Eight-Brand Pileup Dents GM's Turnaround Efforts - WSJ

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I have to agree with Camino on this. Make each brand decide what it is to be and them make then stick within their mission.

Just because Buick gets a nice new vehicle doesn't mean every brand needs it.

I think that Pontiac has the lines they need in order to become more focused. G6, G8, and Solstice. But allow each model to have variations. Base, GT, GXP is fine for two of those but the G8 has the ability to become so much more. Let G8 have a wagon and coupe, as well as the sedan and ST. That could be a pretty hot lineup in itself.

The hard part will be telling the brands to quit whining when someone else has a winner.

+2

That's what I mean when I always preach the "focused division" thing. There is absolutely NO reason why every GM division needs to be all things to all people. That defeats the purpose of having multiple divisions in the first place IMO.

In certain segments in the meat of the market, I think multiple entries can succeed. For instance, the G6, Aura and Malibu will be fine once Pontiac gets a more focused G6. The Lacrosse is already out of the picture since the new model will be leaps and bounds above what we hav today.

As for the Lambdas.... Hmmm... That's a hard one. I thought 3 was enough, but I can also see why the Traverse was greenlighted, with the Outlook not pulling the volume it was intended to.

[Olds Guy]

If only Saturn and Oldsmobile could have exchanged fates.

AMEN!!

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

GM was throwing good money after bad. Do you know where GM got that 10 billion or so to start up Saturn? That's right, from the other divisions. Buy doing that in the early 90's it stunted every platform upgrade by 5 years in every other division. Which I still claim is what killed Oldsmobile off, if Olds could have upgraded their products 5 years earlier it would still be around today.

Saturn's creation by Roger Smith is what killed Oldsmobile.

I think Saturn had a lot to do with it. But it's almost as if that was the plan all along.

I also think the devastating strike of 1998 had a lot to do with the death of Oldsmobile. I remember Olds officials saying that the turnaround was actually picking up momentum, especially on the back of the then just introduced Intrigue, until the UAW strike killed inventory. After the strike, the momentum never returned.

Poor marketing had a lot do with it as well. I distinctly remember an article with a Dodge dealer who said he experienced quite a few people coming into his dealership looking for Intrigues, and especially, Auroras. Remember, Dodge was the "hot" company back then. The decision to switch logos with little marketing support as well as the decision to remove identification from the cars were HORRIBLE moves. I remember reading about the Aurora in Car & Driver and not being very sure what company it was from, when it first came out. I did know that the car was beautiful!

I think GM was very impatient with Oldsmobile and didn't allow the division enough time to show results. But then, I look back and wonder how bad of shape GM would be in now if it had to support another division through the last 5 years of hell. That's why I emphasize patience in all of my posts about the "damaged brands".

[regfootball]

i laugh at all the dissecting of the saturn thing. just now, over the wall, another co-worker bought a saturn this past weekend. that's in addition to the one in my row a couple weeks ago. and was with a coworker at the autoshow this weekend and he spent about an hour in a vue and that will likely be his next vehicle, either that or the fusion.

also, saturn was the GM brand getting the most love at the show this weekend from showgoers. that, and chevy trucks. the astra, aura, vue, outlook, sky, all got plenty of love from the crowds.

not sure its worth all your mental anguish. saturn is here and does generate traffic.

[The O.C.]

OK....that was wierd.....

While reading the end of Reg's last post, a Saturn commercial popped up on the "Today" show.....

[PurdueGuy]

OK....that was wierd.....

While reading the end of Reg's last post, a Saturn commercial popped up on the "Today" show.....

he's a witch!

[enzl]

i laugh at all the dissecting of the saturn thing. just now, over the wall, another co-worker bought a saturn this past weekend. that's in addition to the one in my row a couple weeks ago. and was with a coworker at the autoshow this weekend and he spent about an hour in a vue and that will likely be his next vehicle, either that or the fusion.

also, saturn was the GM brand getting the most love at the show this weekend from showgoers. that, and chevy trucks. the astra, aura, vue, outlook, sky, all got plenty of love from the crowds.

not sure its worth all your mental anguish. saturn is here and does generate traffic.

It's hard not to play "What could have been...", especially when you consider what GM has gone through in the last 20 years.

I agree that Saturn has a future going forward. It is a brand that non-enthusiasts seem to have an affinity for...and one without the baggage of other GM brands.

I can promise you that the current Saturn push has everything to do with psychographics and extensive marketing research. I"d love to be a fly on the wall for some of those meetings:

Can you guys summarize the findings?

'(insert GM division) sucks--would never consider'

'Saturn--might consider'

OK. Let's work with Saturn, boys.

Or something like that. I'm certainly paraphrasing, but I suspect that's not far off.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Even I like Saturn now that it has been assimilated, and Opelized. Saturn was my Holden of the 90's. New decade new GM Holden subsidiary to target, oops I mean help!

[smk4565]

The main problem that I see in all this is that Chevrolet is steadily losing sales year by year. Chevy sold 16% fewer vehicles in 2007 than in 2001 (total US sales were only down 5.8% in same period). Chevy lost sales every year except two in that time period averaging a loss of 2.7% per year. So while GM spreads its marketing/development dollar thin with the Pontiac, Buick and Saturn sideshows, Toyota continues to clean Chevy's clock. It's like Chevy has to flight Toyota with one hand and Pontiac and Saturn with the other. This is the crux of the too-many-brands problem. Fortunately, GM is showing with the Malibu how a large focused marketing effort can work (presumably at the Aura's and G6's expense - haven't seen an ad/commercial for those in quite a while).

BTW, it's interesting that Buick sold fewer vehicles last year than Olds did the year immediately after GM announced its demise (185,791 to 233,745). Buick has averaged an annual loss of 11.7% since 2001 with only one of those years seeing a sales increase (2002). Sure, Buick is purposely being downsized for image and channel reasons so no surprise there. But there's little reason to hope for stabilization this year and next with Traverse stealing at least some sales from Enclave coupled with tired Lucerne and LaCrosse products. By the time the sedan replacements arrive Enclave will be in the dumps. It's like running up a "down escalator."

At the 2001-2007 average sales decline rate, Pontiac will be under that 2001 Olds number within 8 years. Pontiac is used to sales declines - it has had one every year from 2001 to 2007!

Cadillac probably has the greatest potential from a profit per vehicle standpoint. GM should get that sub-CTS car to market pronto!

Cadillac needs a car smaller than the CTS, but priced the same, the current CTS needs to get better and move up in price.

I agree with the problem of losing sales. GM sales are declining with all these brands because Chevy doesn't get the funding they need so that money can be spread to Pontiac, Buick, Saturn, etc. GM has to cut brands so they can fund the others, otherwise all 8 brands will keep losing sales.

If Buick continues at the 11.7% average decline, 2011 sales will be 118,149. Is it worth keeping a brand like that. That drop is possible also, Buick sold 230,000 cars in 2005, and just 185,000 in 2007. I suspect Pontiac sales will continue to decline, unless they see a big increase in fleet sales after stopping Malibu fleet sales.

It comes down to a money problem, Toyota has more than GM does, and them putting a ton of money behind the Camry is outselling the Malibu, G6, and Aura combined. Toyota spent $7.5 billion on R&D last year, vs GM's $6.6 billion. Toyota has 26 models in the U.S. vs GM's 47 (I counted all 3 Escalades as 1, all Yukons as 1, etc.) I don't know the total number of worldwide models GM and Toyota make, but if you divide total R&D spending by number of US models, Toyota spends $30 million per vehicle, and GM $14 million. So how does Buick make a car better than the Lexus ES on half the budget?

[Z-06]

Cadillac needs a car smaller than the CTS, but priced the same, the current CTS needs to get better and move up in price.

I agree with the problem of losing sales. GM sales are declining with all these brands because Chevy doesn't get the funding they need so that money can be spread to Pontiac, Buick, Saturn, etc. GM has to cut brands so they can fund the others, otherwise all 8 brands will keep losing sales.

If Buick continues at the 11.7% average decline, 2011 sales will be 118,149. Is it worth keeping a brand like that. That drop is possible also, Buick sold 230,000 cars in 2005, and just 185,000 in 2007. I suspect Pontiac sales will continue to decline, unless they see a big increase in fleet sales after stopping Malibu fleet sales.

It comes down to a money problem, Toyota has more than GM does, and them putting a ton of money behind the Camry is outselling the Malibu, G6, and Aura combined. Toyota spent $7.5 billion on R&D last year, vs GM's $6.6 billion. Toyota has 26 models in the U.S. vs GM's 47 (I counted all 3 Escalades as 1, all Yukons as 1, etc.) I don't know the total number of worldwide models GM and Toyota make, but if you divide total R&D spending by number of US models, Toyota spends $30 million per vehicle, and GM $14 million. So how does Buick make a car better than the Lexus ES on half the budget?

Where have I read this before....

Right....

In the CTS-V thread.

In the Acura RL thread.

In the Lambda thread.

In the BMW M3 thread.

In the Chevrolet Malibu thread.

In the Alpha thread.

In the general rant thread.

In the happy birthday to K.C. thread.

Man am I having de-ja-vus?

[wildcat]

If Buick continues at the 11.7% average decline, 2011 sales will be 118,149. Is it worth keeping a brand like that . . . So how does Buick make a car better than the Lexus ES on half the budget?

That's if the decline continues. But what is expected when GM harvests and harvests profits but doesn't re-invest them in the brand or drags its heels in creating new, competitive products? Hopefully, the new Buick LaCrosse will be well-received in the market. Besides, Buick doesn't need to sell like in years past (so comparisons to those numbers are useless), because it's now no longer full-line and merely a portion of the B-P-G sales channel. Of course it's still worth keeping the brand - that's 118,149 (or whatever it turns out to be) sales that, otherwise, GM would lose plus Buick's sales in China. Since China Buick is quite successful, development costs for NA Buick, including a car better than the Lexus ES on half the budget, are minimized and the profits maximized. Dave Lyon said that we'll see "real traction" with NA Buick in 2010-11.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

It's like griffon keeps saying. Soon the B/P/GMC channel will be outselling Ford and that's not a bad position to be in.

[buyacargetacheck]

Do you have a link for Lyon's comment? I wonder what basis there is for that statement. A Lucerne replacement might arrive in that timeframe, but it'll serve a declining large car market. By that time the Enclave bloom will be off the rose. So, I see flat to slightly declining sales in 2011 (but probably less than the 11% declines Buick has been seeing lately).

So how does Buick compete with Lexus which has better service, better dealers, and more development dollars? Plus, every time Lexus models that don't compete against Buick are advertised (GS, LS, GX, SC, etc) the ones that do (ES, RX) get a "free" exposure boost. That's the benefit of selling almost 3 times the number of vehicles (at a higher price/profit point to boot!).

Again, it's almost like GM should have dualled the Buick and Cadillac channels and transitioned the traditional large car offering from Buick (Lucerne) to Chevrolet (Caprice).

That's if the decline continues. But what is expected when GM harvests and harvests profits but doesn't re-invest them in the brand or drags its heels in creating new, competitive products? Hopefully, the new Buick LaCrosse will be well-received in the market. Besides, Buick doesn't need to sell like in years past (so comparisons to those numbers are useless), because it's now no longer full-line and merely a portion of the B-P-G sales channel. Of course it's still worth keeping the brand - that's 118,149 (or whatever it turns out to be) sales that, otherwise, GM would lose plus Buick's sales in China. Since China Buick is quite successful, development costs for NA Buick, including a car better than the Lexus ES on half the budget, are minimized and the profits maximized. Dave Lyon said that we'll see "real traction" with NA Buick in 2010-11.

[buyacargetacheck]

Ford brand sold 2.1 million vehicles last year. P-B-G sold just over 1 million. When you say "soon" what exactly do you mean?

It's like griffon keeps saying. Soon the B/P/GMC channel will be outselling Ford and that's not a bad position to be in.

[enzl]

That's if the decline continues. But what is expected when GM harvests and harvests profits but doesn't re-invest them in the brand or drags its heels in creating new, competitive products? Hopefully, the new Buick LaCrosse will be well-received in the market. Besides, Buick doesn't need to sell like in years past (so comparisons to those numbers are useless), because it's now no longer full-line and merely a portion of the B-P-G sales channel. Of course it's still worth keeping the brand - that's 118,149 (or whatever it turns out to be) sales that, otherwise, GM would lose plus Buick's sales in China. Since China Buick is quite successful, development costs for NA Buick, including a car better than the Lexus ES on half the budget, are minimized and the profits maximized. Dave Lyon said that we'll see "real traction" with NA Buick in 2010-11.

Buick's decline in volume has been so precipitous, I'm not sure that a recovery means much. Obviously, global sales of platforms like the Ep II will help with costs, but the bottom line is that the LaCrosse and Lucerne both have a year or more to go before they are replaced--so we may not have reached the bottom, yet.

The second issue is one of relevance, as in, does Buick matter anymore? In the US, I would say no.

[wildcat]

does Buick matter anymore?

Sure, it matters. Buick is a famous and historical and valuable trademark. The public still knows what a Buick was and, thanks especially to the Enclave, what a Buick is.

[wildcat]

Do you have a link for Lyon's comment?

Yes, the comment was carried in various publications in a story about the Buick Riviera Concept. For one example, click here.

That specific statement of Lyon's is the next-to-the-last sentence.

[wildcat]

Buick's decline in volume has been so precipitous

If it's precipitous, it's because GM has decimated Buick's line-up, in two cases replacing two or three vehicles with one. GM will be addressing that soon. Did you see the announcement that Buick's NA line will be expanded?

[wildcat]

It's like griffon keeps saying. Soon the B/P/GMC channel will be outselling Ford and that's not a bad position to be in.

Yes, and thegriffon even remarked that's likely whether or not GM does right with Pontiac.

[Oracle of Delphi]

It's like griffon keeps saying. Soon the B/P/GMC channel will be outselling Ford and that's not a bad position to be in.

Don't you mean B/?/GMC?

[wildcat]

Wouldn't it solve two problems at once if the "?" was Saturn? Wouldn't that immediately increase the number of Saturn sales outlets?

[Oracle of Delphi]

Wouldn't it solve two problems at once if the "?" was Saturn? Wouldn't that immediately increase the number of Saturn sales outlets?

Were you at that meeting too? :AH-HA_wink:

[wildcat]

< cartoon dog voice > Ruh-roh!

Edited March 10, 2008 by wildcat

[buyacargetacheck]

Will GM even be around by that time? The glacial pace of progress makes me think they should rename the company British Leyland. Lots of little brands to nurture and maintain that suck the old cow (Chevy) to death. At least the quality is better than BL's.

Were you at that meeting too? :AH-HA_wink:

[Toyota.vs.GM]

Will GM even be around by that time?

GM will be around :AH-HA_wink: .

[buyacargetacheck]

You might just be a cockeyed optimist :AH-HA_wink:

GM will be around :AH-HA_wink: .

[PurdueGuy]

GM will be around for a long, long time. (Well, most of the brands and much of the infrastructure will be anyway.) Whether it will go through any bankruptcies/sales/etc in that time is another question. Look at Chrysler and all the crap it's gone through and is still around. Even with the death of AMC, many of the brands still stuck around for a long time via Chrysler.

[smk4565]

Sure, it matters. Buick is a famous and historical and valuable trademark. The public still knows what a Buick was and, thanks especially to the Enclave, what a Buick is.

People don't buy history. Most of the public thinks Buick is a car driven by 70+ year olds. GM can't keep a brand because of historical value, Oldsmobile was the oldest of all the GM brands. If sales and profits aren't there, and if there is no money to make new products, brands die.

Buick sales have been down about 20% per month since the Enclave went on sale. The Enclave does define Buick rather well though, rebadge of an existing GM car, 200+ inches long, overweight, 0-60 time on the wrong side of 8 seconds.

[wildcat]

People don't buy history.

The 2008 Buick Enclave isn't history - it's a class-leading vehicle (and, in spite of your statements, is very luxurious and refined. It doesn't need to be a speed demon. And is certainly is a success/). The 2009 Buick Riviera Concept isn't history - it's a new approach to a fabled model. The forthcoming 2010 Buick LaCrosse isn't history - it's the future direction of Buick.

I really hesitated posting because I saw your involvement here. You're one of the -- if not the -- most negative posters on this site.

[balthazar]

Enclave is certainly no "rebadge", but you've ignored this countless times already- I suppose yet another reminder here is likewise wasted on such a knowledgable "GM fan". Even if it was (sorry), when developed concurrently and centrally, one cannot technically be a "rebadge" of another; the 3 were developed at the same time for each specific division. And it must just KILL you that you cannot call it what you so clearly want to: a "rebadged Chevy".

Dead Horse #46: Where & when have you ever seen SUVs drag racing each other? Does the quickest SUV always have the highest sales- because inevitably that's what you always come down to, no matter how irrelevant to the segment: 0-60.

[wildcat]

Thank you, balthazar!

Enclave is certainly no "rebadge", but you've ignored this countless times already

Wasn't the Buick Enclave the first one shown to the public, as a 2006 concept vehicle? That's when the accolades started pouring in!

[turbo200]

GM will be around :AH-HA_wink: .

It was only a matter of time. Is this why killing Zeta and approving Alpha suddenly became top priority? Alpha would allow Holden a smaller mainstream car [and of course brings them into the fold which PCS is so fond of, even at the cost of fantastic Holden engineering], gives Cadillac the entry lux sedan they've always needed, and could supply Europe with some product. Meanwhile, death to Zeta also means death the Pontiac and Buick, since Zeta is basically a lynchpin for Buick and Pontiac; the only product bases they were going to have. Though with recent discussion for a small Buick, and China's affinity, it doens't seem likely. If they're going to clean house and lose the market share along with market burdens of Pontiac, I say may as well rid themsevles of Buick too; I believe in a product revival that GM doesn't have the guts to make, and Buick is far beyond relevant here at this point. Only a truly phoenix-like product rebirth would do to regain interest in Buick for the masses, but the name "Buick" already has such sorry connotations, more than Pontiac I would say. I could see Buick surviving in China and not in America, wouldn't that be ironic?

[turbo200]

The 2008 Buick Enclave isn't history - it's a class-leading vehicle (and, in spite of your statements, is very luxurious and refined. It doesn't need to be a speed demon. And is certainly is a success/). The 2009 Buick Riviera Concept isn't history - it's a new approach to a fabled model. The forthcoming 2010 Buick LaCrosse isn't history - it's the future direction of Buick.

I really hesitated posting because I saw your involvement here. You're one of the -- if not the -- most negative posters on this site.

you don't have to defend youself from baseless claims. The Enclave is a terrific product that demonstrably shows product and investment are king when recreating a brand. Personally, the big Buick's style isn't nearly perfect, but the concept is undeniably a solid homerun. And the fact that it doesn't outperform the CX-9 is a matter of preference. Some people are okay with the fact that the steering isn't as tight, the handling doesn't feel as nimble, etc as the CX-9. Some people prefer the bold, classy, expressiveness, less Japanese robot look of the Enclave. Some people prefer luxury. Sales-wise, market-wise, the Enclave works in areas the CX-9 does not; i.e. solid comfort, engine performance/efficiency, but most importantly big classy bold style [that needs some refining in my book, but works nonetheless]. That's why it's a sales winner. That fact needs no defense in any book. It sells well and GM is making bank off LAmbda. That being said, there are improvements that certifiably need to be made, chief among them is lose the pork.

The other products in the future pipeline don't look so promising......cause they're not out yet! EVeryday Buick is still the old brand with nothing good is damaging. But oh well, GM takes its damn time doing everything. We will see what will become of Buick, but so long as you believe the best product is coming, you need not defend something that exists to insiders only and not the general public. WE shall wait and see how the general public responds to a revitalized Buick, when all is said and done that's what counts.

Edited March 11, 2008 by turbo200

[wildcat]

death to Zeta also means death the Pontiac and Buick, since Zeta is basically a lynchpin for Buick and Pontiac; the only product bases they were going to have . . . Only a truly phoenix-like product rebirth would do to regain interest in Buick for the masses

Buick is doing well with Enclave (Lambda, not Zeta) and will soon have the NG LaCrosse (Epsilon II, not Zeta). Other possibilities include a Buick smaller than LaCrosse (not Zeta) and the Riviera Concept (not Zeta). Buick doesn't need to be "for the masses," that's what Chevrolet is for.

[turbo200]

Buick doesn't need to be "for the masses," that's what Chevrolet is for.

I don't mean it in that context though. Wipe that out of your head for a moment. Off the top of my head, the only market Buick has a great chance of converting are boomers. Youth don't really have a favorable view of the brand, though they are open to cool, unique and new; it would have to take a car with style like Riviera only tranposed maybe to a fresher concept for a car. The two door luxury coupe high on style is an idea that has been done again and again successfully. The same can be said of an entry level luxury car, which is what presumably Lacrosse is heading for, though maybe with slightly lower pricing than traditionally [starting at 27k?]. The point of what I was trying to say is who are you gonna market Buick to? and do they even care? who potentially can it be relevant to at this point? Does Enclave prove it can have relevance, or is it that Enclave hit a burgeoning market with the right combo of ingredients?

I guess the answer is maybe not at this point, but down the line potentially it could be [relevant] with the right product.

[turbo200]

Buick is doing well with Enclave (Lambda, not Zeta) and will soon have the NG LaCrosse (Epsilon II, not Zeta). Other possibilities include a Buick smaller than LaCrosse (not Zeta) and the Riviera Concept (not Zeta).

the others are merely vaporware, products on a computer. give me approval program codes and we'll talk done deals. the Lambda will sell no more than 40-50k units/year, hardly a mass volume car. I guess you could call LAx a volume car, but Epsilon volumes could be absorbed elsewhere. Not to mention, Saab and Saturn even will encroach on the very market Buick seeks to appeal to.

The Zeta Lucerne was presumably going to be the high volume product, unless LAx is where they were going to go for high volume.

Edited March 11, 2008 by turbo200

[wildcat]

Does Enclave prove it can have relevance

Wipe [ your pre-conceived notions ] out of your head for a moment! Read the testimonials from several people (younger people!) on this website who (in some cases, to their surprise) chose an Enclave. Or talk to the people for whom the Enclave was a conquest sale - I think the figure was 43%. Or to those Enclave buyers who helped to lower the average age of Buick owners to, what, 53? Regarding the Enclave, it was stated in Motor Trend, "Buick has rejustified its existence." Go see it in-person, sit in it, drive it. As a recent headline on wardsauto.com stated, "Buick [ is ] on track to Get the Last Laugh."

[turbo200]

Wipe [ your pre-conceived notions ] out of your head for a moment! Read the testimonials from several people (younger people!) on this website who (in some cases, to their surprise) chose an Enclave. Or talk to the people for whom the Enclave was a conquest sale - I think the figure was 43%. Or to those Enclave buyers who helped to lower the average age of Buick owners to, what, 53? Regarding the Enclave, it was stated in Motor Trend, "Buick has rejustified its existence." Go see it in-person, sit in it, drive it. As a recent headline on wardsauto.com stated, "Buick [ is ] on track to Get the Last Laugh."

it still remains to be seen if they can conquer a market outside the crossover field. this is a new, hot market with not as many entries and GM has a good grip on what it needs to with trucks. it's the cars they constantly fail at.

the question remains can Buick develop product that can show it still has relevance to the market, all the while conquering new market segments, entirely new groups of people that have never dreamed of owning a Buick. it's a tall order, but certainly not insurmountable. the key is the product. with all the zeta cancellations, and the fact that many GM models still are value priced, I'm starting to beleive GM doesn't even believe in itself.

Edited March 11, 2008 by turbo200

[wildcat]

the question remains can Buick develop product that can show it still has relevance to the market, all the while conquering new market segments, entirely new groups of people that have never dreamed of owning a Buick.

I realize that it's a tough and competitive world; given its falling share of the NA market, those same thoughts could be asked of GM as a whole. Whatever problems (real or perceived) ascribed to Buick, they are also GM's problems. Nonetheless, GM is re-building its NA Buick line-up from its success with Buick in China. With that goal in place, high-dollar profits are certainly possible (someone said the average transaction price for an Enclave was $39,000) and, if the execution of future vehicles is as good as the Enclave, those returns are entirely likely.

[Camino LS6]

For me, it all comes down to two things. GM has to quit flip-flopping on good plans and pick up the speed of implementation. The constant second-guessing and hedging of bets keeps holding them back. The zeta cars should already have been here for a year, and Alpha should be debuting by next year. The W bodies should already be a memory, and the new sales channels should already have been solidified not only in reality, but also in public perception.

Those are the flaws and errors, not the number of brands.

[smk4565]

For me, it all comes down to two things. GM has to quit flip-flopping on good plans and pick up the speed of implementation. The constant second-guessing and hedging of bets keeps holding them back. The zeta cars should already have been here for a year, and Alpha should be debuting by next year. The W bodies should already be a memory, and the new sales channels should already have been solidified not only in reality, but also in public perception.

I agree with that, GM moves too slowly, and often seems late to the game, such as how Toyota got the jump on hybrids. The zeta cars were put on hold because GM had to divert resources (people and money) to the GMT900s to get them on the market. I too would like to see W-bodies dead, Alpha and Zeta on sale, but where does the money come from? GM has $6.6 billion a year to spread across the 8 domestic brands, Holden, Opel/Vauxhall and Daewoo/Chevy, etc. That money gets spread thin so they have to keep platforms around longer, and keep products on the road longer without an update.

GM has to streamline globally and get more global cars to start making profit and get stronger. GM can't do everything like they once did, the money isn't there. I'd trade the Buick brand for a Zeta Impala that is better than the 300C, G8, Avalon, Lucerne, Genesis, etc. I'd give up Hummer and Saab for an alpha Cadillac that is as good as the 3-series. It is better to have a best in class Malibu, Impala, BTS and CTS than to have 2 W-body cars, 2 G-body cars, 3 dated Saab products, a 12 mpg hummer with declining sales that is getting discontinued in 2011 anyway because CAFE rules change.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Again, it's almost like GM should have dualled the Buick and Cadillac channels and transitioned the traditional large car offering from Buick (Lucerne) to Chevrolet (Caprice).

I was a fan of that as well. I would've made a Buick/Cadillac/Hummer channel.

Then Saturn could've been put with Saab (Where it belongs)

And Pontiac/GMC could've been a step up from Chevrolet.

Ford brand sold 2.1 million vehicles last year. P-B-G sold just over 1 million. When you say "soon" what exactly do you mean?

Maybe I'm mistaken then.

Edited March 11, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

It was only a matter of time. Is this why killing Zeta and approving Alpha suddenly became top priority? Alpha would allow Holden a smaller mainstream car [and of course brings them into the fold which PCS is so fond of, even at the cost of fantastic Holden engineering], gives Cadillac the entry lux sedan they've always needed, and could supply Europe with some product. Meanwhile, death to Zeta also means death the Pontiac and Buick, since Zeta is basically a lynchpin for Buick and Pontiac; the only product bases they were going to have. Though with recent discussion for a small Buick, and China's affinity, it doens't seem likely. If they're going to clean house and lose the market share along with market burdens of Pontiac, I say may as well rid themsevles of Buick too; I believe in a product revival that GM doesn't have the guts to make, and Buick is far beyond relevant here at this point. Only a truly phoenix-like product rebirth would do to regain interest in Buick for the masses, but the name "Buick" already has such sorry connotations, more than Pontiac I would say. I could see Buick surviving in China and not in America, wouldn't that be ironic?

And therein lies the flaw to your post.

Buick is no longer for the masses.

[The O.C.]

For me, it all comes down to two things. GM has to quit flip-flopping on good plans and pick up the speed of implementation. The constant second-guessing and hedging of bets keeps holding them back. The zeta cars should already have been here for a year, and Alpha should be debuting by next year. The W bodies should already be a memory, and the new sales channels should already have been solidified not only in reality, but also in public perception.

Those are the flaws and errors, not the number of brands.

GM has made a name for itself in being notoriously late-to-the-party in just about any market segment it competes.

They are still being hampered by that issue.....just like Camino said.

What they need to do, more importantly than the goodness of the upcoming product, is find a way to somehow invest further in the product development program and start getting this stuff here earlier. (And yes I realize the challenges behind decreasing this lead time.)

In 1986, Ford brought out the award-winning, and critically-acclaimed, Taurus. Two years' later, we get three GM-10 coupes. We had to wait ANOTHER, what 3-4 years before we got a midsize 4-door sedan to compete with Taurus, Accord, and Camry?

In 1991, GM introduced the new N-car compacts.....with no airbags, and a 3-speed automatic.....at a time when the market had already embraced airbags and 4-speed autos.

When Ford introduced the original 4-door Explorer off of the Bronco II chassis.....how many years did it take GM to chop-and-paste the Blazer/Jimmy into a 4-door competitor?

Chrysler introduced the minivans. GM, to this day, has never built a truly competitive entry. (Although neither truly has Ford.)

Toyota introduced the Prius.....Honda, the Insight. We STILL don't have a mainstream full-hybrid (two-mode?) GM car. (edit: okay Insight is hardly "mainstream" but I believe it was the first, no?)

There are just examples of major market missteps......but missteps of the kind that I still see GM making. The big debate is....when you are playing continual "catch-up," how do you pull ahead and begin leading the pack?

(Whew.....caffeine-induced rant has finally ended.....)

Edited March 11, 2008 by The O.C.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I don't mean it in that context though. Wipe that out of your head for a moment. Off the top of my head, the only market Buick has a great chance of converting are boomers. Youth don't really have a favorable view of the brand, though they are open to cool, unique and new; it would have to take a car with style like Riviera only tranposed maybe to a fresher concept for a car. The two door luxury coupe high on style is an idea that has been done again and again successfully. The same can be said of an entry level luxury car, which is what presumably Lacrosse is heading for, though maybe with slightly lower pricing than traditionally [starting at 27k?]. The point of what I was trying to say is who are you gonna market Buick to? and do they even care? who potentially can it be relevant to at this point? Does Enclave prove it can have relevance, or is it that Enclave hit a burgeoning market with the right combo of ingredients?

I guess the answer is maybe not at this point, but down the line potentially it could be [relevant] with the right product.

I'm not so sure about that...

Buick has always been a brand with soild reliability and with depreciation a lot of those VERY reliable previous generation Centurys and Regals are finding their way into the hands of my generation to a lot of avail as far as I can tell. Now, does that rachet up the coolness factor of the division? Not really, but it provides a solid foundation for GM to build on. (If GM ever will)

[smk4565]

I was a fan of that as well. I would've made a Buick/Cadillac/Hummer channel.

I get my car serviced at a Cadillac dealership (they used to have Olds and are one of few places with Aurora parts). The dealership is Cadillac only now, and they own a Buick/Subaru lot 1-2 miles down the road. The service manager told me they wanted to do Buick-Cadillac at the same lot, and GM wouldn't allow them because Buick would hurt Cadillac's image.

Cadillac has to stand alone and move upscale, otherwise they are Lincoln-Mercury. The local Lexus dealership has a cappauccino bar and gives back and neck messages while your car gets fixed.

[Drew Dowdell]

The local Lexus dealership has a cappauccino bar and gives prostate messages while your car gets fixed.

whatever you wanna call it man.....

By process of elimination, it sounds like you use Baierl in Wexford. They have a lot more than just Cadillac, Buick and Subaru. They'd have to start over if they did a Cadillac - Buick lot. I'm not sure how they managed when Olds was still there. That place is tiny but they've given me great service.

[PurdueGuy]

Ya'know, this whole "GM is late to the hybrid market" isn't the simple big failure people make it out to be. It should be rephrased "GM is late to giving in to making PR cars that don't make a profit and don't pay for themselves." GM HAS to make hybrids now because the culture says so. Hybrids may be becoming slightly profitable in some cases now, but overall, they're pure PR. GM has desperately needed profit, and while PR plays into that indirectly, I can't blame them for not jumping right into hybrids before there was customer acceptance. It had the potential to be like the EV1 all over again - very expensive, no real payback, and little recognition until everyone whines that they stopped making it, turning it into proof that GM is an evil corporation that doesn't care about the environment. It's a company, and it HAS to make a profit, and product development has to reflect that.

[The O.C.]

Ya'know, this whole "GM is late to the hybrid market" isn't the simple big failure people make it out to be. It should be rephrased "GM is late to giving in to making PR cars that don't make a profit and don't pay for themselves." GM HAS to make hybrids now because the culture says so. Hybrids may be becoming slightly profitable in some cases now, but overall, they're pure PR. GM has desperately needed profit, and while PR plays into that indirectly, I can't blame them for not jumping right into hybrids before there was customer acceptance. It had the potential to be like the EV1 all over again - very expensive, no real payback, and little recognition until everyone whines that they stopped making it, turning it into proof that GM is an evil corporation that doesn't care about the environment. It's a company, and it HAS to make a profit, and product development has to reflect that.

It worked for Toyota....for right or for wrong.....

'Could've worked for GM.....

[Drew Dowdell]

Ya'know, this whole "GM is late to the hybrid market" isn't the simple big failure people make it out to be. It should be rephrased "GM is late to giving in to making PR cars that don't make a profit and don't pay for themselves." GM HAS to make hybrids now because the culture says so. Hybrids may be becoming slightly profitable in some cases now, but overall, they're pure PR. GM has desperately needed profit, and while PR plays into that indirectly, I can't blame them for not jumping right into hybrids before there was customer acceptance. It had the potential to be like the EV1 all over again - very expensive, no real payback, and little recognition until everyone whines that they stopped making it, turning it into proof that GM is an evil corporation that doesn't care about the environment. It's a company, and it HAS to make a profit, and product development has to reflect that.

truth.

GM was late the the VVT market, however their VVT is an exercise in simplicity compared to the likes of Honda, Toyota, and BMW. Oh sure, the competition's VVT might be 10% better but they also cost 50% - 150% more.

Same is true with the hybrids. The BAS hybrids cost what, one third that of Toyota's system? BAS Series II is supposed to cost the same as BAS Series I yet effectively doubles the performance of the hybrid parts. The 2 mode is better than Toyota's system but costs more. Volt threatens to blow Toyota's system out of the water in terms of effectiveness.

So, while GM may be late... they certainly aren't behind.

P.S. Where is Honda in all of this? They were first to market a hybrid here but it hasn't seen much, if any, improvement after it came to the Civic. It's not a bad system <but effectively identical to BAS>, it's just stagnating.