Pontiac AND Chevrolet doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. Instead of having 3 versions of both short and long wheelbase, offer fewer options - have an LS and LT and be done with it. Have one or two (maximum) and do them BETTER. Have a luxury end with HID headlights, adaptive cruise control, front & rear park assist, back-up cameras, NAV systems, etc. If we put that kind of vehicle together, we could charge as much as Honda!

Please do something with the seats. The fact that we don't have anything like "stow and go" or *easily removable seats* means that we're not competitive. Want to flip & fold the middle row, hold on a minute while I call in the muscle men.

GM could do so much more with these vehicles. For instance, what if they offered a 3.9L with active fuel management and got 40+ mpg? Saying that the vehicles have OnStar doesn't really push them off the lots.

hoping to still be able to sell the Uplanders as up-level, comfortable people-movers,

Janette

[dford]

The logic that the Lambdas are good replacement for a minivan is ridiculous.

If I am shopping for a minivan and search online, will the Outlook pop up next to the Odyssey? No it won't, it will be on the SUV or CUV list.

Will the Enclave have remote opening side doors like a van, no they won't. Will they have the cubic ft of space inside like a van, no they won't.

The Odyssey and Sienna may be "overpriced," but they are priced like they are BECAUSE THEY SELL.

If Ford and GM gave up on every segment they weren't a leader in, each would only sell trucks + the Mustang and Vette. How can they hope to regain market share by retreating from mainstream segments? If they want to take sales back from the imports, they have to sell what the import customers want to buy.

If you look at the sales decline in the minivan segment, you would see that it is mostly attributable to the decline in vans sold by the Big 3. YTD thru October, the Big 3 sold a total of 455900 minivans vs 547360 last year. The Japanese/Koreans sold 341282 this year vs 320962 last year (the Sienna sold about 800 units less than last year). Sales in the category dropped 8.2%, almost totally from the domestic side.

So, if the GM and Ford had fresh designs, would those sales have gone away???

[Dragon]

there is a need for them. the sliding doors can make things a lot eaiser, even for small business who use them for transporting people and boxes

I think a year or two "off" would be a good break so they can differentiate old chev minivans that people obviously don't like

Edited December 8, 2006 by Dragon

[Flybrian]

I still feel that after all is said and done, after all the "Minivans suck balls" jokes have been told, that GM is walking away from a segement it can sell to in some way, shape, or form. What, I ask, is so hard about lowering the ride height on a Lambda and adding sliding doors? A vehicle like this is necessary to retain those people who are GM-loyal and do buy vans.

[pow]

I still feel that after all is said and done, after all the "Minivans suck balls" jokes have been told, that GM is walking away from a segement it can sell to in some way, shape, or form. What, I ask, is so hard about lowering the ride height on a Lambda and adding sliding doors? A vehicle like this is necessary to retain those people who are GM-loyal and do buy vans.

225476[/snapback]

They'd have to do a lot more than that... in terms of passenger and cargo hauling, the current Lambdas trail minivan classleaders by a lot.

I find it interesting how GM once targeted the lower-end of the people-mover segment ($17,999.99 Uplanders), and now they're aiming for Sienna Limiteds, Odyssey Tourings, MDXs, and so on. Maybe they're moving up too quickly and leaving behind people who buy Grand Caravans and Sienna CEs. A minivan for the Chevy brand will fill this gap nicely.

Edited December 8, 2006 by empowah

[DetroitNut90]

It's called GIVING UP.

225450[/snapback]

Exactly. That's what bothers me the most-GM's giving up. To me, they're saying "well...you guys have walloped our asses in this segment, but we won't try and do anything to fix that, so enjoy picking up any of our potential sales!" I thought that GM was done retreating and was ready to go on the offensive...guess not just yet.

Edited December 9, 2006 by DetroitNut90

[Camino LS6]

Fighting on too many fronts can lose you the war.

Especially if your weapon is sub-standard.

I'd call this a tactical retreat.

[dford]

A tactical retreat should include a plan to regain ground lost. Lutz doesn't give much hope that GM will soon produce a top notch minivan. Sounds more like capitualation to me...

[Mr.Krinkle]

I always liked sliding doors. I try to park next to minivans for that reason because I know that giant door isnt going to swing open... One less door to worry about.

[Camino LS6]

A tactical retreat should include a plan to regain ground lost. Lutz doesn't give much hope that GM will soon produce a top notch minivan. Sounds more like capitualation to me...

225498[/snapback]

It also isn't smart to reveal your battle plans to the enemy. I doubt we have seen the last of GM minivans. Even so, I doubt that minivans in general will do anything but decline in popularity.

[ocnblu]

Especially with the Lambdas coming to market. They are going to be big. They are going to destroy the GMT360s and they'll put a hurtin' on the 900 SUVs. Autoweek got excellent overall fuel mileage with their Outlook, and when you think of the weight, size, people room and horsepower of this vehicle, it is astounding mileage, 20.7 mpg.

[keyzi747]

At least GM had "gut" in the 80's and early 90's. Now they are afraid to enter shrinking market segments..

[Carguy]

Do a ALL NEW LAMBDA version of the DUSTBUSTER VANS!!---Perhaps the world is ready NOW for that FUTUREISTIC LOOK!!!--- ---HAY look at the new Honda CIVIC!!

[C.H.U.D.]

Don't worry guys, I'm sure there will be plenty of Uplanders left until GM comes up with a replacement.

[91z4me]

My take is that GM is not really going to go without a Minivan type vehicle but they aren't going to call them minivans. Just like GM tried to do with the CSVs they are trying to separate the vehicle from the soccer mom image. I fully expect the Lambda vans to have all the features associated with a traditional minivan but it will likely be that GM is trying to create a new niche for themselves.

[etapar]

Those that have kids...know why minivans are the best.

The sliding door makes it much easier to get the kids in and out, along with not hitting others cars with the doors when kids get out .....you know how kids are.

The new GM Acadia, Outlook and Enclave (GM Trio) are all the same really.....they should have tried to put sliding doors on one of them.....like the Mazda 5.

The sliding doors should be like Toyota and Chrysler with the doors track hidden a little better with the window (because it looks better)....not like the Nissan, GM and Honda....

A quiet and smooth ride is very important.....good MPG would be great.

The intertainment system in the Enclave Concept...with two screens rather than just one is much better. The screen does not block the rearview mirror like most.

I am looking forward to driving the new GM trio......and would buy one almost for sure if it had the sliding doors......

I like the Dodge Rampage truck for the sliding doors also. If Dodge built the Rampage ....I would buy it....now...

I am currently waiting for the perfect truck/van/family car.

GM is getting much better lately....but they are starting to get a big head....like they can do it with out help...or input from others.....

GM....just try to make it without your customers....right....that is what happen before you started to actually make products the customer wanted again.....

This is just a big circle....you make good products...get over confident...and then slack off.......oops...start again....good products...etc.

Yes GM ...your Minivans stink....but it you put as much effort into making a good minivan....you might be able to grab that segment too.

OK...I am off my soap box....next?

Edited December 9, 2006 by etapar

[4gm]

225501[/snapback]

That thing is too good looking for GMNA. We want ugly minivans that don't sell so we can justify bailing out of the minivan segment altogether.

[AM6_Cutlass]

minivans might have a stigma attached to them, but that doesn't mean alot of people don't want one. Perhaps GM is not losing much considering they never really had a competent minivan and therefore never much of a sales base to be alienating by axing future minivan plans. However, I think the fact that Toyota, Honda and many other minivans will continue to be out there is reason enough for GM to build one, it just has to be competitive. They have much more chance of gaining new customers with a traditional minivan bodystyle. I do like the new Lambda crossovers. At this point, I would feel kinda funny buying and driving a minivan simply because I don't have a family to haul in it. Not big on SUVS (including crossovers), BUT I do love the Enclave. If I could get it with a column shifter like the Terazza or Rendezvous, I would probably buy one. Seriously, now that I have my own house I need the ability to haul larger items than I can fit in the trunk of my Impala, and the Enclave looks more like a luxury car than anything else. Sliding doors would probably be e benefit to some with kids, but to me the way the rear doors open isn't an issue. The hatch, however, I would prefer to split in two with the lower half dropping like a traditional tail gate, but nobody is really doing that at the moment in SUVS, wagons or vans.