W-Body to live into 2012?

[enzl]

I got an amazing deal on the CTS, however that was not my reasoning for buying it as you are trying to assume. I would have paid MSRP for the CTS if I had been able to afford it and if the dealer wasn't negotiating. I desired the CTS. No one desires a Cobalt or Corolla.

I'm not sure where this part is coming from. I never said that people didn't look at safety or reliability or reputation before making a purchase. I specifically waited for the HF3.6 because I knew the 3.2 offered at launch was inadequate. GM did themselves a disservice by offering that engine at launch, but the 3.6 has been great enough that they've been forgiven for it.

People buy Toyondas for two reasons:

1. Consumer Reports tells them to.

2. Their great aunt's, roomate's, lesbian lover had a used Chevy Vega that broke down two miles outside of the dealership in 1981.

In nearly every case, feature v. feature, reliability v. reliability, price v. price, the domestics will offer a better deal than Toyondassan. However, most sheeple don't bother to do the research. Yes there are exceptions, but for the bulk of the lineups, this is true.

Let's play O-Boi's quote game:

"I got an amazing deal on the CTS"--But you didn't buy based on the deal---yes, that makes it clearer

"No one buys a Cobalt <non-SS> or Corolla because they are pining for one, drooling over it ever since seeing it at the autoshow. People buy one of these cars because of "the deal"." --Don't see anything about reputation, research or reliability--

As for your scree against Toyonda purchasers sources:

EVERY magazine, independant journalist, website & CR (& my gay Uncle) consistently rate MANY products above GM products---other than the CTS, 'Bu & GMT900's. But everybody is wrong because the all-knowing O-boi has decreed they are wrong, or biased or blind--pick the excuse du jour.

As I said before, if you have to sell the deal, than the vehicle is doomed. That's fact--if you're selling the deal, than you will, inevitably, be fighting it out with the product that the 2nd lowest price appeared on. How do you make money doing that consistently? And pay Union wages. And pay the banks you're in hock to. And pay employees. And pay for R&D. Simple answer is you can't--and GM's precarious position supports my view, not yours.

[pow]

I got an amazing deal on the CTS, however that was not my reasoning for buying it as you are trying to assume. I would have paid MSRP for the CTS if I had been able to afford it and if the dealer wasn't negotiating. I desired the CTS. No one desires a Cobalt or Corolla.

I'm not sure where this part is coming from. I never said that people didn't look at safety or reliability or reputation before making a purchase. I specifically waited for the HF3.6 because I knew the 3.2 offered at launch was inadequate. GM did themselves a disservice by offering that engine at launch, but the 3.6 has been great enough that they've been forgiven for it.

People buy Toyondas for two reasons:

1. Consumer Reports tells them to.

2. Their great aunt's, roomate's, lesbian lover had a used Chevy Vega that broke down two miles outside of the dealership in 1981.

In nearly every case, feature v. feature, reliability v. reliability, price v. price, the domestics will offer a better deal than Toyondassan. However, most sheeple don't bother to do the research. Yes there are exceptions, but for the bulk of the lineups, this is true.

No, people buy Toyondas because they make the best cars for their needs. We chose an Odyssey over a Venture because it wasn't a deathtrap, it was far more comfortable, it was far more powerful, and even though the Chevy likely had a ton of incentives, we were willing to pay extra for a more desirable vehicle. Comparing trade-in values, a comparable Venture now would be worth $5K less than the Odyssey.

In a competitive market, there are lots of good deals but rarely better deals. Deals are subjective, depending on the buyer's needs and wants, and they're compromises. A closing dealership in the middle of nowhere might offer a bigger discount than a local dealership, but that involves the inconvenience of traveling hundreds of miles. A Cobalt might be $2K less than a comparable Corolla, but the market has decided that the extra room, higher level of safety, better fuel economy, good previous experience, advertising, or whatever else consumers find appealing in a Corolla - is well worth the premium. Up until recently, for the bulk of the lineups, the domestics offered lower prices, and the imports offered better vehicles.

GM now is in a far better position, offering first-tier products that help restore their image and improve their brands' desirability. The Malibu has no price advantage over an Accord, and the Camry is actually relying on incentives. The market notices these things.

Edited May 29, 2008 by empowah

[Drew Dowdell]

Let's play O-Boi's quote game:

As for your scree against Toyonda purchasers sources:

EVERY magazine, independant journalist, website & CR (& my gay Uncle) consistently rate MANY products above GM products---other than the CTS, 'Bu & GMT900's. But everybody is wrong because the all-knowing O-boi has decreed they are wrong, or biased or blind--pick the excuse du jour.

As I said before, if you have to sell the deal, than the vehicle is doomed. That's fact--if you're selling the deal, than you will, inevitably, be fighting it out with the product that the 2nd lowest price appeared on. How do you make money doing that consistently? And pay Union wages. And pay the banks you're in hock to. And pay employees. And pay for R&D. Simple answer is you can't--and GM's precarious position supports my view, not yours.

Why is it bad for me to try and get the best deal possible on the car I want? The difference is desire. I would have bought the car regardless but I found a way to save money in the process. If I had the opportunity to get the same deal on a C-Class or 3-series, I still would have picked the CTS because it was the car I wanted! Why is that so hard to understand? There were less expensive lease offers on the 3-series at the time and I passed them up to get the CTS.

EVERY magazine, independant journalist, website & CR (& my gay Uncle) consistently rate MANY products above GM products---other than the CTS, 'Bu & GMT900's. But everybody is wrong because the all-knowing O-boi has decreed they are wrong, or biased or blind--pick the excuse du jour.....

OMFG! I didn't say a Cobalt was better than the Corolla... or any other vehicle for that matter! I'm simply saying that feature for feature you pay less at any domestic dealer and that most times, over the life of the vehicle, you save money. Of course, your mileage may vary.

"The deal" includes things like expected maintenance costs, expected gas costs, expected insurance costs. It costs more to insure a Civic or Corolla. Don't ask me why, I don't know. It's not just price + tax + tags.

As I said before, if you have to sell the deal, than the vehicle is doomed. That's fact--if you're selling the deal, than you will, inevitably, be fighting it out with the product that the 2nd lowest price appeared on. How do you make money doing that consistently?

Hyundai/Kia

[Sixty8panther]

People buy Toyondas for two reasons:

1. Consumer Reports tells them to.

2. Their great aunt's, roomate's, lesbian lover had a used Chevy Vega that broke down two miles outside of the dealership in 1981.

In nearly every case, feature v. feature, reliability v. reliability, price v. price, the domestics will offer a better deal than Toyondassan. However, most sheeple don't bother to do the research. Yes there are exceptions, but for the bulk of the lineups, this is true.

Someone carve that onto a slab of granite cause that is the god's truth!

[Drew Dowdell]

No, people buy Toyondas because they make the best cars for their needs. We chose an Odyssey over a Venture because it wasn't a deathtrap, it was far more comfortable, it was far more powerful, and even though the Chevy likely had a ton of incentives, we were willing to pay extra for a more desirable vehicle. Comparing trade-in values, a comparable Venture now would be worth $5K less than the Odyssey.

In a competitive market, there are lots of good deals but rarely better deals. Deals are subjective, depending on the buyer's needs and wants, and they're compromises. A closing dealership in the middle of nowhere might offer a bigger discount than a local dealership, but that involves the inconvenience of traveling hundreds of miles. A Cobalt might be $2K less than a comparable Corolla, but the market has decided that the extra room, higher level of safety, better fuel economy, good previous experience, advertising, or whatever else consumers find appealing in a Corolla - is well worth the premium. Up until recently, for the bulk of the lineups, the domestics offered lower prices, and the imports offered better vehicles.

Neato. You did exactly what I said and picked out one of the worst domestics to compare to one of the best imports. I mean really, the Venture was rivaled only by the Windstar/Freestar in domestic lameness.

Aura, Malibu, Fusion, Sable, Taurus, Milan.... match the options up to their foreign rivals and the domestics will cost you less.

Edge, Vue, Outlook, Acadia.... same thing

[CARBIZ]

No, people buy Toyondas because they make the best cars for their needs. We chose an Odyssey over a Venture because it wasn't a deathtrap, it was far more comfortable, it was far more powerful, and even though the Chevy likely had a ton of incentives, we were willing to pay extra for a more desirable vehicle. Comparing trade-in values, a comparable Venture now would be worth $5K less than the Odyssey.

In a competitive market, there are lots of good deals but rarely better deals. Deals are subjective, depending on the buyer's needs and wants, and they're compromises. A closing dealership in the middle of nowhere might offer a bigger discount than a local dealership, but that involves the inconvenience of traveling hundreds of miles. A Cobalt might be $2K less than a comparable Corolla, but the market has decided that the extra room, higher level of safety, better fuel economy, good previous experience, advertising, or whatever else consumers find appealing in a Corolla - is well worth the premium. Up until recently, for the bulk of the lineups, the domestics offered lower prices, and the imports offered better vehicles.

GM now is in a far better position, offering first-tier products that help restore their image and improve their brands' desirability. The Malibu has no price advantage over an Accord, and the Camry is actually relying on incentives. The market notices these things.

Okay, but what is your point? The transaction price of a, say, 2001 Venture EWB would have been at least $5k less than the Odyssey, so it would be a wash. That is what I am getting at. Was the Odyssey 'better' than the Venture. Well, I guess it depends on the year. In '99? No. In 2003, yes. The Venture should have been replaced by a new platform in '05, not just warmed over - I think we all agree on that. I can remember leasing Ventures in '02/'03 that were $180 a month less than a comparable Sienna at the time. That's nearly $9k on a 4 year lease. Same equipment. Trust me: leave 'resale' out of this. I won't argue that the Sienna and Odyssey finally became 'better' than the Venture, but by then GM ratcheted up the incentives on the Venture so much that there was an obscene difference in the transaction prices.

This is the ugly truth. Even Edmunds.com recently admitted the cheapest car on the road to buy, drive, insure and maintain is the lowly Aveo. If you talk real world numbers, GM is rarely beat - their marketing department sees to that. I would wager a bet that the number of true cash buyers in both our countries number far less than 10-15%. So where is the benefit to Joe Public?

As to your Corolla assertion: the Corolla has no better or no worse safety than the Cobalt. Where's your information on that? The market has decided nothing. Unless American figures are significantly different, the G5/Cobalt twins are outselling everything but the Civic so far this year in Canada.

You know, GM is not completely stupid. They do recognize that they have to be very creative in keeping their older vehicle lines selling: Uplander, Cobalt, G6, Allure, Equinox, whatever. That is why they are getting so desperately cash starved: on the one hand they are struggling to refresh their product lines with consumers that demand something fresh every week, while on the other hand trying to keep their older lines still relevant through incentives.

Like trying to line dance with one leg in a cast and the other in a bucket of cement, I'd think. But we armchair critics think we know so much better! Every manufacturer has a target painted on GM.

[Paolino]

2. Their great aunt's, roomate's, lesbian lover had a used Chevy Vega that broke down two miles outside of the dealership in 1981.

Yet another reason I hate lesbians. :AH-HA_wink:

[enzl]

Why is it bad for me to try and get the best deal possible on the car I want? The difference is desire. I would have bought the car regardless but I found a way to save money in the process. If I had the opportunity to get the same deal on a C-Class or 3-series, I still would have picked the CTS because it was the car I wanted! Why is that so hard to understand? There were less expensive lease offers on the 3-series at the time and I passed them up to get the CTS.

OMFG! I didn't say a Cobalt was better than the Corolla... or any other vehicle for that matter! I'm simply saying that feature for feature you pay less at any domestic dealer and that most times, over the life of the vehicle, you save money. Of course, your mileage may vary.

"The deal" includes things like expected maintenance costs, expected gas costs, expected insurance costs. It costs more to insure a Civic or Corolla. Don't ask me why, I don't know. It's not just price + tax + tags.

Hyundai/Kia

You have conveniently added details to your CTS lease deal until it appears that you weren't buying at that moment because of the deal. Just admit your original reply was erroneous and move on with the tortured logic...

The deal is the deal. All other considerations down the line must include residual value, if you're going to pull the down-the-road costs into the argument.

And, if your idea of success is Kia or Hyundai...well, that explains your spirited defense of GM's current state.

(Psst....Kia and Hyundai have gone thru so many management guys because they aren't making the money in this market that their masters in Korea thought they would...and profitability at H/K stores is razor thin, at best....but since you don't know the biz, I wouldn't have expected you to know any of that. You just like to pretend you 'know' stuff. )

[regfootball]

Why is it bad for me to try and get the best deal possible on the car I want? The difference is desire. I would have bought the car regardless but I found a way to save money in the process. If I had the opportunity to get the same deal on a C-Class or 3-series, I still would have picked the CTS because it was the car I wanted! Why is that so hard to understand? There were less expensive lease offers on the 3-series at the time and I passed them up to get the CTS.

OMFG! I didn't say a Cobalt was better than the Corolla... or any other vehicle for that matter! I'm simply saying that feature for feature you pay less at any domestic dealer and that most times, over the life of the vehicle, you save money. Of course, your mileage may vary.

"The deal" includes things like expected maintenance costs, expected gas costs, expected insurance costs. It costs more to insure a Civic or Corolla. Don't ask me why, I don't know. It's not just price + tax + tags.

Hyundai/Kia

you know i can relate a little bit of a similar story here. 3 yrs ago when i was looking to get into my car (which ended up being my 500) on the same day i test drove a 3 series and a cts, both with stick (3 series did not have sport pkg). the cts was used with the 3.2 opel motor. the bmw i think was a 328 or 330?

the 3 series was composed and serene and all but quite honestly it was boring and dull. nothing to get wet over. the cts on the other had was fun and seemed to be more urgent in its moves and its suspension. i can only imagine how much better a 3.6 sport cts is and now even how much better the new 08 is.

i ultimately had to pass on both because the cash outlay was too much and i wanted front drive and more utility but my point is that I too prefered the CTS to the 3 series that day. A hottie excoworker i know showed me her new 06 beemer recently and to be honest that didn't impress me either. i like the new cts a lot as well. in summation, don't assume the 3 series will always win the customer comparo. i really think the cts has an attitude that all the dull clinical german cars lack. perhaps that is why oldsmoboi likes them, regardless of if there is a price advantage with the cadillac sometimes. when i looked the get into price was the same and i still would have gone cts i think.....lease wise at least.

Edited May 30, 2008 by regfootball

[Drew Dowdell]

You have conveniently added details to your CTS lease deal until it appears that you weren't buying at that moment because of the deal. Just admit your original reply was erroneous and move on with the tortured logic...

If people like you are working at GM, then no wonder they are in the state they are in.

I specifically said that I bought at that moment because of the deal because I would not have been able to afford the car at that moment otherwise.

I also specifically said that the same deal offered to me by ANY of the other luxury manufacturers would NOT have sold the car.

There is a huge difference between buying an entry lux car like the CTS and buying an appliance car like the Cobalt or Corolla. BEFORE YOU POST ANY OTHER RESPONSE, EXPLAIN WHY YOU CANNOT SEE THIS!

[enzl]

If people like you are working at GM, then no wonder they are in the state they are in.

I specifically said that I bought at that moment because of the deal because I would not have been able to afford the car at that moment otherwise.

I also specifically said that the same deal offered to me by ANY of the other luxury manufacturers would NOT have sold the car.

There is a huge difference between buying an entry lux car like the CTS and buying an appliance car like the Cobalt or Corolla. BEFORE YOU POST ANY OTHER RESPONSE, EXPLAIN WHY YOU CANNOT SEE THIS!

There is a huge difference, but that's not the argument.

GM (at large) is selling the deal with MOST of its product. Your experience (as a GM fan & Caddy buyer--so we're doubly sure) only reconfirms MY argument. BUT FOR the deal, no sale. Whether you would have bought something else is immaterial. If what GM must do to put an entry-lux shopper who Loves the CTS a "DEAL", can you imagine what it takes to get a customer cross shopping BMW?

I know, your personal situation is relevant...to you, sir. To GM, that's another sale that the MSRP was an imaginary fantasy. It's troubling and I can't believe YOU don't see that.

If GM listened to people like me, they wouldn't be in the place they're in. Why can't you just admit, I'm right. OC is right. Evok was right (until the a$$holes here chased him away.) There's a bunch of other people who have called for severe and immediate action on this board for years!!!!!!!!They were right. Just man up and admit it, finally. If they had been listening to us all along, they'd have competitive cars, economical product & flexible manufacturing to move on trends quickly. It's time for you guys to fess up--admit you simply misjudged the severity of GM's problems. You'll all feel better. You just don't want to 'lose' to people like us. I get it. Still doesn't change the fact that you were (and probably are) wrong.

Personally, I think it's incredibly short-sighted and selfish to want to be correct so badly that you'll sacrifice GM's future. Without people of my mindset, nothing would be advancing and GM would be doomed. Your need to be right even outweighs the needs of the company...incredible.

Remember, the first patriots were revolutionaries.

Edited May 30, 2008 by enzl

[The O.C.]

If what GM must do to put an entry-lux shopper who Loves the CTS a "DEAL", can you imagine what it takes to get a customer cross shopping BMW?

That statement is so true, it's not even funny........

[The O.C.]

i ultimately had to pass on both because the cash outlay was too much and i wanted front drive and more utility but my point is that I too prefered the CTS to the 3 series that day. A hottie excoworker i know showed me her new 06 beemer recently and to be honest that didn't impress me either. i like the new cts a lot as well. in summation, don't assume the 3 series will always win the customer comparo. i really think the cts has an attitude that all the dull clinical german cars lack. perhaps that is why oldsmoboi likes them, regardless of if there is a price advantage with the cadillac sometimes. when i looked the get into price was the same and i still would have gone cts i think.....lease wise at least.

The problem is, it's going to be a very long time, IF EVER, before GM can overcome the perception, image, and desirability of the BMW nameplate (not to mention Mercedes-Benz and Lexus.)

We can debate the merits and demerits of CTS versus 3-Series before we are blue in the face. But the fact of the matter is, the consumer that just has to have "a BMW" (or insert prestige name brand here) is going to be very tough to win over....even considering the excellence of a new product like the CTS.

The REAL problem is.....this perception, image, and desirability factor comes into play in more mainstream market segments also.....(Honda/Toyota, Chevy/Pontiac/Ford.)

From a product standpoint, IMHO even though I still like my car, my '07 CTS isn't nearly as appealing to me from a driving, ride, handling, and powertrain standpoint that the 3-Series is. The new CTS is much closer.....and will make my decision more difficult when my lease comes up.

[CARBIZ]

But, Enzl, this does not have to be an 'either-or' situation. Nothing in business is that cut and dry. With you, the glass is always half empty (hell, I'd settle for half empty - the glass is bone dry with you). You make me look like an optimist - and, believe me, if you knew me that is saying a helluva lot!

We know GM has made a ton of mistakes. I would love to be privy to the legal entanglements, contracts, etc. that GM has obligations to that it is trying to untangle. You've alluded to 'bad' union negotiations, but since neither of us were there, and since GM dragged their top negotiator all the way from Asia to handle these, one can only assume there are extenuating circumstances that we do not know about.

GM needs to get rid of probably 30% of its dealer base. I am sure it is working on that.

GM needs to amalgamate P-B-GMC. It is doing that, I am sure, as fast as legally possible.

GM is replacing or updating model lines at a pace not seen since the '70s. (Malibu '97-03/'04-'07: pretty good.)

GM has gone through 3 massive bloodlettings of both the white collar and blue collar workforce to cut costs.

GM has divested itself of non-core enterprises to generate cash and focus on its core products.

GM is leveraging it's world capabilities: G8, GM-DAT, etc.

GM is still leading the pack or at least keeping abreast of technologies: OnStar, 3.6 V6, 6 spd autos, 2.0 ecotec, etc.

GM needs to replace the 4 spd auto with the 6. It is doing that. The Windsor plant is slated to close in 2 years.

The reviled Uplander is gone. New minivan to follow next year.

We know the Cobalt will also be gone in the next 18 months.

We know the Impala will be gone in the next 18-24 months.

I could go on and on. I am not sure what else you expect them to do. It isn't like Toyota, BMW and the rest are standing still. It would be easier to defend a fort than an entire city - that is the advantage the much smaller companies have had over GM. They can grow from their core strengths, whereas GM (and Ford) have yet to recover from mistakes (both real and perceived) made 20 years ago.

I'll tell you what, Enzl, if the replacement Cobalt and the 'new' minivan replacement next year are not 'all that,' I will join your choir. Until then, I am staking my livelihood on the fact that the powers that be can at least arrest the ship from sinking, if not turn it around.

With the state of our jaded media, I have no illusions that GM (or Ford) can ever regain their former glory: I would settle for a modicum of respect from the self-appointed experts.

[Drew Dowdell]

This has gone so far in circles it's become useless.

Show me where I said I didn't want radical change at GM. I even posted my "manifesto" of some of the changes in hardware that GM needs to make. Now, right or wrong, I don't know. However it most certainly was not "more of the same".

You have a beef with the board. Fine, fire them all. Personally, I think Wagoneer has been failing at his job for so long that he deserves to be fired. Look at all the changes Mulally has made over at Ford in such a short time. As I stated in another thread; GM has no excuse, none, zero.

As far as my motivations for getting my CTS, you are right, those are my own. However, GM got a 24 year old who bought his first house a year prior, into it's newest Cadillac luxury sedan by giving him a loyalty rebate for his Cutlass and a conquest rebate for his Continental allowing him to afford the car he so desired. The same day I took delivery of my car, there was another guy around my age who took delivery of a silver CTS.

What was your comment about "not even getting people into the showroom in the first place."? Before the CTS, when was the last time GM was pulling young guys into Cadillac showrooms?

GM has a lot of work to do, I've never denied that. All I want is for you to give credit where it is due. You do nothing but &#036;h&#33; all over every good announcement to come from GM. Even in the announcement about the Volt premiering at Paris, you armed yourself with enough vagueness, "as long as it comes close to production with minimal changes", that you'll still be able to bash it once it's released.

Just.. when a good announcement comes out... stop being an asshole. You can dance your "I told you so" dance in all the negative announcement threads. I'll leave it to you and PCS to figure out who leads and who follows. It's hard enough being a GM fan these days without you bashing everything that comes from the company.

[Drew Dowdell]

With the state of our jaded media, I have no illusions that GM (or Ford) can ever regain their former glory: I would settle for a modicum of respect from the actual GM employees.

fixed

[enzl]

'Biz and 'boi-

It's not about being right---and perhaps both of you have been unfairly roped into my beef with some of this sites lesser characters in regards to their foolish blindness--its about simply being given my due.

Did either of you ever consider that the glass is bone dry? That's simply reality. I've never said anything on here that was untrue, nor have I 'bashed' GM--although I've certainly pointed out when other posters were misleading or wrong.

GM is in the fight of its life--the fact that I was stating that years ago may imply that I know something you guys don't--or perhaps I have the experience necessary to make that judgment--whether either of you want to hear it or not isn't germane to the arguments we have here.

I'm not thumbing my nose at you, nor am I gloating. There's nothing that gives me more displeasure than GM's fate and the likely outcome. If I truly wanted to screw GM, I could have aired my grievances publically, years ago. So I've been a team player---in the way that counts---but anytime I bring up my CV here, I'm 'bragging' or 'boasting' about my personal success.

Clapping along with a bunch of misinformed GM fanboys as they spread complete stupidity because this is a GM fansite doesn't wash with me. I'm sick of excuses for GM--they f'ed up, they haven't owned up to it & the changes they've made shouldn't be congratulated because they finally woke up from the stupor that has led thm to the place they are.

I've said plenty of good things here--just check out the last 4/5 topics I've begun here as proof--its so easy to do, but, again, that might require people to look into things and know something before commenting. You guys see what you want to see. And then shoot the messanger because the news isn't what you'd like. I'm OK with that position here---but I won;t apologize for it and I won;t back down from it--

I can't win here. I know that. But I seriously resent being hammered due to my opinion---and furthermore, the facts support my position and the severity of the problem requires immediate, 'my house is burning down' type action. Negative is how it looks, guys. Period.

[z28luvr01]

There is a huge difference, but that's not the argument.

GM (at large) is selling the deal with MOST of its product. Your experience (as a GM fan & Caddy buyer--so we're doubly sure) only reconfirms MY argument. BUT FOR the deal, no sale. Whether you would have bought something else is immaterial. If what GM must do to put an entry-lux shopper who Loves the CTS a "DEAL", can you imagine what it takes to get a customer cross shopping BMW?

I know, your personal situation is relevant...to you, sir. To GM, that's another sale that the MSRP was an imaginary fantasy. It's troubling and I can't believe YOU don't see that.

If GM listened to people like me, they wouldn't be in the place they're in. Why can't you just admit, I'm right. OC is right. Evok was right (until the a$$holes here chased him away.) There's a bunch of other people who have called for severe and immediate action on this board for years!!!!!!!!They were right. Just man up and admit it, finally. If they had been listening to us all along, they'd have competitive cars, economical product & flexible manufacturing to move on trends quickly. It's time for you guys to fess up--admit you simply misjudged the severity of GM's problems. You'll all feel better. You just don't want to 'lose' to people like us. I get it. Still doesn't change the fact that you were (and probably are) wrong.

Personally, I think it's incredibly short-sighted and selfish to want to be correct so badly that you'll sacrifice GM's future. Without people of my mindset, nothing would be advancing and GM would be doomed. Your need to be right even outweighs the needs of the company...incredible.

Remember, the first patriots were revolutionaries.

That statement is so true, it's not even funny........

Okay, I think I have to jump in an defend Oldsmoboi, as you guys still aren't seeing his point. Maybe I can clear things up with a little story, because I'm in the same situation myself, albeit with digital cameras.

After my experience at NYIAS this year, I start pining for a digital camera with a higher zoom than the one I have, because 3x optical zoom just doesn't cut it when you're trying to do more than snapshots. I'm trying to get everything I need (camera, batteries, charger, bag, maybe an optional lens or two) for as close to $300 as possible. As I always do when I buy electronics, I do a ton of research, both online and with people who have had experience with the manufacturers I'm investigating. I eventually narrow my choices down to an Olympus, a Kodak, and a Canon. After viewing sample shots from all three, reading user and editorial reviews, comparing feature sets, and talking with people in the know, I determine that the Kodak is the one I want. Unfortunately, it just came out a month ago, and it'll cost me over $400 for the camera plus the add-ons I want. I'd have bought the camera already if that were doable for me. It isn't right now, so I'm holding off until the price gets within my range, as it will inevitably do once demand goes down. I could probably get the Canon within my budget, but I'd really much rather have the Kodak.

So, is the fact that I'm waiting for the price drop on the Kodak an indictment of the product? Or is it just me showing some financial responsibility and not putting myself in any more debt than I need to be in. If you ask me, this situation is more an indictment of the Canon and Olympus cameras, especially the Canon, since I could get it for what I want to pay right now, yet I won't.

[Drew Dowdell]

'Biz and 'boi-

It's not about being right---and perhaps both of you have been unfairly roped into my beef with some of this sites lesser characters in regards to their foolish blindness--its about simply being given my due.

Did either of you ever consider that the glass is bone dry?

I still think there is some water left in the glass, but after a few of this week's announcements, I think GM is going to squander them away. Up until this week, I had hope. Now I think GM is headed more toward Chrysler's direction than Ford's.

The sales of the Lambda are going to hit the buffers. Traverse will get here just in time to make one of the biggest belly flops the market has seen in a long time. A great product at the worst possible time. GM shouldn't even bother unless the two-mode is available at launch and in substantial quantities.

I take issue with GM's apparent inability to see past the end of their V6es. Killing a large car because current mentalities require it to be V6 powered is shortsighted, especially with things like the Turbo-Ecotec-BASII waiting in the wings.

The Malibu is a great effort but at least from where I sit, much of the advertising has stopped.

Delta II needed to be here in January, but now it seems GM doesn't have the funding to do a pull ahead stunt like they did with the GMT-900s.

So yeah, there is still some water in the glass, but I guess we'll have to see what GM does with it.

[daves87rs]

'Biz and 'boi-

It's not about being right---and perhaps both of you have been unfairly roped into my beef with some of this sites lesser characters in regards to their foolish blindness--its about simply being given my due.

Did either of you ever consider that the glass is bone dry? That's simply reality. I've never said anything on here that was untrue, nor have I 'bashed' GM--although I've certainly pointed out when other posters were misleading or wrong.

GM is in the fight of its life--the fact that I was stating that years ago may imply that I know something you guys don't--or perhaps I have the experience necessary to make that judgment--whether either of you want to hear it or not isn't germane to the arguments we have here.

I'm not thumbing my nose at you, nor am I gloating. There's nothing that gives me more displeasure than GM's fate and the likely outcome. If I truly wanted to screw GM, I could have aired my grievances publically, years ago. So I've been a team player---in the way that counts---but anytime I bring up my CV here, I'm 'bragging' or 'boasting' about my personal success.

Clapping along with a bunch of misinformed GM fanboys as they spread complete stupidity because this is a GM fansite doesn't wash with me. I'm sick of excuses for GM--they f'ed up, they haven't owned up to it & the changes they've made shouldn't be congratulated because they finally woke up from the stupor that has led thm to the place they are.

I've said plenty of good things here--just check out the last 4/5 topics I've begun here as proof--its so easy to do, but, again, that might require people to look into things and know something before commenting. You guys see what you want to see. And then shoot the messanger because the news isn't what you'd like. I'm OK with that position here---but I won;t apologize for it and I won;t back down from it--

I can't win here. I know that. But I seriously resent being hammered due to my opinion---and furthermore, the facts support my position and the severity of the problem requires immediate, 'my house is burning down' type action. Negative is how it looks, guys. Period.

I'd have to agree with that. Things just are not looking good for GM right now, expect maybe the Malibu and the Volt, when it gets here.

What people fail to realize is that Toyota has enough money to put GM away at ANY time. Trust me, if they wanted to, i have no doubt that it would happen. The only reason that they have not is due to the huge blacklash that it would cause.

Besides, if they wait long enough, the big three might just do it on their own.

The only thing that GM has going for it is the global market right now...(china, Gme)

While I also agree with Biz on some his points...and the product will take time to chnage-they need to do something about their image now.

The money being spent on AA could have been spent on a new image campaign....

While GM is starting to see the light-they need to see more of it faster.

I don't think it is a product issue, it is a image issue.

[enzl]

I don't think it is a product issue, it is a image issue.

QFT.

But the only way to change the image is for the product to support an alternate, more positive story.

It's a vicious circle.

[The O.C.]

QFT.

But the only way to change the image is for the product to support an alternate, more positive story.

It's a vicious circle.

It's a BITCH.

I've worked at the Caddy store for two weeks now......and let me tell you....the new CTS is most definitely one of the best products GM has in it's product portfolio right now.....and it can stand up to any competitor in the marketplace. Yes, the 3-/5-Series might still be more of an ultimate drivers car, and Audi might still have the slightly superior fit-and-finish.....but in the end, CTS is on pretty much the same plateau now as it's competition.

AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM......

They haven't leapfrogged.....they haven't re-invented the market.....they haven't done anything spectacular to make those BMW, Benz, and Lexus drivers to make the CTS their new "gotta-have" car.

So...yes now we have the product. BUT....we STILL have to convince those consumers dedicated to their German (and sometimes Asian) competition to "make the leap" and join GM again.

CTS is a HOT PRODUCT at our store....no questions about it.......but STILL.....I can count on one hand the number of german-import trade-ins or cross-shoppers we get.

IF GM pulls out of this slump.....it will, I guarantee, be decades before we see it. And in order to do that, they have to hit all the buttons between now and then. Given past performance, I don't know if they can accomplish that.

[ZL-1]

So...yes now we have the product. BUT....we STILL have to convince those consumers dedicated to their German (and sometimes Asian) competition to "make the leap" and join GM again.

Yep, that's the real challenge. It will take more than product for GM to turn around, it will take consistency and time.

Edited June 4, 2008 by ZL-1

[black02]

CTS is a HOT PRODUCT at our store....no questions about it.......but STILL.....I can count on one hand the number of german-import trade-ins or cross-shoppers we get.

Step one is to stop the defections. If you owned a 6-year old Chevy Lumina in 2000, and you wanted to buy a decent RWD sports sedan, you might have taken a look at the Catera, but you'd probably end up buying a BMW or Mercedes.

Now, if you're trading up your 2002 Malibu, GM has a good chance of getting your business with a CTS.

So maybe you won't get the BMW owner, but if you get the Chevy or Ford owner, you're doing better than before.

[!!!TED!!!]

About the Impala...

I just got this email (as feedback from my codes page)

Ted,

I do not think the GMX551 should be a red/cancelled program. My company is a brake component supplier and we are working on assemblies that go on the GMX511/521/551 vehicles, all to be built at Oshawa Car. I know the pro and con rumors of a rwd Impala. But, we'll see come fall of 2008

[haypops]

The only thing that GM has going for it is the global market right now...(china, Gme)

I have great concerns that the China part of GM's empire will be a future headache instead of a bright spot.

[turbo200]

About the Impala...

I just got this email (as feedback from my codes page)

reliable source? if this were true, wouldn't there be other suppliers [though not necessarily reaching out through your page]. I want to believe.

[CARBIZ]

I have great concerns that the China part of GM's empire will be a future headache instead of a bright spot.

That's a given. All these companies jumping into bed with the Chinese. Just wait. Once they've sucked in our technology, they are going to boot out the foreigners, one by one.

[haypops]

That's a given. All these companies jumping into bed with the Chinese. Just wait. Once they've sucked in our technology, they are going to boot out the foreigners, one by one.

Well that too. My concern is that China will stop buying Buicks and other large cars because of the increased price of gasoline. Unlike the United States, they have little domestic production and a their heavy industry demands more energy than our service/IT related industries. Their banking system is deep into US$ so that do has them hard pressed.