January 2008 Sales: General Motors

[Newbiewar]

FOR RELEASE: 2008-02-01

GM Reports 252,565 Deliveries in January, Up 2.1 Percent

Strong Retail Increase of 11.2 Percent Offsets Planned Fleet Reduction

Chevrolet, Buick, GMC, Cadillac and Saturn Total Sales Up

Malibu Total Sales Up 58 Percent; CTS Up 95 Percent; Lacrosse Up 70 Percent; G6 Up 16 Percent

Small/Compact Car Total Sales Up 17 Percent Driven By Aveo, Cobalt and G5

Enclave, Acadia and OUTLOOK Drive Mid-Utility Crossover Segment Up 134 Percent

DETROIT - GM dealers in the United States delivered 252,565 vehicles in January, an increase of 2.1 percent compared with the same month last year. The company continued its efforts to focus on improved retail sales, showing an increase of more than 11 percent.

Very strong retail sales of 186,187 vehicles were driven by a more than 31-percent surge in retail car sales. GM retail share in the U.S. has remained essentially stable for the past two and one-half years. Total truck sales of 148,191 were up more than 3 percent compared with a year ago.

"January's performance strongly indicates that, along with our great market position in trucks and crossovers, GM is back in the car business," said Mark LaNeve, vice president, GM North American Vehicle Sales, Service and Marketing. "Our new launch vehicles, including the award-winning Chevrolet Malibu and Cadillac CTS had a sensational month, as did the Chevrolet Cobalt, Pontiac G5 and G6, Saturn AURA, Buick Lacrosse and Cadillac STS. Overall, we've had year-over-year retail sales increases in four of the past five months."

Chevrolet Malibu retail sales were up 198 percent while total sales climbed 58 percent, compared with a year ago. Chevrolet retail car sales were up 62 percent compared with a year ago. Cadillac CTS deliveries were up 95 percent total and 104 percent retail compared to last January.

GM's fuel-efficient small cars saw substantial total and retail growth. Chevrolet Aveo total sales were up 40 percent, while retail sales were up 65 percent; Cobalt was up 33 percent total and 65 percent retail; Pontiac G5 was up 50 percent total and 71 percent retail, while Vibe was up 10 percent total and 58 percent retail when compared with January 2007.

The Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia and Saturn OUTLOOK together accounted for more than 12,200 retail vehicle sales in the month. The mid-utility crossover segment grew retail sales by 144 percent compared with year-ago January levels. Total sales of GM's mid-utility crossovers were up 134 percent to more than 12,600 vehicles compared with a year ago.

Small crossover utilities, led by the Saturn VUE, Chevrolet Equinox and Pontiac Torrent pushed up GM's total sales in that segment by 51 percent, while retail volume rose 38 percent compared with last year.

"Our retail increase helped move our mix of retail sales as a percentage of total sales up by 6 points," LaNeve added. "We are improving our quality of share while offering vehicles that have industry-leading value, great fuel economy and the best warranty coverage of any full-line automaker." Chevrolet retail sales were up 13 percent, Pontiac was up 17 percent, Buick was up 13 percent, GMC was up 15 percent, Cadillac was up 11 percent and Saturn retail sales were up 5 percent compared with a year ago.

Certified Used Vehicles

January 2008 sales for all certified GM brands, including GM Certified Used Vehicles, Cadillac Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles, Saturn Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles, Saab Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles, and HUMMER Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles, were 37,669 vehicles, down 13 percent from last January.

GM Certified Used Vehicles, the industry's top-selling certified brand, posted January sales of 33,339 vehicles, down 11 percent. Cadillac Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles sold 3,226 vehicles, down 14 percent. Saturn Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles sold 546 vehicles, down 59 percent. Saab Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles sold 429 vehicles, down 19 percent, and HUMMER Certified Pre-Owned Vehicles sold 129 vehicles, up nearly 2 percent.

"January sales for GM Certified Used Vehicles were up 10 percent from the previous month, but down 11 percent from the brand's best January sales month ever in 2007," said LaNeve. "We're optimistic about growing sales in the first quarter as consumers opt for financing similar to new vehicles on some of our most popular models and as more highly equipped off-rent vehicles work their way into GM Certified inventory in coming months."

GM North America Reports January 2008 Production; 2008 First-Quarter Production Forecast Revised at 965,000 Vehicles

In January, GM North America produced 297,000 vehicles (106,000 cars and 191,000 trucks). This is down 16,000 units or 5 percent compared to January 2007 when the region produced 313,000 vehicles (135,000 cars and 178,000 trucks). (Production totals include joint venture production of 13,000 vehicles in January 2008 and 15,000 vehicles in January 2007.)

The region's 2008 first-quarter production forecast is revised at 965,000 vehicles (357,000 cars and 608,000 trucks), up 15,000 units or 2 percent from last month's guidance.

General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM), the world's largest automaker, has been the annual global industry sales leader for 77 years. Founded in 1908, GM today employs about 274,000 people around the world. With global headquarters in Detroit, GM manufactures its cars and trucks in 35 countries. In 2007, nearly 9.37 million GM cars and trucks were sold globally under the following brands: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, GM Daewoo, Holden, HUMMER, Opel, Pontiac, Saab, Saturn, Vauxhall and Wuling. GM's OnStar subsidiary is the industry leader in vehicle safety, security and information services. More information on GM can be found at www.gm.com.

Note: GM sales and production results are available on GM Media OnLine at http://media.gm.com/us/gm/en/ by clicking on News, then Sales/Production. In this press release and related comments by General Motors management, we use words like "expect," "anticipate," "estimate," "forecast," "objective," "plan," "goal" and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements, representing our current judgment about possible future events. We believe these judgments are reasonable, but actual results may differ materially due to a variety of important factors. Among other items, such factors might include: the pace of introductions and market acceptance of new products; the effect of competition on our markets and significant changes in the competitive environment; price increases or shortages of fuel; and changes in laws, regulations or tax rates. GM's most recent annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly report on Form 10-Q provide information about these factors, which may be revised or supplemented in future reports to the SEC on Form 10-Q or 8-K.

# # #

Original Press Release with Sales Breakdown

[Northstar]

Nothing really seemed that great, but it was January. I guess everything was pretty solid across the board to achieve an 11% retail increase.

[Toyota.vs.GM]

The Good news was Toyota was DOWN!2.3 percent!

[siegen]

Honda was down as well.

This post wins the award for most line-breaks!

[ZL-1]

This post wins the award for most line-breaks!

Saab had a rough month and the dinossaur 9-5 is taking a huge beating... the new 9-5 should be on sale now!

[Z-06]

Saab had a rough month and the dinossaur 9-5 is taking a huge beating... the new 9-5 should be on sale in 2006!

Fixed

[thegriffon]

GM dealer groups you really wanted to be in January:

Cadillac, up 8%

BPG, up 6% (just 2K shy of Dodge, and so far ahead of Lincoln-Mercury it isn't funny)

Saturn, up 12%

[Z-06]

What is not written is the fact that Impala got hammered. It lost almost 8,000 units compared to last year, and the Malibu gained about 5,000 units compared to 2007. Collectively that is a loss.

So much for next gen Impala to be a FWD. The Malibu and Impala if both on FWD will kill eachother rather than killing the competition. It will be interesting to watch the Impala volume over the next 11 months and compare it with the Malibu.

Impala sold about 17k, that is a good volume for a RWD. Looking at about 200k/year.

[Brougham-Holiday]

Even though the OUTLOOK is priced lower then the GMC and Buick sister SUVs it still is the worst seller. It would be nice if GM let more people know about the new products at Saturn. Even the Aura hasn't caught on as the G6 and Malibu have even though it is so similar.

DTS and Lucerne are both down as well, would be nice if GM tossed something fresh towards them as well. Too bad they still have the old 4 speed auto as that is a killer on paper when compared to many of the competitions trans. that now have 5 and 6 speeds.

I agree with smallchevy, the Impala is way down, 8,000 units is like dropping a whole car line. Thats on track to loose 100,000 units a year. Even with the Malibu doing so well, this must still hurt GM.

Over all it does look much better for GM then it did in the past. The new products are doing well, but its clear that many customers know how far the other products are past their expiration date.

[Chicagoland]

I think Saturn's no haggle pricing is hurthing them, over all. People know how to deal and want to get the lowest price. Chevy dealers can make a sale easier by lowering the price. Saturn is stuck with the high price on the Aura, and then people wonder.

Also, G5 went from 1300 to 1900, 50%, but not much numerically. Still the Malibu is doing better than the experts predicted! W body Impala is starting its fade out, down alot!

[enzl]

Keep in mind that the Impala's #'s are hurt most by fleet sales reductions, then the Malibu...although it's obviously difficult to tell which has more effect.

Saturn still worries me...all of the product and very small volume increase---the Outlook probably should have gone to Chevy.

GM deserves praise for positive moves in a brutal marketplace. Our Domestic stores had tough months...but Chevy was still solid--the 'bu has definitely gotten some positive traffic.

[ZL-1]

Fixed

I think it will be presented later in the year: the Insignia will have precedence, but then the 9-5. I'd like GM to roll out the new Saabs with logic: 9-5, 9-4, 9-3 and 9-1, but since the 9-3 got the new nose this year it will perhaps be the last one.

[A Horse With No Name]

Glad to see the bu doing well, and Solstice is up as well.

Glad to see GM get some nice fresh product to market.

Chris

[Z-06]

I think it will be presented later in the year: the Insignia will have precedence, but then the 9-5. I'd like GM to roll out the new Saabs with logic: 9-5, 9-4, 9-3 and 9-1, but since the 9-3 got the new nose this year it will perhaps be the last one.

Buick, Opel/Vauxhaul/Saturn and Saab will get the first fruits of EPII. 9-5 will be one of them. I think we may see it in Frankfurt or Paris.

[ZL-1]

Buick, Opel/Vauxhaul/Saturn and Saab will get the first fruits of EPII. 9-5 will be one of them. I think we may see it in Frankfurt or Paris.

Seeing the Saab at one of those shows would allow Opel to have precedence in showing the Insignia

[loki]

I agree with smallchevy, the Impala is way down, 8,000 units is like dropping a whole car line. Thats on track to loose 100,000 units a year. Even with the Malibu doing so well, this must still hurt GM.

hopefully starting to switch over to just one line producing W-bodies...for things to come.

[Newbiewar]

Honda was down as well.

This post wins the award for most line-breaks!

thx ill take that award

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Saab had a rough month and the dinossaur 9-5 is taking a huge beating... the new 9-5 should be on sale now!

Saab really needs product to remain viable. I can't believe there are whispers of phasing out Pontiac and Buick while Saab has drained the bank for years now.

Hopefully the G8 line and new Vibe will be enough of a boost for Pontiac to be in the positive.

Hummer needs product NOW! I fear that the division will get a very negative connotation (it's 1980 all over again, with GM neglecting a division) even more so than it has now. (Thanks to the greenies and import humping press)

Solstice is up as well.

Nice!!! And in the middle of winter...

Edited February 3, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

What is not written is the fact that Impala got hammered. It lost almost 8,000 units compared to last year, and the Malibu gained about 5,000 units compared to 2007. Collectively that is a loss.

So much for next gen Impala to be a FWD. The Malibu and Impala if both on FWD will kill eachother rather than killing the competition. It will be interesting to watch the Impala volume over the next 11 months and compare it with the Malibu.

Impala sold about 17k, that is a good volume for a RWD. Looking at about 200k/year.

True that...

Hopefully those lost sales were planned fleet reductions.

[ZL-1]

Saab really needs product to remain viable. I can't believe there are whispers of phasing out Pontiac and Buick while Saab has drained the bank for years now.

I agree. They will get product: 9-5, 9-4X, 9-1 (production not confirmed, but a concept's coming earlier than expected - Geneva, not London), and EpII 9-3.

Re proftability:

1. Saab drained the bank but from what I from Saab people's public statements it is now fully integrated into GME (remember 9-5 moving to Germany, Trollhättan maybe getting NG Astra, Astra TwinTop and maybe the NG 9-3 convertible) and its breakeven should be, my guess, at around 150K/year. They sold 133K in 2006 with only two model ranges, so with the new product they should do fine.

2. The worry with Pontiac and Buick is that they might sell important numbers volume-wise, but at a loss from all the discounting and daily-rental sales. Hence the "damaged brands" talk.

Unless we get the numbers GM prepares for internal reporting and analysis, it's hard to tell what the real shape of the brands is. Gut feeling gives me a more bullish prognosis regarding Saab and Buick, and I never underestimate my bowels

[Z-06]

I agree. They will get product: 9-5, 9-4X, 9-1 (production not confirmed, but a concept's coming earlier than expected - Geneva, not London), and EpII 9-3.

Re proftability:

1. Saab drained the bank but from what I from Saab people's public statements it is now fully integrated into GME (remember 9-5 moving to Germany, Trollhättan maybe getting NG Astra, Astra TwinTop and maybe the NG 9-3 convertible) and its breakeven should be, my guess, at around 150K/year. They sold 133K in 2006 with only two model ranges, so with the new product they should do fine.

2. The worry with Pontiac and Buick is that they might sell important numbers volume-wise, but at a loss from all the discounting and daily-rental sales. Hence the "damaged brands" talk.

Unless we get the numbers GM prepares for internal reporting and analysis, it's hard to tell what the real shape of the brands is. Gut feeling gives me a more bullish prognosis regarding Saab and Buick, and I never underestimate my bowels

The more GM integrates its design and operations, the more obscure will it be to really distinguish which brand is damaged or profitable. In some ways it is a good thing. The only thing which can tell about a losing brand is the sales numbers, not revenue or product development spending.

SAAB can really sustain the 150K volume, and with 9-1, 9-4 coming in, brand new 9-5 out in the horizon and updated 9-3 in, it can sustain for the next few years.

LIKE FOG said, Hummer needs good product soon. They should update the H2 onto the GMT900s and put a SIDI in. May be that would be a good vehicle to put the 4.9SIDI and the upcoming diesel to start with. They should not wait for the H4 till 2010 or beyond.

You cannot ignore one brand and look for pushing the other in the integrated design and development scenario.

[A Horse With No Name]

I agree. They will get product: 9-5, 9-4X, 9-1 (production not confirmed, but a concept's coming earlier than expected - Geneva, not London), and EpII 9-3.

Re proftability:

1. Saab drained the bank but from what I from Saab people's public statements it is now fully integrated into GME (remember 9-5 moving to Germany, Trollhättan maybe getting NG Astra, Astra TwinTop and maybe the NG 9-3 convertible) and its breakeven should be, my guess, at around 150K/year. They sold 133K in 2006 with only two model ranges, so with the new product they should do fine.

2. The worry with Pontiac and Buick is that they might sell important numbers volume-wise, but at a loss from all the discounting and daily-rental sales. Hence the "damaged brands" talk.

Unless we get the numbers GM prepares for internal reporting and analysis, it's hard to tell what the real shape of the brands is. Gut feeling gives me a more bullish prognosis regarding Saab and Buick, and I never underestimate my bowels

When it comes to spin from the automotive media I never understimate the products of my bowls.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Again, diesels would make great sense in the HUMMER lineup.

Fuel costs will be huge for truck owners, and there are lots of people who need trucks for buisiness reasons. the sooner GM can get more diesels to market the better.

Chris

[ZL-1]

The more GM integrates its design and operations, the more obscure will it be to really distinguish which brand is damaged or profitable. In some ways it is a good thing. The only thing which can tell about a losing brand is the sales numbers, not revenue or product development spending.

SAAB can really sustain the 150K volume, and with 9-1, 9-4 coming in, brand new 9-5 out in the horizon and updated 9-3 in, it can sustain for the next few years.

LIKE FOG said, Hummer needs good product soon. They should update the H2 onto the GMT900s and put a SIDI in. May be that would be a good vehicle to put the 4.9SIDI and the upcoming diesel to start with. They should not wait for the H4 till 2010 or beyond.

You cannot ignore one brand and look for pushing the other in the integrated design and development scenario.

You can ignore and even kill them, it all depends how how costs are allocated. It is a mere management accounting issue. I think Saab can hit the 170K/year volume that Jan Åke Jonsson described as a volume that would generate interesting returns (I think he meant 'great returns' but he's Swedish so he'll understate).

I think Hummer is a dinossaur. EDIT - A cool dinossaur, but a dinossaur.

Edited February 5, 2008 by ZL-1

[enzl]

Volume should always be secondary to profitability in any biz...but Saab's volume isn't an issue at all. The fact is that the Saab lineup today could be 2 great models rather than a series of also-ran and never-was products. The 9-2X was a bad idea poorly executed. The 9-3 is really a warmed over Vectra and the 9-5 needs carbon-dating to extract it's true age. The 9-7X is ironically, the best T-blazer ever built, but still not remotely a Saab.

GM has always lacked focus when it comes to Saab. They could be making 200k+ niche, exclusive and interesting Saabs, rather than attempting to craft Saabs out of more plebian underpinnnings and rebadging mediocre sister products.

People currently buy Saabs on the deal---many educated consumers jumped ship years ago as CR, JD Power & pretty much every other survey group have found them to be disasterous ownership experiences--dealer flux, poor reliability & worse resale value burned most of these customers around the time the 900 became the 9-3.

They won't come back without a massive effort in product, marketing and dealer service---an investment that I don't believe GM can muster nor afford. GM must focus...and not on Hummer either...that's been another distraction that has cost them the development of desperately needed mid-market product.

[Z-06]

You can ignore and even kill them, it all depends how how costs are allocated. It is a mere management accounting issue. I think Saab can hit the 170K/year volume that Jan Åke Jonsson described as a volume that would generate interesting returns (I think he meant 'great returns' but he's Swedish so he'll understate).

I think Hummer is a dinossaur. EDIT - A cool dinossaur, but a dinossaur.

True upto a certain extent. But the profitability of GM overall also depends on differentiation. GM cannot think of profitability and or volume if they keep only three or four brands like Toyota. There are two types of customers GM has broadly, which is upto a certain extent is unique compared to Japanese brands. One is the loyal, "enthusiast" who wants the brands and products which make him feel nostalgic about GM, and other is one who is trendy, ready to acquire anything that is cool and hip. GM needs to balance those. A customer who is already a customer is better than customer who needs to be reached and educated. Both SAAB and Hummer do not have any stand alone designed and developed product in the future. Which means either or both of the brands could be killed or ignored. But then you are ignoring customer #1. GM acknowledges customer #1 and thus needs to satiate him through keeping the brands going.

[enzl]

True upto a certain extent. But the profitability of GM overall also depends on differentiation. GM cannot think of profitability and or volume if they keep only three or four brands like Toyota. There are two types of customers GM has broadly, which is upto a certain extent is unique compared to Japanese brands. One is the loyal, "enthusiast" who wants the brands and products which make him feel nostalgic about GM, and other is one who is trendy, ready to acquire anything that is cool and hip. GM needs to balance those. A customer who is already a customer is better than customer who needs to be reached and educated. Both SAAB and Hummer do not have any stand alone designed and developed product in the future. Which means either or both of the brands could be killed or ignored. But then you are ignoring customer #1. GM acknowledges customer #1 and thus needs to satiate him through keeping the brands going.

While I understand the sentiment, I think you're underestimating the problem:

GM has many different types of customers---and for years, they tried to keep them all happy by 'splitting the difference' with their products:

For ex. Cadillac tried to keep geezers with the DTS, while trying to foist an STS 'sports sedan' w/ FWD on import intenders--this is despite the fact that Historically Caddy was a RWD co., and all of the growing success of BMW and MB were routinely ignored---Lexus didn't ape Caddy with their first product (LS), they ripped off MB---in 1989!--so the warnings were there.

Or, how about the W-body variants? Pontiac, Buick, Olds and Chevy were all peddling the same car, basically---for 10+ years. It's like they never saw, nor adjusted to the quality available from the original Taurus or later Camries, Accords or late Altimas...

Now, they've made a bed and must lie in it. To make the same mistake again is stupid. To differentiate ALL brands sufficiently is impossible. Since Olds costs Billions to fold, you can't close a make---so you've got to cut down on the number of models--combine storefronts and, basically, niche-ify most of the remaining small fry--Buick, Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer, Saab.

They have no choice. There's no reason why GM can't make do with less product. More product=more problems. At some point, they must cease being the 'WallMart' of cars with a few exceptional product breakthroughs--they must be a manufacturer of quality, unique and class product, regardless of category.

Until or Unless that happens, they're just circling the toilet awaiting gravity's inevitable pull.

[ZL-1]

While I understand the sentiment, I think you're underestimating the problem:

GM has many different types of customers---and for years, they tried to keep them all happy by 'splitting the difference' with their products:

For ex. Cadillac tried to keep geezers with the DTS, while trying to foist an STS 'sports sedan' w/ FWD on import intenders--this is despite the fact that Historically Caddy was a RWD co., and all of the growing success of BMW and MB were routinely ignored---Lexus didn't ape Caddy with their first product (LS), they ripped off MB---in 1989!--so the warnings were there.

Or, how about the W-body variants? Pontiac, Buick, Olds and Chevy were all peddling the same car, basically---for 10+ years. It's like they never saw, nor adjusted to the quality available from the original Taurus or later Camries, Accords or late Altimas...

Now, they've made a bed and must lie in it. To make the same mistake again is stupid. To differentiate ALL brands sufficiently is impossible. Since Olds costs Billions to fold, you can't close a make---so you've got to cut down on the number of models--combine storefronts and, basically, niche-ify most of the remaining small fry--Buick, Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer, Saab.

They have no choice. There's no reason why GM can't make do with less product. More product=more problems. At some point, they must cease being the 'WallMart' of cars with a few exceptional product breakthroughs--they must be a manufacturer of quality, unique and class product, regardless of category.

that's a problem as it spreads resources thin. Eventually GM will decide which brands will be starved to death.