The Future of Buick - Autoweek

[Flybrian]

Can Future Buicks Play With Lexus?
GM hopes to reinvigorate lineup with Chinese-inspired products

2011 Buick Lucerne Sketch by Blackviper8891
Link to Original Article @ AutoWeek | Published 07/30/07, 11:29 am et

AT A GLANCE:
FUTURE PRODUCT PLANS
2008
Enclave crossover debuts

2010
Re-engineered, restyled LaCrosse

2011
Lucerne redesign

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

Can Buick be an American Lexus if it's designed in China?

The brand is a hot seller in China, which has become Buick's top market. And the Riviera concept that debuted in April at the Shanghai auto show - a product designed in China - reveals Buick's new global look.

Now GM wants to position Buick as an affordable luxury brand in the United States. In a few years, the automaker will find out whether U.S. consumers embrace Buick's Chinese connection.

Excelle: China's redesigned compact sedan debuts there in late 2008 or early 2009. The car will be built on GM's new global front-drive vehicle architecture being developed in Germany.

GM insiders say the Excelle is being considered for the United States. The car likely would be exported here, a GM source says. The new small Buick sedan is similar in size to the Toyota Corolla.

LaCrosse: Drawing on Buick's Super heritage of 50 years ago, the 2008 LaCrosse adds a Super model and its first V-8 - a 5.3-liter engine that delivers 300 hp. The car's exterior is distinguished by fender portholes.

Although the styling of the current LaCrosse has been compared to that of the previous-generation Ford Taurus, the next-generation LaCrosse will be a stylish, upscale-looking sedan. The restyled LaCrosse is slated for the 2010 model year on GM's re-engineered Epsilon 2 vehicle architecture. Front- and all-wheel-drive versions are planned.

In China, Buick will sell essentially the same LaCrosse beginning in 2010.

Lucerne: A redesign is slated for the 2011 model year, when the Lucerne switches to GM's global rear-drive platform. Initially, the car is expected to be imported from Holden, GM's Australian subsidiary. Later, Lucerne production likely will switch to the Oshawa, Ontario, assembly plant.

GM's rwd platform is slated for a range of brands including Holden, Opel and Daewoo, along with the upcoming Chevrolet Camaro and 2008 Pontiac G8. To distinguish models among brands, the lengths of the wheelbase and front and rear overhangs can be adjusted.

This year, Buick's China operations introduced the 2007 rwd Park Avenue at the Shanghai motor show. That car is assembled by Holden and is the vehicle architecture the U.S. model eventually will share.

Riviera: Maybe it is time to turn back the clock. The stylish, two-door, rwd Riviera concept was one of the talked-about surprises at this year's Shanghai auto show. Buick's U.S. dealers need an image-maker like this elegant coupe to attract new buyers. The Riviera concept showcases the new global styling language for Buick.

An announcement on the Riviera is likely at January's Detroit auto show, says a GM source.

Enclave: The mid-sized 2008 Enclave crossover replaces the Rainier SUV, Rendezvous crossover and Terraza minivan. Sales began about two months ago. The Enclave was developed on GM's new fwd Lambda architecture along with the Saturn Outlook and GMC Acadia. GM likely will offer a V-8 engine next year.

There are no plans to sell the Enclave in China.

Rainier: The 2007 model ends the Rainier's production run.

Rendezvous: Ditto. The 2007 model is the last.

Terraza: Finis. 2007 is the last model year.

[cire]

Hopefully, the success of Buick in China will ensure that Buick will be strengthened with a collection of upscale and competitive products in the near luxury field.

I am glad to see the minivan disappear. This badge engineered disaster definitely did not fit well with the image of the brand.

I hope the Excelle replacement (I hope the name changes; I heard the "Skylark" moniker might reappear; "Excelle" brings back mid 80's Hyundai nightmares) is not simply a badge engineered Chevy Cobalt with a Buick grill. Everything the customer sees and interacts with needs to be distinct and upscale for this car to succeed.

I hope the LaCrosse replacement's design lives up to the promises made in this article. The current design looks too much like a Ford Taurus warm-over. The name needs to change; I heard rumors that it will be called "Regal".

I hope the Lucerne's rear wheel drive replacement does not continue with the "Lucerne" name. The current Chinese product is called "Park Avenue". That model name would work, as well as "LeSabre", "Electra", or "Invicta". I looked up the term "lucerne" in the dictionary the other day; it means "alfalfa". I know this is not the origin of the model name. I am sure this car is named after the resort city in Switzerland; I just wonder how many Buick customers are aware of this origin.

Should the Riviera be a traditional two door coupe or a four door coupe design like the Mercedes CLS? I know it has always had only two doors, but would it sell better with a four door configuration. If it is a halo car for the brand, I guess the sales figures would not matter as much as retaining the historic image.

I still think Buick needs a smaller crossover based on the Saturn Vue platform with styling inspired by the beautiful Buick Enclave. It needs to look and feel completely different from the Saturn Vue. They could retain the "Rendezvous" model name for the new and greatly improved vehicle.

Edited August 14, 2007 by cire

[Dsuupr]

I'm excited about the idea of the Excelle. With baby boomers hitting the age of retirement, it should be a huge hit, IF DONE RIGHT!

The Excelle is the type of car GM needs to show that they can make cars with great gas mileage that are worth owning.

[buickguy]

The name Excelle has got to go. I think of the 80s Hyundai Excel. Of all the names in Buick's glorious past, they can come up with a better name.

The Riviera is in all likelihood a go. I read somewhere Buick in China wants to make a big splash for the 2008 Olympics. This would do it.

Portholes. They must be on all Buicks. It is a distinctive feature that only Buick and Maserati share.

[Drew Dowdell]

Portholes. They must be on all Buicks. It is a distinctive feature that only Buick and Maserati share.

and the chevy cavalier, Kia Sedona, Dodge Neon, Ford Excursion, Chrysler 300 and 1985 Dodge Caravan and Lexus ES..... depending on what part of the city you're in.....

[Paolino]

and the chevy cavalier, Kia Sedona, Dodge Neon, Ford Excursion, Chrysler 300 and 1985 Dodge Caravan and Lexus ES..... depending on what part of the city you're in.....

Don't forget 2008 CTS, STS, Vue, Ford 500... everyone is putting them.

I do not want to see the Excelle here... I just don't think of Buick as a compact car. A small midsize, fine, but a compact, no.

I have to say, I'm hoping they leave just one "barge" for Buick... being that Cadillac is getting away from them. I absolutely love boats... I know they're not the most popular thing now, but I think they need something for private limos and such.

[Cananopie]

I'm not too keen on the idea of a compact Buick however if done right it could really boost Buicks image and allow those who want a Buick name to be within affordable reach. But "Excelle" is a terrible name... call it a Skylark and if it's done right Buick and GM can hopefully give the name a little bit of respect back that it deserves that was removed with the two previous generations.

[ZL-1]

(...)

LaCrosse:(...)

Although the styling of the current LaCrosse has been compared to that of the previous-generation Ford Taurus(...)

:rotflmao:

[cavalier36]

Id call the "excelle" a Skylark or an Invicta here. the next lacrosse to be built on Epsilion and built alongside the next generation Pontiac G6 in Orion Michigan, its rumored to be called the Regal..

I would make the Riviera on the Zeta platform it would be a reskinned next generation GTO.

the lucerne would be a large zeta sedan that would challenge the Chrysler 300.

[VenSeattle]

Id call the "excelle" a Skylark or an Invicta here. the next lacrosse to be built on Epsilion and built alongside the next generation Pontiac G6 in Orion Michigan, its rumored to be called the Regal..

I would make the Riviera on the Zeta platform it would be a reskinned next generation GTO.

the lucerne would be a large zeta sedan that would challenge the Chrysler 300.

Preferred:

Compact Buick = Skylark

Midsize Buick = Regal

Zeta Sedan = Park Avenue

Zeta Coupe/Convertible = Riviera

Compact CUV = Rendezvous

- The Pontiac G8 will be the Chrysler 300 competitor (and rightfully so... IIRC the Pontiac Bonneville was GM's original competitor to Chrysler's 300-Series.) The Impala will take on the Dodge Charger. The Buick Zeta will have a much higher starting price than the 300 and will also be larger than the 300.

[vrazzhledazzle]

Not enough is happening..this will do no more than sustain current sales..which have slipped enough - Buick needs to find a way to boost sales and the Enclave alone won't do it.

The future should be more like this:

2008

Enclave crossover debuts

2009

Re-engineered, restyled LaCrosse from china

2010

Riviera coupe in some form or another

2011

Lucerne redesign (in the form of bringing the Park Ave here)

2012

Consider Velite convertible

[smk4565]

Buick will never be Lexus or close to it. Buick isn't even at Lincoln level. Look at either sedan in CX trim, they have a cloth bench seat and fake wood and hardly any features. I really don't see Buick getting new buyers. The current cars are bad, that is why Oldsmobile buyers didn't go to Buick and probably went to Japanese brands. Toyota builds a mush riding sedan and does it with better materials than Buick uses. And the imports have DOHC engines with 250+ hp and not a 3800 with a 4 speed auto from the 80s.

Current Buick owners are the only people that will buy a future Buick. Personally I wouldn't even make them past 2011, and would send them off with Oldsmobile. The market is changing, Buick still builds the same style of car that sold in the 80s, hardly anyone buys a car like that anymore, buyers want different and even if Buick builds different, people won't notice or they will refuse to buy it because of the badge on the front. I am one of those people, I like GM cars and I wouldn't ever buy a Buick no matter what they make because of the image they have.

[VenSeattle]

Buick will never be Lexus or close to it. Buick isn't even at Lincoln level. Look at either sedan in CX trim, they have a cloth bench seat and fake wood and hardly any features. I really don't see Buick getting new buyers. The current cars are bad, that is why Oldsmobile buyers didn't go to Buick and probably went to Japanese brands. Toyota builds a mush riding sedan and does it with better materials than Buick uses. And the imports have DOHC engines with 250+ hp and not a 3800 with a 4 speed auto from the 80s.

Current Buick owners are the only people that will buy a future Buick. Personally I wouldn't even make them past 2011, and would send them off with Oldsmobile. The market is changing, Buick still builds the same style of car that sold in the 80s, hardly anyone buys a car like that anymore, buyers want different and even if Buick builds different, people won't notice or they will refuse to buy it because of the badge on the front.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but luckily for Buick, yours isn't the only one out there. Buick is profitable globally and sales are increasing even if not in the US at the moment. Enclave is the beginning of several things to change at Buick. The LaCrosse replacement and Zeta vehicle(s) will continue to move Buick further up market.

I am one of those people, I like GM cars and I wouldn't ever buy a Buick no matter what they make because of the image they have.

This is why GM needs multiple divisions. If you're already a fan of other GM divisions, why should Buick want you or even go after you?

[Flybrian]

Yeah. That Avalon is a high-quality piece. Give me a 3800 and a 4-speed over a blustery 3.5l and erratic Toyota transmission any day.

[gm4life]

I think Buick is going to have a huge impact on the luxury car market. Only thing missing from the plan above is a new FWD Lucerne/DTS with state of art motors/trannys.

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

Yeah. That Avalon is a high-quality piece. Give me a 3800 and a 4-speed over a blustery 3.5l and erratic Toyota transmission any day.

[smk4565]

LaCrosses are about $22,000 base now, and are always discounted, Lucerne about $25,000 and discounted. Most Luxury cars base closer to $33,000 and easily go toward 40 or more. I doubt Buick will give up on the cheapy cloth interiors and fake wood either, they rely on (older) buyers that are in chevy price range but don't want a chevy. The new Malibu will be priced very similar to a LaCrosse, yet the Malibu is middle class, LaCrosse is luxury?

My thoughts on GM are like this. They have 8-9 brands, more around the world, say 12 total. Toyota has 3, (4 if you count Dihatsu). So if both companies spend $12 billion on new models, GM spends 1 billion per brand, Toyota spend about 4 billion per brand. Toyota has fewer overall models too. I know GM shares among cars, but with all these brands and models they stretch the budget thin. I'd rather see a couple brands phased out, so they can pump up the others into best n in the world.

[buickguy]

check out gminsidenews.com smk4565 has an obsession with hating Buick. scores of posts railing on Buick. he just found a new site to repeatedly say "kill buick" over and over again. get ready, it's gonna get real tiring and at times nonsensical. it would be great if he offered real suggestions for buick. but rather than accept the fact buick is actually a growing brand internationally and has the best quality ratings of any gm brand and a great heritage, he just bashes the brand every chance he gets.

[VenSeattle]

Back during the Snitz days, brand-specific moderators could ban members from different sub-forums if they created problems or constantly bashed without contributing anything to the topics. This policy may be revisited if it continues. (FYI... I was the Buick Forum Moderator.)

[smk4565]

check out gminsidenews.com smk4565 has an obsession with hating Buick. scores of posts railing on Buick. he just found a new site to repeatedly say "kill buick" over and over again. get ready, it's gonna get real tiring and at times nonsensical. it would be great if he offered real suggestions for buick. but rather than accept the fact buick is actually a growing brand internationally and has the best quality ratings of any gm brand and a great heritage, he just bashes the brand every chance he gets.

Buick sales were down 26.5% in July, 3rd worst decline of any brand, Hummer was down 27%, (I am thinking Hummer should have never been a brand, just one GMC model as a niche vehicle like the Toyota FJ Cruiser is.) Buick is on pace for about 200,000 sales this year, down from 242,000 last year and down from 980,000 20 years ago. They have lost about 30-40,000 sales per year for 20 years, regardless of quality ratings or products. The image hasn't changed, the sales keep dropping. The imports built better cars too.

Heritage doesn't sell cars, Lexus has 17 years of existence vs over 100 each for Buick and Cadillac and Lexus easily outsells them. People care about image of the car, not what it was 50 years ago.

Everything Buick tried hasn't worked for 20 years, maybe it was lack of effort, maybe incompetence, I suspect poor image was a lot of it. At this point, it would take billions to get good cars into Buick, and billions more to change their image. I'd rather see those billions spent on Chevy. Financially GM just doesn't have the money to fix every brand, Toyota spends about double per vehicle investment than GM does. How can GM make a better car with half the money? They can't, that is why they make a 3800 w-body buick and rely on fleet sales.

I would kill Saab first though, that is a huge waste of money and the cars are unreliable. Hummer isn't performing well either, and making a cheaper one doesn't really help, that works for a year or 2, then the brand image drops, Jaguar learned that with the X-type.

Basically, I'd trade all of Buick for 1 great (not good, truly great benchmark) Chevy that would sell 400,000 cars a year without fleet sales.

Edited August 2, 2007 by smk4565

[HarleyEarl]

Buick Excelle for N.America?

I hope that is just some scary, horrifying rumor.

At times, I have to question why I like Buick. That affection is really based on it's distant past.

The Buick of today is so far removed from what it once was that it's not even recognizable.

Everytime I see a mediocre Lucerne or LaCrosse/Allure, or the hideous Rendezvous, the insipid Terraza,

the who cares Rainier, I just cringe.

Edited August 2, 2007 by HarleyEarl

[VenSeattle]

Buick sales were down 26.5% in July, 3rd worst decline of any brand, Hummer was down 27%, (I am thinking Hummer should have never been a brand, just one GMC model as a niche vehicle like the Toyota FJ Cruiser is.) Buick is on pace for about 200,000 sales this year, down from 242,000 last year and down from 980,000 20 years ago. They have lost about 30-40,000 sales per year for 20 years, regardless of quality ratings or products. The image hasn't changed, the sales keep dropping. The imports built better cars too.

Heritage doesn't sell cars, Lexus has 17 years of existence vs over 100 each for Buick and Cadillac and Lexus easily outsells them. People care about image of the car, not what it was 50 years ago.

Everything Buick tried hasn't worked for 20 years, maybe it was lack of effort, maybe incompetence, I suspect poor image was a lot of it. At this point, it would take billions to get good cars into Buick, and billions more to change their image. I'd rather see those billions spent on Chevy. Financially GM just doesn't have the money to fix every brand, Toyota spends about double per vehicle investment than GM does. How can GM make a better car with half the money? They can't, that is why they make a 3800 w-body buick and rely on fleet sales.

I would kill Saab first though, that is a huge waste of money and the cars are unreliable. Hummer isn't performing well either, and making a cheaper one doesn't really help, that works for a year or 2, then the brand image drops, Jaguar learned that with the X-type.

Basically, I'd trade all of Buick for 1 great (not good, truly great benchmark) Chevy that would sell 400,000 cars a year without fleet sales.

First thing, the majority of Buick's lost sales over the past decade+ come from the reduction of models (Including this year - phase-out of Rendezvous, Terraza, & Rainier.)

You fail to realize Buick and Cadillac are no longer about volume in the US. GM is targeting Chevrolet and Saturn as volume brands. GM is pushing for Cadillac and Buick to become (more) aspirational. Too much volume in the Premium market waters down the brand. GM does not require Buick to maintain 400k or 500k sales in the US to maintain profitability because Buick already achieves 500,000+ sales a year globally with the Chinese market. The consolidation of line-ups along with tightly focused attention to the premium segment will make Buick's vehicles competitive in today's luxury markets that have evolved considerably since Buick was considered a true premium competitor.

No matter how many billions of dollars you dump into Chevrolet, their vehicles will not sustain the same profit margin that premium/luxury vehicles do. Chevrolet will always be shopped and scrutinized on price. Volume is one thing, profitability is another. Buick and Cadillac can become very profitable with their current volumes. They’re not far off (and still surpass many) other profitable luxury brands.

When it comes to direct pricing and content, Chevrolet and Buick will not be interchangeable going forward. Historically speaking, that was only for a brief period anyway. Even now Buick's two sedans and Enclave CUV contain many features not found on any trim level in what you'd like to consider "comparable" Chevrolets: Memory seats (Luc & Enc), Magnetic Ride Control (Luc & Lax), load-leveling suspension (Luc), heated/ventilated seats (Luc & Enc), higher quality interior materials (All), quieter interiors (All), longer warranty (all), oscillating headlamps (Enc), and I'm positive I have left others out.

And to highlight this point once again, Buick is profitable as a brand. For this past quarter, if it wasn't for the one time charges for Delphi, GM US operations would have been profitable as a whole as well. Why continue to scream "KILL" KILL" KILL" when GM's turn around efforts are showing serious progress - especially when that progress includes Buick(China)?

[balthazar]

>>"check out gminsidenews.com smk4565 has an obsession with hating Buick. scores of posts railing on Buick. he just found a new site to repeatedly say "kill buick" over and over again. get ready, it's gonna get real tiring and at times nonsensical."<<

Too late.

[Cananopie]

Buick sales were down 26.5% in July, 3rd worst decline of any brand, Hummer was down 27%, (I am thinking Hummer should have never been a brand, just one GMC model as a niche vehicle like the Toyota FJ Cruiser is.) Buick is on pace for about 200,000 sales this year, down from 242,000 last year and down from 980,000 20 years ago. They have lost about 30-40,000 sales per year for 20 years, regardless of quality ratings or products. The image hasn't changed, the sales keep dropping. The imports built better cars too.

Heritage doesn't sell cars, Lexus has 17 years of existence vs over 100 each for Buick and Cadillac and Lexus easily outsells them. People care about image of the car, not what it was 50 years ago.

Everything Buick tried hasn't worked for 20 years, maybe it was lack of effort, maybe incompetence, I suspect poor image was a lot of it. At this point, it would take billions to get good cars into Buick, and billions more to change their image. I'd rather see those billions spent on Chevy. Financially GM just doesn't have the money to fix every brand, Toyota spends about double per vehicle investment than GM does. How can GM make a better car with half the money? They can't, that is why they make a 3800 w-body buick and rely on fleet sales.

I would kill Saab first though, that is a huge waste of money and the cars are unreliable. Hummer isn't performing well either, and making a cheaper one doesn't really help, that works for a year or 2, then the brand image drops, Jaguar learned that with the X-type.

Basically, I'd trade all of Buick for 1 great (not good, truly great benchmark) Chevy that would sell 400,000 cars a year without fleet sales.

The reason why Buick was selling half a million cars a year in the 80s is because Buick had been an aspirational and reliable brand for decades and GM cashed in on that by making very cheap Buicks.

Put Lexus through the same cycle and see if they will be able to still be a company. The biggest reason for the reduction of Buicks was mismanagement at GM due to a problem that had never even remotely happened to them until the gas crisis - an influx of foreign brands. I do not really blame GM for mismanaging because they were blindsided as they were an unwieldy giant and small foreign brands were small and agile. It really did take them 20 years to be able to adjust to the current competition...

And in a lot of situations giant corporations typically manipulate the government in such a way through lobbyists in order to force something like Toyota or VW to have a raised price, but in respect to all of the big 3, they took it like a man and they did the adjusting instead of refusing competition...

Buick was able to go from positioned between Olds and Caddy to selling on par with Chevy, Pontiac, and Olds... forgotten about basically... and still were able to survive. GM did such an amazing job with that brand that loyalists kept buying even when the quality of Buicks went way down. Buick was able to start to pull out of the nose-dive in the late 90s boosting quality and now Buick is trimming off the fat and ready to be a current competitor that isn't awash in GM financial misery.

Fleet sales are down, the LaCrosse and Lucerne didn't abandon the previous generation fanbase (ask Oldsmobile why this is important) and the Enclave is on target, current, and extremely effective in everything from styling to luxuries to technology. And Buick shows no signs of playing dudley anymore with strictly 4 door vanilla vehicles. The fleet sales are low and the quality of each vehicle is high... forget the Rainier, forget the Terraza, they might've given Buick volume which is obviously important to you but they did not give Buick quality... going down the volume road leads Buick right back in the same predicament they were with in the 80s that took them 20 years to get out... and now you want them to revert and recycle back to it.... Buick is an amazing company for even surviving that tarnished image and just stands as a testament to what a great company can hold up against. Buick was practically forgotten for about a decade because their image sold everything while the cars stayed below entry-lux conditions. Now Buick is getting back on its horse and China shows every sign of ensuring Buick for the long run.

Relax and understand that you are looking at the tail-end of the declining sales. Buick has cut its inventory in more than half within the last half-decade so of course there will be a period of declined sales... but you can not say the Lucerne or the Enclave have been received poorly... I'll give you the LaCrosse even though it doesn't seem a detriment to Buick.

[smk4565]

I am all for profit over fleet sale volume. But it really comes down to consumer demand. If demand is high, people will pay sticker price, resale values will be good. Buick does not have high demand, so they often have the $3500 off specials or 0% financing. Mercedes and BMW sell about 1 million cars each world wide, their image seems to be fine. I'd like to see Cadillac really improve sales of cars over $50,000 (of course they need new models for that), that is how I'd like to seem them boost sales, profit and image would rise too.

Buick is not a luxury brand, they even refer to themselves as a "premium" brand. Better than mainstream, but below luxury. Although since you can get a new Buick for $23,000 before the discounts, I don't see that as premium, when the cheapest car on the lot is $29,000 (and doesn't have $3000 cash back), then they are "premium."

I do blame GM for mismanagement in the 80s and 90s, they didn't realize the threat the imports posed, and they did nothing to change their ways, and now they are paying for it. They can recover, but they need to act fast and take action.

In the 90s when Buick had Century, Regal, LeSabre, Park Avenue, Riviera sales still declined. When They rose for 1 year when the Rendezvous was new. Then Olds died and they got the SUV and van, and sales still went down, in a year where they added models. The number of models doesn't matter, it is demand for the brand has dropped, that is why sales have dropped.

1 Chevy may not make the profit that a Buick can but they can sell far more Chevys. If they make a grand slam Malibu or Cobalt, they could sell over 300,000 a year, and without the heavy discounts. Then they are in a situation like Toyota is in, and they will become more profitable.

I want to see GM as the best car company in the world, and #1 in sales because their cars are the best, not because they had employee discount that month, or sold cars to Avis. I fear that with the number of brands and models, they can't finance them all, or pay to market them all. I have an Oldsmobile, it was sad they had to go, but GM is stronger with a more narrow product focus.

I fear that if this turnaround plan doesn't produce big results soon, Toyota will one day buy GM. That is the last thing I want to see happen. I think Toyota hasn't bought another car maker because they feel like they are buying someone else's mess and they can run opposition into the ground anyway. If I were in Toyota's position though, I would one day consider buying GM, and then who knows what they would do with it.

[VenSeattle]

Image: Killing Oldsmobile harmed GM and every GM division's reputation and image. Killing Oldsmobile has not proven to have had any benefit to GM. The current Turn around effort is in place because half-ass efforts (like killing Oldsmobile) did not successfully stabilize GM.

But it really comes down to consumer demand. If demand is high, people will pay sticker price, resale values will be good.... In the 90s when Buick had Century, Regal, LeSabre, Park Avenue, Riviera sales still declined.

Demand & Volume: You failed to mention the 1990's discontinuation of several Buicks: Roadmaster Sedan, Roadmaster wagon, Reatta coupe, Reatta convertible, Regal coupe, Century wagon, Century coupe, Skylark sedan, and Skylark coupe. Nine unique body styles across five separate models were discontinued without replacement in the 1990's. The Riviera was dropped in 1999.

Wow! Amazing! Sales declined! But did they?

Buick Brand sales:

1990: 426,512

1995: 494,782

1999: 445,611

Despite losing nine body styles and four models, Buick continued to find consistent buyers through the 1990's. Some years were up and some were down... but overall, Buick held its ground in the 1990s (and remained profitable) while GM, as a whole, was floundering.

Also remember, throughout this hard time, the LeSabre remained the #1 selling large vehicle in America during the 1990's. Sales throughout the 1990's held around 150,000 on average.

Throughout the 1990's and even now, Buick's resale value percentage has often been higher than Cadillac.

Success: Buick is not the problem at GM. GM can/will be successful with Buick. Buick is continuing to prove as a viable and living brand. Killing another brand right now would throw GM's upper management into turmoil while creating huge upfront costs and myriads of negative press... All of it undermining GM's turnaround efforts.

[Cananopie]

I do blame GM for mismanagement in the 80s and 90s, they didn't realize the threat the imports posed, and they did nothing to change their ways, and now they are paying for it. They can recover, but they need to act fast and take action.

...

I fear that if this turnaround plan doesn't produce big results soon, Toyota will one day buy GM. That is the last thing I want to see happen. I think Toyota hasn't bought another car maker because they feel like they are buying someone else's mess and they can run opposition into the ground anyway. If I were in Toyota's position though, I would one day consider buying GM, and then who knows what they would do with it.

Hindsight, as they say, is 20/20 and you are a prime example of that. Was GM worried about the import vehicles in the 40s? what about the 50s? SURELY they were concerned about them in the 60s!? No?!?! What about the 70s? Not really... And now... after decades of having only two REAL competitors (Chrysler and Ford) you expected a bloated corporation who has played the same game for generations to have just "realized the threat that imports posed."

Gas was not an issue before the late 70s, imports were not an issue before the late 70s, and neither was heavy competition... in about a decades time many companies flooded the market and GM was a bulky corporation used to entitlement rather than heavy competition... and it was that way decade after decade after decade after decade. NONE of the Big 3 were ready for cheap labor outside of the country or gas shortages or any of that and being one of the biggest corporations in the WORLD at the time (if not THE biggest) they had a LOT of work to do to compete with the cheap small imports.

It's as if today you should expect EXXON-MOBIL to be on their toes for small oil companies they never even hear of... the oil world revolves around them, not vice versa. They have the cash to throw at problems of competition and thats the difference between GM and them, GM didn't eliminate competition but adjusted to it.

As for your incredibly irrational fear of Toyota PURCHASING GM you can relax about that. GM made over 192 BILLION dollars in revenue last year and was the 5th largest corporation in the ENTIRE WORLD, they aren't exactly strapped for cash. And even if they were Toyota does not have enough money to purchase GM. Nobody does. Not #8 Toyota or #1 Exxon Mobil... at BEST they'd have to merge (which there are absolutely no signs of) and even so Toyota is becoming just as much GM as GM is becoming Toyota.

Your fears are irrational, your reasoning is without proof, and your spite for Buick is above all else. Buick is an international brand gaining international popularity in one of (if not THE) fastest growing market in the world. In the USA Buick is finally getting the financial attention it deserves and the GM flying fortress is leveling out after a bit of a dip. They are still a very influential corporation and though Toyota will be roughly evenly matched with them by the end of the year, it does not make them "buyable." As of last year they still stood as one of the top five largest corporations in the entire world- the entire world!

Chill out and relax. Things are not as bad off as you wish them to be.

Edited August 3, 2007 by Cananopie

[smk4565]

As for your incredibly irrational fear of Toyota PURCHASING GM you can relax about that. GM made over 192 BILLION dollars in revenue last year and was the 5th largest corporation in the ENTIRE WORLD, they aren't exactly strapped for cash. And even if they were Toyota does not have enough money to purchase GM. Nobody does. Not #8 Toyota or #1 Exxon Mobil... at BEST they'd have to merge (which there are absolutely no signs of) and even so Toyota is becoming just as much GM as GM is becoming Toyota.

Your fears are irrational, your reasoning is without proof, and your spite for Buick is above all else. Buick is an international brand gaining international popularity in one of (if not THE) fastest growing market in the world. In the USA Buick is finally getting the financial attention it deserves and the GM flying fortress is leveling out after a bit of a dip. They are still a very influential corporation and though Toyota will be roughly evenly matched with them by the end of the year, it does not make them "buyable." As of last year they still stood as one of the top five largest corporations in the entire world- the entire world!

GM's revenues are high, but they are worth very little as a company because of the debt structure and struggles to make profit.

GM is worth $18.9 billion dollars (Ford is worth about $16.5 billion). That is the sum of ever share of stock they have. Toyota is worth about $215 billion dollars, over 11 times more. Toyota had $30-40 billion in their cash reserve in 2002-2005, but currently it is about $19 billion dollars. Toyota made $14.7 billion in profit last year, and is on pace to do about $16 billion in profit this year. For a little more than 1 year's profit, Toyota could buy 100% of GM's stock, buying 51% stake would cost less than $10 billion. GM's massive debt is probably what keeps another company from wanting to buy them. And I think Toyota likes doing things their own way and don't want to deal with other's problems. But it is financially possible for Toyota to buy GM or Ford or several other auto makers. Recently Toyota was worth more than Ford, GM, Honda, Nissan and Chrysler combined.

If Ford or Chrysler go bankrupt in the next 5-10 years that could change the whole automotive landscape as well.

Buick does well in China, but not here. I don't think the products can erase the image, even if the products do get good, and 2 of their 3 right now are really bad, the Enclave I think is class average. The SRX is way better and not much more money, the MDX is better, the Lexus RX for as ugly as it is, if lighter, faster, offers a hybrid, better mileage, etc. The Mazda CX-9 is even nice surprisingly. If all GM is going to do with Buick is rebadge other cars then there isn't a lot of point to keeping them. If Buick has good models, that sell with zero incentives then they should stay with their 3 car lineup as long as they make profit.

As long as Buick doesn't slow down other GM brands I don't mind if they are around. But GM over the last 5-8 years has shown an inability to update every model in every brand fast enough. It seems they go brand to brand and patch them up and move on, and by the time they move through 8 brands and get back around it is too late. Saab should go first, they are useless. Without them, and with Pontiac and Buick each having 3 models that might cut down the overall number of models enough to make it all work well.

[gm4life]

I am not a huge Buick fan but I would ask smk to ride in a new Buick Lucerne CXL V8 or CXS and bet he finds it very impressive quality and all. Or better yet drive a new Enclave. Buick has proven they can do it, and be a poor mans Lexus. Yes a Lucerne CXS pushes right over 40K with options, well into Lexus territory. Don't know what he is talking about. Yeah sales have gone down but Buick's reliability is one of the best in the industry and with good new products like the Lucerne and Enclave I have ALOT of hope for Buick. In fact in 2004 if you would have asked me the same question I would have said kill that old fart brand. I have even toyed with getting an Enclave CX or Lucerne CXL! I would watch what you say and suggest you drive and spend some time in an excellent new Buick product before you bash so much. There is light at the end of the tunnel. With the new China developed (I would assume good looking) Regal and various other products like the new Park Avenue on the way BUICK WILL LIVE! And might become a more young hip Lexus-ish brand but uhh thats right older people don't drive Lexus's right? WRONG you see them all the time... Go ahead call them an old fart brand too. Think before you speak. Simple and DON'T DIS ANY BRAND ON A GM FORUM! THAT IS MY ADVICE. I don't love Saturn but I certainly don't bash them. They even are getting better. Saab actually is making GM money can turn into an Audi/Volvo beater if they keep working on it. The 2003 9-3 actually gave me hope as did the somewhat washed out 2006 9-5. Good products can erase bad images Buick has some good ones like GNX, GSX, Riv and even the old Supers. Buick heritage is rich time to cash in on it. And with Buick China being a huge success you can bet you will see more modern looking and luxurious Buick's here in the states because of them. Buick China is in part saving Buick America. With almost a million sales and the on-onslaught of the imports and a dying demographic at the time they had no place to go but down. But trust me with products like the Lucerne and Enclave they can turn around. There is even an owner on this forum who owns two BMW's and a Lucerne they can do it... Don't even start bashing BMW...

Edited August 5, 2007 by gm4life

[Z-06]

I don't think the products can erase the image, even if the products do get good, and 2 of their 3 right now are really bad, the Enclave I think is class average.

I am sorry but I have to say this. If the very same products from the very same country which bombed us in 1945 got the bad memories which they created erased from our country then Buick can too as it has nothing anti-US against them to turn the tide around for its good products.

Part of what is preventing Buick is the negative perception about it which the people are being bombarded with.

For example four years ago when Buick did not have good products media was bashing them. Now Buick has one stellar product (Enclave) and one better than Average (Lucerne) the new trick the media plays is ohh look at Buick at one time it was a 800 lb Gorilla now it is a 10 oz Yorkie with only three products and thus it is not going to survive. Yes part of it is GM to blame, but at the same time, GM should get a second chance.

As far as market share for Buick and GM in general, I would rather see a 25% market share in 16 million units than 35% market share in 12 million units. If it was not for that reduced share and the media bashing GM would not have woken up till they were really signing the Chapter 11.

[balthazar]

>>"the Enclave I think is class average....The Mazda CX-9 is even nice surprisingly."<<

If you think the mazda (owner loyalty: 26%, second worse only to isuzu) is 'surprisingly nice', the Enclave will floor you (provided you could experience it without the Mt Everest chip against Buick on your shoulder).

>>"If all GM is going to do with Buick is rebadge other cars then there isn't a lot of point to keeping them."<<

None of Buick's offerings can be legitimately called a 'rebadge' according to the common sense definition of the practice.

>>"If Buick has good models, that sell with zero incentives then they should stay with their 3 car lineup as long as they make profit."<<

Even toyota doesn't sell with zero incentives- perhaps it can be canceled as a penalty for 'poor performance'.

Edited August 5, 2007 by balthazar

[smk4565]

>>"the Enclave I think is class average....The Mazda CX-9 is even nice surprisingly."<<

If you think the mazda (owner loyalty: 26%, second worse only to isuzu) is 'surprisingly nice', the Enclave will floor you (provided you could experience it without the Mt Everest chip against Buick on your shoulder).

>>"If all GM is going to do with Buick is rebadge other cars then there isn't a lot of point to keeping them."<<

None of Buick's offerings can be legitimately called a 'rebadge' according to the common sense definition of the practice.

>>"If Buick has good models, that sell with zero incentives then they should stay with their 3 car lineup as long as they make profit."<<

Even toyota doesn't sell with zero incentives- perhaps it can be canceled as a penalty for 'poor performance'.

Toyota doesn't need a $3000 cash back deal, and Lexus surely doesn't, you usually don't see Lexus or BMW discounts until end of calendar year and end of model year. If Buick sells cars with just a finance rate or maintenance package or up to $500 off, that is what everyone else does, but they do some heavy discounting now. One dealer here had brand new LaCrosses for $17,900 a couple months back.

The Enclave is an Acadia basically, but with wood trim and slightly different shaped dash kind of like Trailblazer and Envoy but the 2 have different sheet metal. LaCrosse shares some sheet metal with the Grand Prix, just look at the doors, they are the same, same platform, engine, tranny, etc. They need uniqueness to justify themselves as premium. If they made a $28-33,000 epsilon car with a DI, DOHC V6 and near lexus ES interior it might be a winner because those trading up from the Malibus' CamCords, Impalas, etc might buy it. But the Lincoln MKZ isn't setting any sales records I think the Buicks would get lost in the shuffle just like the MKZ.

Sitting in the CX-9 it surprised me for a Mazda since usually they are junk, but the CX-9 was more like a Volvo inside (I am not a big Volvo fan though), for $34,000 sticker it was pretty nice and Motor Trend rated it better than the Honda Pilot and GMC Acadia because it was faster and drove and handled better than the Acadia. If the Acadia can't beat a CX-9, how will the Enclave beat the SRX, MDX, M-class and RX350?

[smk4565]

In response to GM4life,

I have an Aurora 4.0 which is the same chassis as the Lucerne but the Aurora is shorter and about 200 pounds lighter than a V8 Lucerne. The Lucerne CXS has slightly worse braking and handling when I compared the numbers of the 2 and Acceleration the Lucerne has a slight edge in, about .2 seconds, but added power of the northstar is kind of cancelled out by the extra 200 pounds. I never bothered to drive a Lucerne CXS since it a bigger version of what I have, and the suspension is probably softer. I can imagine what it drives like. I like the Aurora in general, but it body rolls to much and has too much weight in the wrong places, I am buying rear drive for my next car for sure.

I have sat in the Lucerne many times at the auto show, the base interior with the cheap cloth and bench seat is a joke. The CXS interior isn't much better because the radio and speedo/tach gauges are almost identical with the Impala. The interior has an impala shape feel to it, the arm rest is too far back so if you arm is on it, you can't reach the radio controls, and you can in the Aurora. The Aurora used real wood too, the Lucerne's wood looks fake and the wood on the doors doesn't quite match what is on the center console. Plus the Lucerne has worse styling inside and out to me, but that is personal preference. I think the Lucerne is worse than the Aurora, and the Aurora was 6 years ago.

I was under the impression that Saab had not made money since GM bought them. Saab is going to sell about 33,000 cars in the US this year, that is sad. Every car dealer I have talked to says how much they break down, and I agree because my mom had a 2002 and had it towed 4 times. A 2002 car that was $41,000 should not be towed 4 times because it can't move. She had the 9-5, I have driven the 9-3 many times since she had loaners ever other month, the 9-3 was a really weak car (this was before the turbo v6) and the interior had too much plastic. Saab should definitely be the first brand to go.

I dont' like Buick products, and I think in 10 years there won't be much market for them because baby boomers won't give them a chance (lincoln is in the same situation). However Buick can still make money and some people will always want a cushy car just like some people will always want a Subaru WRX tuner type car. Buick is more useful than Saab or Hummer, so I'd hope Buick isn't the first brand to go if GM hits hard times again. Buick should be 3rd to go if GM gets in trouble again.

[cletus8269]

i guess if you can throw 40 grand on a car what kind of a difference would it make to have a 2000 dollar rebate on it? pretty much dont seem to be hurting for money obviously. if a 2 or 3K dollar rebate gets a 28K buick off the lot who cares?

Edited August 5, 2007 by cletus8269

[balthazar]

>>"Toyota doesn't need a $3000 cash back deal..."<<

Dealer by me is offering $7100 off the tundra. Yes, they need to. But the manner in which you gush about toyota, one would think they shouldn't offer dime 1 on ANY vehicle.

>>"The Enclave is an Acadia basically, but with wood trim and slightly different shaped dash kind of like Trailblazer and Envoy but the 2 have different sheet metal."<<

Enclave --> Acadia = ES350 --> camry.

>>"Motor Trend rated {Mazda} better than the Honda Pilot ..."<<

It was the acura mdx... or is that just "a pilot basically, but with wood trim and slightly different shaped dash" ??

>>"...and GMC Acadia because it was faster and drove and handled better than the Acadia. If the Acadia can't beat a CX-9, how will the Enclave beat the SRX, MDX, M-class and RX350?"<<

OMG- these are SEVEN PASSENGER 4x4s, not 500-HP ferraris!! No one races these or even THINKS about 0-60 in these except the 55-yr old teenagers that write for magazines! Jesus- they ran them all 0-100; do you want 100-MPH 4600-lb acura & mazda trucks ripping down your street? These magazines can only test 1 type of vehicle- a sports car. Their analysis for anything else is nearly useless.

BTW; here's your "faster" mazda:

0-60 -- GMC: 8.2 sec, mazda: 8.1

1/4-mile -- GMC: 16.4 sec, mazda: 16.3

Don't tell me; you could "easily" tell which was faster, right? Maybe you should be asking yourself why the SUV with 400-lbs less weight, nearly a lb less/hp, and better gears (3.46 vs. 3.16) (yes, I'm talking about the mazda)could only essentially equal the GMC in accceleration, handling (.80 Gs vs. .79 Gs, 28.2 sec figure 8 vs. 28.2 sec figure and provides 40,000 miles less powertrain warranty & 64,000 miles less roadside assistance can compete with the GMC at the same price point.

[Northstar]

>>"Toyota doesn't need a $3000 cash back deal..."<<

Dealer by me is offering $7100 off the tundra. Yes, they need to. But the manner in which you gush about toyota, one would think they shouldn't offer dime 1 on ANY vehicle.

>>"The Enclave is an Acadia basically, but with wood trim and slightly different shaped dash kind of like Trailblazer and Envoy but the 2 have different sheet metal."<<

Enclave --> Acadia = ES350 --> camry.

>>"Motor Trend rated {Mazda} better than the Honda Pilot ..."<<

It was the acura mdx... or is that just "a pilot basically, but with wood trim and slightly different shaped dash" ??

>>"...and GMC Acadia because it was faster and drove and handled better than the Acadia. If the Acadia can't beat a CX-9, how will the Enclave beat the SRX, MDX, M-class and RX350?"<<

OMG- these are SEVEN PASSENGER 4x4s, not 500-HP ferraris!! No one races these or even THINKS about 0-60 in these except the 55-yr old teenagers that write for magazines! Jesus- they ran them all 0-100; do you want 100-MPH 4600-lb acura & mazda trucks ripping down your street? These magazines can only test 1 type of vehicle- a sports car. Their analysis for anything else is nearly useless.

BTW; here's your "faster" mazda:

0-60 -- GMC: 8.2 sec, mazda: 8.1

1/4-mile -- GMC: 16.4 sec, mazda: 16.3

Don't tell me; you could "easily" tell which was faster, right? Maybe you should be asking yourself why the SUV with 400-lbs less weight, nearly a lb less/hp, and better gears (3.46 vs. 3.16) (yes, I'm talking about the mazda)could only essentially equal the GMC in accceleration, handling (.80 Gs vs. .79 Gs, 28.2 sec figure 8 vs. 28.2 sec figure and provides 40,000 miles less powertrain warranty & 64,000 miles less roadside assistance can compete with the GMC at the same price point.

C&D only picked the Mazda because it was significantly cheaper than the other two.

[smk4565]

Well I'd never buy a Mazda either, but I was surprised when at sat in it that is was more like a Volvo, than the junk they normally make. The car mags seemed to like it for the lower cost and car like handling. The Acadia has great braking, and I remember the reviews being positive but every car mag didn't like how the price quickly climbed to about $45,000. I think that is a lot too, that is Lexus RX or Cadillac SRX territory.

GM has kind of forgotten the space the Trailblazer is in now, the Lambdas are closer in size and price the the Tahoe.

The Enclave was the 43rd best selling SUV in July, which is an improvement over prior months, but it is outsold by the Pacifica and Torrent. The Acadia is 24th best selling. The Enclave is nice for a Buick, but it isn't any better than an Acura or Lexus, and has a less prestigious name.

The Lucerne is making a good case for it's survival, they are on pace to sell almost 90,000 this year. The LaCrosse is fading, they only sold 4,100 in July, 27,000 through the year so far.

Looking at Lincoln sales however makes Buick look like an All star. Lincoln is really pathetic.

Edited August 6, 2007 by smk4565

[Sixty8panther]

Don't F*** with Buick!

[Cananopie]

There are more things to the automotive industry than quantity which is really the only point you keep bringing up over and over again.

You are telling a GM forum that Buick doesn't know what they're doing, and when you get a response saying exactly the opposite by a dozen people you cling to declining sales as your only real form of defense.

You make it sound like being 43rd best selling has any bearing on it being a hit or not. The Enclave just got out of the stable well behind the Acadia which is widely more available than the Enclave, let alone cheaper...

and you have the audacity to compare it to the Torrent or the Grandpa Pacifica which are priced (excluding the incentives that must be on that thing by now) $8,000 to $10,000 cheaper than the Enclave base model. They aren't even in the same league.

And then you blindly, with no proof, say it's not better than Acura or Lexus which you've been ingrained somewhere that they are "more prestigious." Please stop confusing your opinion with fact and stop trying to make Buick look worse by comparing it to the bulk sales of the much cheaper and in one case outdated models. You're not tricking anyone, your entries seem at best spiteful as if you must prove what a poor brand Buick is... with no real proof at all and ignoring the unique situation the brand has been in, which there is much surprise at how well the sales have stayed afloat.

Buick's are a lot more profitable than the lower brands, a high percentage of customers pay in cash, the Chinese market is flourishing with Buicks, the Lucerne slams Avalon sales, Buick is constantly rated as one of the most reliable brands, it has one of the most loyal fanbases, the average age of a Buick owner is dropping like the barometer before a storm (and it has taken less than a decade to do it), the Enclave has a huge waiting period and is one of the hottest new vehicles, Buick has proven it could sell what Pontiac can't (Aztec vs Rendezvous)....

and yet with all those facts you just focus in on the numbers, ignoring the drastic drop in vehicles to save a bloated umbrella corporation. Who wants the late 80s/early 90s Skylarks and Centuries again? Nobody... but you cling to those sales numbers like it was worth it. Buick was selling Chevys at the time the sales were near half a million, the quality was not there. Things have changed a lot. Quality, not quantity, is what you need to realize is what Buick is about. You seem to be the only one on this forum who won't let go of the old 80s/early 90s Buick image of being "less prestigious" so let go of it will you?

[smk4565]

I agree quality cars are needed more than mass quantity. I thought 2 years ago Buick and Pontiac should each have 3-4 models, yet stuff like the Montana and G5 kept coming. 3800s and 4-speeds don't make good cars. Lexus even with their Camry rebadge does better than that. The 2008 Malibu does better than that. I know Buick is very profitable, because you pay for more than you get, and they are using mechanicals from 1990. It is just like the Town Car is profitable because it is 1991 mechanics and priced $20k over the Ford model.

Buick's average buyer age is 65, up from 63 in 2004, so the LaCrosse and Lucerne has not reversed the trend. I don't really care if they stay or go, I just don't want to see resources or money diverted form Chevrolet or Cadillac to fund brands like Saab that are dragging GM down.

[cyclonic]

Good to see so much passion for the brand here. I can see how its somewhat of an aspirational brand in China, but to me, in the US, Buick is ..well, dead. Then again, I really hope I am wrong.

My opinion is based on the idea that Buick has no real discernible place in the domestic GM world (to me anyway). Cadillac does luxury and that should be the aspirational brand. I know that i'd like a Caddy! Pontiac should do sporty, Chevy should do value and Saturn should do ..well whatever they do. Buick? Where do they fit in? Are they luxury brand? If so, you can't have two luxury brands, consumers only become confused. Are Buick only there for the blue-rinse set who want a nice comfy ride to insulate their fragile brittle bones before they shuffle off this mortal coil?

I dunno honestly. Buick leave me confused.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Saturn does Europe, or should I say Opel USA!

[cyclonic]

Saturn does Europe, or should I say Opel USA!

For once, we agree! If someone gave me the choice of a Cobalt or an Astra, i'll take the Astra every time.

[Cananopie]

Good to see so much passion for the brand here. I can see how its somewhat of an aspirational brand in China, but to me, in the US, Buick is ..well, dead. Then again, I really hope I am wrong.

My opinion is based on the idea that Buick has no real discernible place in the domestic GM world (to me anyway). Cadillac does luxury and that should be the aspirational brand. I know that i'd like a Caddy! Pontiac should do sporty, Chevy should do value and Saturn should do ..well whatever they do. Buick? Where do they fit in? Are they luxury brand? If so, you can't have two luxury brands, consumers only become confused. Are Buick only there for the blue-rinse set who want a nice comfy ride to insulate their fragile brittle bones before they shuffle off this mortal coil?

I dunno honestly. Buick leave me confused.

The identity that worries you about Buick shouldn't, and it's interesting at how you ignore Saturn's identity and not have that worry you.

The way I see it, and I think many would agree, is for the core brands it runs something like this:

Chevy is your bulk sales with the widest variety of vehicles, none too luxurious.

Pontiac is going to be about the same size as Buick (model-wise) focusing on sporty, but still cheaper, vehicles

Saturn is a lot more inline with Opel now but not only that GM seems to use the brand for more of a practicing brand to see how the public responds to it... I mean we're going to see the first serious green vehicles out of Saturn and Saturn is always doing something a little different than the rest of GM.

Buick is the entry-luxury brand. as it has always been. To me it seems America is so focused on the best nowadays that middle class luxury which flourished during previous decades has virtually been forgot about. The American mentality is either "You're rolling with the best (ie Caddy, BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Infiniti) or you aint nothing (ie Chevy, Pontiac, Dodge, Toyota, Nissan)" and a lot of people forget that there is a pretty big gap usually between them. Buick aims to fill that gap... GMC respectfully tapers off with the Acadia for the Enclave, the Impala doesn't encroach in on Lucerne territory substantially... the $30k - $40k range has a lot of buyers who aren't looking to spend the kind of money that movie stars, rappers, and other celebrities will throw down for things like the Escalade, but still believe they deserve a car with some luxury and comfort. Buick has always catered to this crowd and still has its place. Check the prices of Cadillacs in comparison and notice that they are not selling the same vehicles Buick is in the same price range... there is more than the two-tiered system most people think about with cars (low class or high class).

Cadillac is the aspirational brand, the brand that is there to flaunt and to essentially waste money. It doesn't have the time to be dealing in the $30ks anymore and the longer time goes on the more expensive Caddys are getting (with the quality to go with them).

Buick has a very important thing in the scheme of things. The companies that overlap price and product are the first three- Chevy, Pontiac, and Saturn... does it take 3 brands to do the very few things each of them do?