GM Studies Killing Saab, Saturn, Pontiac

[balthazar]

>>"Umm... The {Cadillac} SALES both in american and especially outside of america in relation to the competition."<<

Does Cadillac compete w/ audi?

Jan-Jun '08 Audi : 45,711

Jan-Jun '08 Cadi : 88,709

But here we are in smk-land {shudder}: basing "success" on sales numbers. Success in business is generally determined by profit, not volume per say. How in the world does ferrari manage to crank out so many different models with no sales volume ??? Easy- they're grotesquely overpriced for what you get = profit.

[BuddyP]

Buick outsells them if you include China.

I don't care about China, nor do I EVER want to see a chinese Buick be imported into the US.

[ZL-1]

I don't care about China, nor do I EVER want to see a chinese Buick be imported into the US.

Not even the new Regal (aka Opel Insignia)?

[Sixty8panther]

KILL/SELL:

Saab, Saturn & Hummer.

DO NOT FU** WITH FOR FEAR OF AN A$$KICKING:

Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Cadillac.

[Satty]

The huge, ginormous problem with selling Saab (or Hummer, for that matter) is that nobody has any money right now. GM wants to unload the brands to raise cash, but that requires a buyer.

[Sixty8panther]

Very true.

Flip side of the coin:

Killing Oldsmobile COST GM millions already AND it

has been reported as most on here will remember

that it would have cost GM less to KEEP Oldsmobile

alive.... and in the end for what?

Euthanizing Olds meant GM gave up market share.

They have admitted that.

So in other words killing brands is NOT ever going

to be the answer unless the question is "How do you

permanently reduce market share?"

BUT

If you have to kill a Brand Saturn & Saab are both

leaches on GM's wallet and Hummer is a dirty word.

(I personally like Hummer but I like GMC more)

[hyperv6]

You kill the division it cost ypu money and if ypu keep the division it cost ypu even more money.

It is like a gang greene leg you hate to lose it buyt sometimes you need to step back to move forward again.

The bottom line is if Pontiac, Saturn or Saab is not making money and it will cost you a lot of money you don't have to fix them you stop the infection.

The money put to Pontiac and the others could be used to make the profit centers of Pontiac and Cadillac better. It is no longer about Market Share it is profit. Who cares if you hold 30% of a market is you can't pay the bills.

[VenSeattle]

The plan that GM is looking at is to consolidate their market offerings between Chevrolet and Cadillac down to one brand. After all is said and done, Chevrolet will continue to compete with the same brands (minus some siblings and other potential fatalities.) however, GM will require more from Cadillac. Cadillac will be all GM has to compete against the world's finest. After the recession, Cadillac will need to offer vehicles that compete head-on with the luxury/ultra-luxury vehicles that remain. That will continue to increase the gap between Chevrolet and Cadillac.

Buick's ability to offer a wide range of products (cars, coupes, convertibles, CUVs, & SUVs) carrying a wide price range (currently $20k to mid-$40k) make it the best choice among the mid-tier/mid-luxury brands to choose from within GM's portfolio.

So... If Pontiac, SAAB, & Saturn were phased out...

Buick could have the SAAB 9-4X as a Rendezvous positioned under Enclave

Buick could have the Insignia-based Chinese Regal positioned under the new LaCrosse

Buick could get a version of the next-gen Astra family (or SAAB-Deltas; next gen 9-3) for entry-level premium compacts (Skylark, Skyhawk, Century or a new name altogether)

Buick could also sell the Alpha vehicle as a RWD performance coupe/convertible (Riviera)

Buick could also sell a premium delta-based Volt sibling...

All of them: Rendezvous, Enclave, Regal, LaCrosse, Delta-Buicks, Alpha-Buick, & Buick Volt could be sold in both China and the US.

All of them marketed under one brand internationally (we already know the Enclave will be exported to China and the LaCrosse will be sold both in the US and China.)

In addition... Buick's the only mid-tier brand that can demand a price tag high enough to justify sharing a Cadillac platform (Sigma) without it looking out of place in the brand:

- Does a RWD-midsize/large SAAB sedan fit SAAB's image?

- or does it fit Saturn's image? Either selling for $43k-$50k?

- Unfortunately, Pontiac is already having trouble selling a $30k RWD V6/V8 sedan.

The other 3 just don’t seem to work out.

It's a way to extend the use of an existing platform with little investment. I could argue that as of right now... a Buick-badged mid-$40k STS would sell better under the Buick brand. At least it wouldn't have the new CTS on the showroom floor competing with it. The Buick-STS would complement the new LaCrosse as a step up/Buick flagship. The Buick STS would provide LGR production volume and could sell as a Park Avenue replacement in China. Cadillac could still keep the STS and refresh it/upgrade it positioning it higher than the CTS and Buick-version (making it a true E-Class/5-Series luxury competitor or SWB S-Class/7-Series fighter) without abandoning the midsize/large premium market. When conditions improve, Cadillac could stretch higher and come out with models to compete against the baby RR & Bentley cars that will survive the recession.

All of this allows Cadillac to move into the luxury/ultra-luxury market while keeping another brand as a solid step-up above Chevrolet. Very little price or market overlap. The gap is bridged. Three international line-ups.

[haypops]

and Hummer is a dirty word.

)

I got into some interesting discussions discussing the GM, etc. bridge loans. Two GM brands came out time and again.

HUMMER - This brand is the opposite of a halo car. I was surprised how much hatred it carries with it. I calmed the waters by posting a picture of a post delivery vehicle and explaining that AM General not GM made the H1.

BUICK - A number of posters commented what great gas mileage they got in their Buicks.

[wildcat]

Buick could also sell a premium delta-based Volt sibling.

VenSeattle: You forgot to mention its name: Electra

[enzl]

>>"Umm... The {Cadillac} SALES both in american and especially outside of america in relation to the competition."<<

Does Cadillac compete w/ audi?

Jan-Jun '08 Audi : 45,711

Jan-Jun '08 Cadi : 88,709

But here we are in smk-land {shudder}: basing "success" on sales numbers. Success in business is generally determined by profit, not volume per say. How in the world does ferrari manage to crank out so many different models with no sales volume ??? Easy- they're grotesquely overpriced for what you get = profit.

I think Audi will hit 1 million sales, annually this year, worldwide.

I don't believe Caddy will hit 300k, worldwide.

Audi is fleshing out a full line-up---Caddy has been trending downward for decades, no?

Caddy is great--but the prime victim in the unavoidable starvation of great brands in the GM universe.

[balthazar]

Decades ago Cadillac only had sedans & coupes, now they also have a roadster, a full-size SUV line, a crossover, and 'small' sedan and true high-performance variants. A new coupe & 'sport wagon' are on the way. Looks like trending upward to me.

Since Cadillac's expasion worldwide has been recent & limited, and the marque primarily sells in the U.S., seems a U.S. comparison of numbers vs. audi is legitimate, since FOG brought the American market up.

[enzl]

Decades ago Cadillac only had sedans & coupes, now they also have a roadster, a full-size SUV line, a crossover, and 'small' sedan and true high-performance variants. A new coupe & 'sport wagon' are on the way. Looks like trending upward to me.

Since Cadillac's expasion worldwide has been recent & limited, and the marque primarily sells in the U.S., seems a U.S. comparison of numbers vs. audi is legitimate, since FOG brought the American market up.

Cadillac's proliferation has kept it relevant, but I'd hardly suggest that Caddy sells anywhere near its historical levels, either by numbers or marketshare---either here or worldwide.

A smart GM would have leveraged the Cadillac brand worldwide decades ago. That's the problem with the Audi comparo--it's not apples to apples. Audi has entered the argument of high-end product while Caddy has struggled to stay relevant. Audi is an example of VW effectively acting as a steward of the brand--I'm sure that GM has not done the same with Caddy. Put the CTS aside, and there's little to discuss, presently.

[mr.nice]

Well, this still all comes down to the UAW getting on board.

Fine, cut 2-4 brands...given the UAW contracts, you're still going to have to produce roughly the same number of vehicles, but you'll have 1.5x the Impala's on the road, 1.5x the Silverados on the road, as they get all still get produced, just now strictly under Chevy badges instead of thier rebadged twins from the now defunct divisions.

Simply, its still cheaper to produce cars and get some value out of the workers, as opposed to have those guys paid out not to work under the current structure.

Keep in mind the US Congress will want to see a combination of cost cutting and the maintaining of jobs in any plan.

[SAmadei]

Fine, cut 2-4 brands...given the UAW contracts, you're still going to have to produce roughly the same number of vehicles, but you'll have 1.5x the Impala's on the road, 1.5x the Silverados on the road, as they get all still get produced, just now strictly under Chevy badges instead of thier rebadged twins from the now defunct divisions.

They won't sell 1.5x Impalas. No Pontiac, I'm not buying GM. I won't recommend GM to others, either.

Just as others have mentioned, when GM killed Olds, all that volume was LOST. GM needs to inform Congress of that. They should also let Congress know that Chevy, BPG, Cadillac and Saturn would be only 4 divisions, not 6.

[SAmadei]

- Unfortunately, Pontiac is already having trouble selling a $30k RWD V6/V8 sedan.

So if Chevy badges the G8 as a Caprice, they are going to have better luck selling a $30K RWD V6/V8 sedan?!?

[hyperv6]

Stop all this we could put this model in this line up. We have too many models non not just divisions.

The idea is to do away with all the many models and divisions to save money.

If the model is not sold world wide it is gone.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

You know, I was thinking...

If GM uses the number of people it employs as leverage for the "bailout", wouldn't killing divisions and downsizing be counter productive?

And +1 on the "GM needs to let Congress [and the world] know that it only sells 4 divisions." Then maybe less people would be asking/forcing them to assasinate divisions.

Repeat after me: FOUR DIVISIONS (Because that's the way the restructure was supposed to be.

1) Chevrolet

2) Saturn

3) Buick/Pontiac/GMC

4) Cadillac/Saab/Hummer

Edited November 29, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[The O.C.]

Decades ago Cadillac only had sedans & coupes, now they also have a roadster, a full-size SUV line, a crossover, and 'small' sedan and true high-performance variants. A new coupe & 'sport wagon' are on the way. Looks like trending upward to me.

Since Cadillac's expasion worldwide has been recent & limited, and the marque primarily sells in the U.S., seems a U.S. comparison of numbers vs. audi is legitimate, since FOG brought the American market up.

The unfortunate reality is not what's currently in the product lineup, but how much those products contribute to Cadillac's overall sucess.

(Based upon my six months' experience working at a Caddy store....) there are two....only two....products that generate any sort of significant contribution to Cadillac.......the CTS, and the short-wheelbase Escalade.

STS is sale-proof. STS-V is sale proof.

SRX is sale-proof.

XLR is sale-proof. XLR-V is sale-proof.

ESV and EXT Escalades move at a fraction of the short-wheelbase model.

DTS is not quite sale-proof, but damn near it.

The new CTS-V, coupe and sportwagen will generate positive press......but hardly help to fix the problems with the rest of the product line.

A smaller, less-expensive RWD sedan could be interesting....if executed to the level the current CTS is.

Where's the new STS/DTS replacement? I don't even think it's barely on the horizon.

The new SRX is a sharp looker.....but loses it's third-row seat and is FWD-based. How will that help steal sales from the Lexus RX's of the world? (As "sale proof" as SRXs are, if you have a 5-seat model, it's even more sale proof.)

For all my bitching, we do just fine and make nice money at this store....thanks to CTS, Escalade Shorty, used-cars, and service. But Cadillac is still a far way from "trending upwards" in the grand scheme of things.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

The unfortunate reality is not what's currently in the product lineup, but how much those products contribute to Cadillac's overall sucess.

(Based upon my six months' experience working at a Caddy store....) there are two....only two....products that generate any sort of significant contribution to Cadillac.......the CTS, and the short-wheelbase Escalade.

STS is sale-proof. STS-V is sale proof.

SRX is sale-proof.

XLR is sale-proof. XLR-V is sale-proof.

ESV and EXT Escalades move at a fraction of the short-wheelbase model.

DTS is not quite sale-proof, but damn near it.

The new CTS-V, coupe and sportwagen will generate positive press......but hardly help to fix the problems with the rest of the product line.

A smaller, less-expensive RWD sedan could be interesting....if executed to the level the current CTS is.

Where's the new STS/DTS replacement? I don't even think it's barely on the horizon.

The new SRX is a sharp looker.....but loses it's third-row seat and is FWD-based. How will that help steal sales from the Lexus RX's of the world? (As "sale proof" as SRXs are, if you have a 5-seat model, it's even more sale proof.)

For all my bitching, we do just fine and make nice money at this store....thanks to CTS, Escalade Shorty, used-cars, and service. But Cadillac is still a far way from "trending upwards" in the grand scheme of things.

We did have STS and DTS replacements until the powers that be thought it was a good idea to kill Zeta.

[GMTruckGuy74]

The new SRX is a sharp looker.....but loses it's third-row seat and is FWD-based. How will that help steal sales from the Lexus RX's of the world? (As "sale proof" as SRXs are, if you have a 5-seat model, it's even more sale proof.)

I see an awful lot of Lincoln MkX's on the road... they're 5-seaters only, right? And they come in FWD standard, with AWD optional, right? And correct me if i'm wrong, I thought I read that the new SRX will be AWD standard???

[ehaase]

Where's the new STS/DTS replacement? I don't even think it's barely on the horizon.

A fellow on GMI named Docray1, who is knowledgeable about Cadillac, says that GM is actually studying an Epsilon II replacement for the DTS.

[Camino LS6]

All of this speculation here in this thread adds up to a grand total of nothing good.

Should GM choose this path forward, my interest in the company will come to a screeching halt.

[A Horse With No Name]

I would be prepared for an announcement soon of more employee layoffs and plant closings, most likely before GM goes before Congress next week.

+1

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

We did have STS and DTS replacements until the powers that be thought it was a good idea to kill Zeta.

This is what scares me. All of the import brands are working on development and refreshes, and GM, Ford, and Chrysler are kinda treading water.

Until we can be profitable enough to do R and D and catch up, all we are doing is treading water and putting off the inevitable.

Sadly, my family on my mohters side loved Hudson in the 50's and on my fathers side loved Studebaker in the 50's. I think that 50 years later we may well deal with the death of other car lines we love..

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

All of this speculation here in this thread adds up to a grand total of nothing good.

Should GM choose this path forward, my interest in the company will come to a screeching halt.

Mine too...but I agree, nothing good is going to come of this. Our C and G April fools thread about GM closing North American operations seemed like a farfetched fantasy to me when we posted it back in April. A lot has changed in seven months.

Chris

[The O.C.]

I see an awful lot of Lincoln MkX's on the road... they're 5-seaters only, right? And they come in FWD standard, with AWD optional, right? And correct me if i'm wrong, I thought I read that the new SRX will be AWD standard???

Well maybe that works for Lincoln.....but I know that here, what we sell in SRX (primarily Certified pre-owned) we sell as RWD SRX models.....as people don't want to pay the extra for AWD if they don't have to (don't live in a snowy climate, etc.) In fact, we don't even stock new SRXs with AWD.....

Also, of those people that have inquired, they LIKE the fact that the SRX is RWD instead of FWD....I've heard that mentioned various times.

Just my observations, that's all.....

[pow]

Perhaps they could sell Saturn to the French... with an established dealer and customer base, it's a good outlet for them in the US.

And their products are similarly small, utilitarian, economical, and funky... Saturn C4 Picasso anyone?

[ZL-1]

A fellow on GMI named Docray1, who is knowledgeable about Cadillac, says that GM is actually studying an Epsilon II replacement for the DTS.

good lord... i hope he's an armachair coach and not truly knowledgeable...

[hyperv6]

All of this speculation here in this thread adds up to a grand total of nothing good.

Should GM choose this path forward, my interest in the company will come to a screeching halt.

They can and will do what they can to save GM. IF they have to kill off my fav division so be it. As of now I am a GM fan first and a division fan second.

My fear is if GM should fail all together or get taken over my next car may have to be of a brand I never wanted to buy.

I can live with a Chevy much better than a Honda.

Edited November 30, 2008 by hyperv6

[Camino LS6]

They can and will do what they can to save GM. IF they have to kill off my fav division so be it. As of now I am a GM fan first and a division fan second.

My fear is if GM should fail all together or get taken over my next car may have to be of a brand I never wanted to buy.

I can live with a Chevy much better than a Honda.

Very simply that's not a good enough answer.

Killing brands doesn't exactly have a good track record of positive results.

I believe that, far from saving GM, it will hasten the complete failure of the company.

[hyperv6]

Very simply that's not a good enough answer.

Killing brands doesn't exactly have a good track record of positive results.

I believe that, far from saving GM, it will hasten the complete failure of the company.

I would like to have 10 cars in my garage too but with what money I have coming in I can only afford 3 solid cars.

I could sell them off and buy 10 junk cars for the driveway with no money to fix them.

GM is going to have the funds to fix 2-3 divisions and unless Pontiac sales are up in China I would not hold my breath.

Killing brands has not worked because they never fixed the surviving brands.

Chevy is the work horse here and they need to make Chevy the best they can be. The money and good products going into other divisions is not going to save GM. Pontiac is not going to save GM.

Chevy needs to evolve like Hyundia has and retake the market.

The less divisions also would get everyone on one page working in one direction. In the past the division fighting has done more damage than Toyota has.

GM is going to get one chace to get this right.

The money rebading Chevys as Pontiacs could go to makeing better Chevys.

GM is wokring to make Caddy world class.

Well why are they not wokring to make Chevy world class in it price group? Not as good as Honda or Toyota but better. Right now who ever give people the most good car for the money is going to win, and right now Hyundia has a lot of people worried.

If you wanted to save Pontiac it should have been started 10 years ago. Or convice the people in China it is better than a Buick.

To show how bad off Pontiac is here in one of it's strongest markets I saw in the paper a $30,000 G8 advertised at $24,000 and I am sure you talk them lower them lower on the last day of the month. Sad but even one of the best cars Pontiac has ever offered is not selling at fire sales prices.

Edited November 30, 2008 by hyperv6

[Camino LS6]

That GM is late in getting this worked out there can be no denying but, I have yet to see ANY proof that there is any benefit to killing brands.

I think all talk of the number of brands as pivotal to GM's survival, is WAY over-emphasized. It would make far more sense to talk about models and brand focus instead. You yourself have nailed this issue with the comment that what GM has failed to do is to fix (focus) the brands.

A far lower number of models, and a near-prohibition of badge jobs would be a far more effective way to cut costs, raise profit, and improve sales than the surrender strategy and PR nightmare killing brands would be. GM need not kill brands to regain viability and become lean - that is a tired old saw.

EDIT: Additionally, this course of action is only being considered to "please" the Congress who have been conditioned by analysts and the press to believe that it is true. That is not a basis for a sound business decision in my view.

[daves87rs]

I'm not so sure killing Brands are a good idea..

Killing models, on the other hand, might help....

[gm4life]

I really don't think killing ANY BRANDS except for Hummer, Saturn and Saab is a good idea. Pontiac has way to much heritage and way to many dealers in BPG or Chev, Pont, Buick that I see alot of. Olds market share was lost the sales went to Acura and Lexus not Pontiac and Buick like GM thought. There is no way that GM would ever want to dream of killing off Pontiac, that would be plain stupid, that brand has a history and a pulse that Saturn can't match. Pontiac has adapted through good times and bad and they will again. When you get down to the core GM Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, Cadillac and GMC that is all you need and should have left if you must cut. I would refocus GMC on only building luxury/medium duty trucks and take the Kodiak away from Chevrolet and just give it too GMC. Trust me loyal Pontiac owners won't go to Buick or Chevrolet, they will go to Dodge of Nissan just watch. If Pontiac is gets killed I might end up buying my first HONDA.

Edited November 30, 2008 by gm4life

[ToniCipriani]

A fellow on GMI named Docray1, who is knowledgeable about Cadillac, says that GM is actually studying an Epsilon II replacement for the DTS.

Despite me being a fan of Epsilons, this is as sensible as bringing MDM's designs to production.

[smk4565]

I would like to have 10 cars in my garage too but with what money I have coming in I can only afford 3 solid cars.

I could sell them off and buy 10 junk cars for the driveway with no money to fix them.

GM is going to have the funds to fix 2-3 divisions and unless Pontiac sales are up in China I would not hold my breath.

Killing brands has not worked because they never fixed the surviving brands.

To show how bad off Pontiac is here in one of it's strongest markets I saw in the paper a $30,000 G8 advertised at $24,000 and I am sure you talk them lower them lower on the last day of the month. Sad but even one of the best cars Pontiac has ever offered is not selling at fire sales prices.

Amen

[balthazar]

Last time GM seriously considered killing off Pontiac was the early '50s, that decision was stayed and Pontiac went on to become one of the most successful marques of the '60s & '70s.

GM has stayed the execution of models / brands more than once, only to be proven absolutely right about the decision. I would hate for them to be wrong this time, and if there was no Oldsmobile case to draw data from, perhaps the immediate economic situation would build a strong case for discontinuance of Pontiac.... but Olds answers the question pretty thoroughly. 3 models only- forget folding 'Pontiac money into Chevy'; instead fold vibe/ Torrent/ G3/ G5/ G6 money into G8 / Solstice/ Alpha and avoid the image & bad press of killing off another brand.

Pontiac Builds Niche Performance.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

A fellow on GMI named Docray1, who is knowledgeable about Cadillac, says that GM is actually studying an Epsilon II replacement for the DTS.

Yep... That's what I've heard too. Maybe it's the resurrection of the so-called Chi architecture.

If Cadillac goes down that path, they're as dead as Lincoln. Then again, since GM seems to have wet dreams about Saab, maybe it will now become the "global luxury division" and cadillac can take Buick's role.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

BTW, Toyota is moving forward with establishing a 4th brand now (in the US --they'll only have 4 brands)

Prius is supposedly going to become its own entity.

Tell me GM needs to assassinate divisions.

[Robert Hall]

BTW, Toyota is moving forward with establishing a 4th brand now (in the US --they'll only have 4 brands)

Prius is supposedly going to become its own entity.

Or not..

Autblog article

[Sixty8panther]

Balthazar is 100% right.

And Toyota HAS a fourth & even fifth & sixth brand... Subaru, Daihatsu & Hino.

[regfootball]

I'm not so sure killing Brands are a good idea..

Killing models, on the other hand, might help....

again. this is really the right idea.

to me it hinges on GM combining BPG in with chevy. then caddy can be with saab (assuming saab stays). some suggest moving saturn into an entry level to caddy. i think if they were going to do that, why not blitz the saturn name and just kill saab and sell opel as a companion to cadillac. or keep the saturn brand to sell a small car and vue and then the opel product and then caddy. pontiac can exist on 3 models (solstice / g6 / g8) for awhile. buick should have about 4-5 models. if pontiac sold 125k and buick 175k for a short period, added on to chevy you could justify this.

caddy needs to have two all new rwd bias but awd capable platforms in development. the two platforms can exist in smaller and larger incarnations. the small platform could exist for a range of cadillac products and also be shared with pontiac for the next g6 and solstice (although the pontiac would not share premium suspensions etc.). the larger platform should form the basis of the larger cadillacs, as well as the large holden products, the g8 line, the top level buick, and a new large flagship opel (above the insignia).

aside from that, about 3 highly flexible fwd bias platforms which have some size flexibility could underpin a vast majority of GM's other volume models (excluding lambda).

[enzl]

Brand consolidation isn't an 'if', its a 'when', boys...

GM's experience with Olds only indicates they must sell, rather than shutter the brands they plan to amputate--that's how you beat most state franchise laws.

This is going to be like Sophie's Choice--as is obvious from the passion on this site---but if GM is to survive, we've all go to get used to the fact that it will be in some vastly different form.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Or not..

Autblog article

Well, that settles it then... (For now)

[saturnd00d]

Although axing a couple brands would be ideal for the long-term, I don't believe that would be in the best interest of GM at the moment. They need to fix the here-and-now.

Consolidate the brands as was mentioned all over this thread, and it should yield less overlapping, and possibly free up more money for R&D, earlier refreshes, etc.

Keep Pontiac-Buick-GMC but in there:

-Axe the G3 and G5 from Pontiac, keep the others

-Keep Enclave in Buick as the premium of TWO Lambdas in GM's lineup

-Make GMC sell midsize trucks and full-size trucks and Vans, possibly give them minivan variant to re-enter the market, axe Acadia

Roll Saturn and Saab in with Cadillac to allow for a premium division.

-Saturn to keep Astra, Aura and Vue but axe Outlook; Saab to offer 9-3 and 9-5 sedans and wagons; Caddy keeps CTS, STS and Escalade, but axe DTS

As for Chevy, scale them down to cars and keep Traverse (as the lower model of the two remaining Lambdas), axe the rest of the trucks from them. You don't need them to offer the same trucks as GMC, and because the truck sector is smaller than it used to be, it makes no sense to give them more.

[Robert Hall]

Although axing a couple brands would be ideal for the long-term, I don't believe that would be in the best interest of GM at the moment. They need to fix the here-and-now.

Consolidate the brands as was mentioned all over this thread, and it should yield less overlapping, and possibly free up more money for R&D, earlier refreshes, etc.

Keep Pontiac-Buick-GMC but in there:

-Axe the G3 and G5 from Pontiac, keep the others

-Keep Enclave in Buick as the premium of TWO Lambdas in GM's lineup

-Make GMC sell midsize trucks and full-size trucks and Vans, possibly give them minivan variant to re-enter the market, axe Acadia

Roll Saturn and Saab in with Cadillac to allow for a premium division.

-Saturn to keep Astra, Aura and Vue but axe Outlook; Saab to offer 9-3 and 9-5 sedans and wagons; Caddy keeps CTS, STS and Escalade, but axe DTS

As for Chevy, scale them down to cars and keep Traverse (as the lower model of the two remaining Lambdas), axe the rest of the trucks from them. You don't need them to offer the same trucks as GMC, and because the truck sector is smaller than it used to be, it makes no sense to give them more.

Some good points there, but I can't see Pontiac axing the G3 and G5, even though they are just rebadges--without them the BPG dealers are going to scream that they can't compete with Chevy.

Interesting proposal about a SSC division..combining the dealers, etc.

Not sure about cutting Chevy trucks--seems like Chevy is the stronger truck brand than GMC. But there is a lot of redundancy in models between the brands--the compact pickups and full size vans are identical save the grilles; only the full size pickups and SUVs have any differentiation, however superficial. I'd trim GMC..(again, though, the BPG dealers would scream they couldn't compete against Chevy)

Edited December 1, 2008 by moltar

[ZL-1]

without them the BPG dealers are going to scream that they can't compete with Chevy.

And there lies the issue.........

[saturnd00d]

There indeed lies the issue, however if Chevy gave up their truck portion to GMC's brand, then they too would be crying they couldn't compete in that respect. If they all want to survive, they have to allow for sacrifices. Under the current model, no one will scream they can't compete because they'll all be out of a job. It almost reminds me of a parent/child analogy. You have two kids screaming they want dessert. One kid wants 3 slices of pie and another wants 2, but now that kid feels they should have the same in the interest of fairness. The parent has to step in here sometime and say, you will all have one slice of pie. If you don't like it, you don't get any.

GM has to step in and say...enough is enough, we have to do what's best for the company. If downsizing is not an option, we can't continue to sell overlapped products. Each of the brands needs a definition. You can't have several divisions offering mostly the same products on the same platforms with different price ranges. It might be cost effective, but what's better? Cost-effectiveness or staying in business?

Something/someone's gotta give here.

Edited December 1, 2008 by saturnd00d

[Camino LS6]

There indeed lies the issue, however if Chevy gave up their truck portion to GMC's brand, then they too would be crying they couldn't compete in that respect. If they all want to survive, they have to allow for sacrifices. Under the current model, no one will scream they can't compete because they'll all be out of a job. It almost reminds me of a parent/child analogy. You have two kids screaming they want dessert. One kid wants 3 slices of pie and another wants 2, but now that kid feels they should have the same in the interest of fairness. The parent has to step in here sometime and say, you will all have one slice of pie. If you don't like it, you don't get any.

GM has to step in and say...enough is enough, we have to do what's best for the company. If downsizing is not an option, we can't continue to sell overlapped products. Each of the brands needs a definition. You can't have several divisions offering mostly the same products on the same platforms with different price ranges. It might be cost effective, but what's better? Cost-effectiveness or staying in business?

Something/someone's gotta give here.

True that.