GM is Behind Saturn

[haypops]

.

the whole BS about 'I wont set foot in Chevy deaelr, but will Saturn' makes no sense, since Saturns are the same quality vehicle. The SL's just had plastic panels, not "way better" than Cavalier's of the day. I see more old J cars running than SL's, FWIW.

FWIW I bought a SL and a J car in 1994 and the Saturn was of better quality. It was not just plastic pannels as my two delta vehicles (ION and HHR) both use engines built under Saturn patent. Obvioulsly I am one who will set foot in a Chevy showroom.

[regfootball]

same old bull$h! with gm and their incentive game, was at the dealer today. they introduce a loyalty rebate and add gm card top off earnings. however, on the astra as i found out today, the basic incentives were reduced on the car to the tune of about 2000 less. and no dealer discount.

basically for a non gm loyalty or gm card customer, now again this month, the out the door price is like 2 grand to 3 grand more for a stale carryover model this month vs last.

my patience is almost gone for this saturn price bull$h!. saturn, gm, whatever. i would love to support saturn or any gm division. the vue is WAY overpriced as are the epsilon cars now. as for the astra, it now again appears they don't even want to move them. a 1000 rebate is all that is available to a non gm loyal customer and no dealer discount. is this how you clear inventory on an overpriced and dead model?

Edited January 7, 2009 by regfootball

[2QuickZ's]

my patience is almost gone for this saturn price bull$h!. saturn, gm, whatever. i would love to support saturn or any gm division. the vue is WAY overpriced as are the epsilon cars now. as for the astra, it now again appears they don't even want to move them. a 1000 rebate is all that is available to a non gm loyal customer and no dealer discount. is this how you clear inventory on an overpriced and dead model?

GM never learns their lessons. A couple of years ago they decided to drop the sticker prices of their vehicles and correspondingly lower the rebates (at least in theory) so their residual values would look better since they are determined from sticker price as opposed to transaction price. Apparently they undid all of that during the 2008 and into the 2009 model year.

I know that the 2008 VUE had AT LEAST 3 price increases during the model year that raised the base price a total of around $700 IIRC. My '08 VUE XR with premium and convenience packages and chrome skid plates and cargo cover stickered at $26,750. I was at the dealership a few weeks ago and they were bragging about the fact you could get the '09 XR with the 4 cyl. I checked out the sticker and about had a heart attack! I don't remember exactly what it was but I believe it was over $27k and its only the 4 speed auto! Even though they are already on dealer lots you cannot price out the XR 4 cyl. online because nobody has the pricing information. It's not on Saturn's website or Edmunds. Base on an XR FWD is now $27,130 and equipped roughly the same as my '08 would come out to $29,130. That's a $2380 increase in one model year!

Edited January 7, 2009 by 2QuickZ's

[regfootball]

GM never learns their lessons. A couple of years ago they decided to drop the sticker prices of their vehicles and correspondingly lower the rebates (at least in theory) so their residual values would look better since they are determined from sticker price as opposed to transaction price. Apparently they undid all of that during the 2008 and into the 2009 model year.

I know that the 2008 VUE had AT LEAST 3 price increases during the model year that raised the base price a total of around $700 IIRC. My '08 VUE XR with premium and convenience packages and chrome skid plates and cargo cover stickered at $26,750. I was at the dealership a few weeks ago and they were bragging about the fact you could get the '09 XR with the 4 cyl. I checked out the sticker and about had a heart attack! I don't remember exactly what it was but I believe it was over $27k and its only the 4 speed auto! Even though they are already on dealer lots you cannot price out the XR 4 cyl. online because nobody has the pricing information. It's not on Saturn's website or Edmunds. Base on an XR FWD is now $27,130 and equipped roughly the same as my '08 would come out to $29,130. That's a $2380 increase in one model year!

they did the same bull$h! from sept to october. they pulled about 3 grand away of incentives. i too noticed the vue already outrageously priced to begin with, they had an 09 four popper on the show floor. 26+ MSRP!!!!!!! holy crap!

last month the vue 6 popper had about 6 grand total incentives and the 4 popper was like 5250 incentives. now the vue red line fwd for example starts at 27 grand but most v6 models left or built are xr v6 awd which sticker over 30 grand. basically in short, most vues are north of 26-27 grand msrp so even with huge incentives they are still way more spendy than escapes as an example. so this month they reduced the incentives by like 2-3 grand on those and bam, you cannot touch a vue at all.

even the sales guy moaned when i bitched that the price of the car is different every month and it pisses off the customer. he's like 'try selling them like that' or something like that. it even pisses off the sales dudes.

[cire]

With what $$ to 'expand Saturn'? GM CANNOT afford to have 8 full line brands, period.

How do three products (1 subcompact, 2 compacts) make a brand a full line vehicle division? I agree that GM doesn't need all its brands to be full line divisions (which happens to be one of the ways that the corporation went terribly wrong with Saturn in the first place), but some of the brands (especially Saturn and Pontiac) could make nice supporting sub-brands. My understanding was that GM was developing a hatchback version of the Cruze for some markets that prefer that particular configuration; why not slap a Daewoo grille with a Saturn logo/model name on it and give it to Saturn. Chevrolet would still have the Cruze sedan to chase the volume part of the affordable compact segment in the States. I'm sure there will be a hatchback version of the next gen Aveo sedan. Again, what harm would it do to let Saturn carry a slightly altered version of the hatchback configuration instead of Chevrolet? The Orlando is a type of vehicle (MPV) that is considered sort of quirky in the U.S. and has an unproven level of success in this country. Why not give this vehicle a trial run in this country under a brand that has a quirky and nonconventional image in the market? The development of the products will already be done and paid for, it's just a matter of applying a Saturn logo to the products and arranging to build them in North America.

As far as "expanding" Saturn, my plan was to place them in some existing Chevrolet dealerships only in markets where Saturn does not currently exist. Other than a new sign and some space on the dealers' lots, how much would that really cost? Would it be cheaper to follow this plan than to take on the costs and negative publicity of shutting Saturn down? I'm not a big Saturn fan and I'm not championing the brand out of loyalty (I personally think it was absolutely ludicrous to launch a new brand than to simply make changes within the existing brand structure). However, I do believe that shutting down the brand will be far costlier to GM (in both actual dollars and public perception) than finding a way to give the brand a small niche of the market to pursue. By assigning the brand affordable hatchbacks and MPVs, GM can continue to support the brand with vehicles that won't deduct much volume from Chevrolet and might serve to reinforce the quirkiness and individuality of the Saturn brand. If GM needs to restructure without the costs and negative publicity of shutting down brands, then this might be the way to go as far as Saturn is concerned.

[BigPontiac]

How do three products (1 subcompact, 2 compacts) make a brand a full line vehicle division? I agree that GM doesn't need all its brands to be full line divisions (which happens to be one of the ways that the corporation went terribly wrong with Saturn in the first place), but some of the brands (especially Saturn and Pontiac) could make nice supporting sub-brands. My understanding was that GM was developing a hatchback version of the Cruze for some markets that prefer that particular configuration; why not slap a Daewoo grille with a Saturn logo/model name on it and give it to Saturn. Chevrolet would still have the Cruze sedan to chase the volume part of the affordable compact segment in the States. I'm sure there will be a hatchback version of the next gen Aveo sedan. Again, what harm would it do to let Saturn carry a slightly altered version of the hatchback configuration instead of Chevrolet? The Orlando is a type of vehicle (MPV) that is considered sort of quirky in the U.S. and has an unproven level of success in this country. Why not give this vehicle a trial run in this country under a brand that has a quirky and nonconventional image in the market? The development of the products will already be done and paid for, it's just a matter of applying a Saturn logo to the products and arranging to build them in North America.

As far as "expanding" Saturn, my plan was to place them in some existing Chevrolet dealerships only in markets where Saturn does not currently exist. Other than a new sign and some space on the dealers' lots, how much would that really cost? Would it be cheaper to follow this plan than to take on the costs and negative publicity of shutting Saturn down? I'm not a big Saturn fan and I'm not championing the brand out of loyalty (I personally think it was absolutely ludicrous to launch a new brand than to simply make changes within the existing brand structure). However, I do believe that shutting down the brand will be far costlier to GM (in both actual dollars and public perception) than finding a way to give the brand a small niche of the market to pursue. By assigning the brand affordable hatchbacks and MPVs, GM can continue to support the brand with vehicles that won't deduct much volume from Chevrolet and might serve to reinforce the quirkiness and individuality of the Saturn brand. If GM needs to restructure without the costs and negative publicity of shutting down brands, then this might be the way to go as far as Saturn is concerned.

Sounds like the return of Geo...

[cire]

I almost like this. The return of Saturn to being focused on small cars would be wonderful, IMO. I think we have seen with the Astra, though, that hatches don't sell well enough for Saturn to survive on them. They need sedans too.

I'm not convinced that the Astra failed because it was only available in a hatchback configuration (although this configuration would certainly qualify it for "niche" status in the U.S.). I think there are many factors that have contributed to the failure of the Astra in the U.S. (exchange rates, lack of advertising, car not tailored to match U.S. market's standards of premium, premium car sold under a brand perceived as "affordable", limited dealer network, limited interior volume, etc.). I do agree and accept that the hatchback configuration is not exactly considered mainstream in the U.S. This is the very reason why a hatchback version of the Cruze (with grille, logo, and model name alterations) would be ideal for Saturn; this configuration (as well as the MPV) is viewed as quirky and unconventional (at least in the U.S.), just as Saturn should be. To me, Chevrolet should be marketed to the mainstream while Saturn should be marketed to those who consider themselves to be "individualists" or "nonconformists".

The problem with giving Saturn affordable sedans under this plan is that it would cause Saturn to overlap and compete with Chevrolet. Since both brands would be sold under one dealership in some markets (via the "expansion" plan), this would be an incredible redundancy.

[cire]

Sounds like the return of Geo...

I did have that in mind when I thought of the plan. It also sounds a bit like Scion too, unfortunately.

[SAmadei]

they did the same bull$h! from sept to october. they pulled about 3 grand away of incentives. i too noticed the vue already outrageously priced to begin with, they had an 09 four popper on the show floor. 26+ MSRP!!!!!!! holy crap!

This is one of the big things that I worry about in GM's attempt to return to its prior glory. IMHO, I don't think GM is going to attract serious conquest buyers with great product alone. They need to beat Toyota and Honda on price, as well. That is with a low MSRP, not a high MSRP with a mountain of cash back incentives... that just confuses the customer, as well.

I can understand simple taxes and law and I fix cars, computers, houses. I'm building my own solar PV array right now. However, I have no idea WTF GM is doing with pricing and financing right now. And guess what... its keeping me out of the showroom.

[Sixty8panther]

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articl...94_FORTUNE5.htm

Not entirely saying they are saved, but GM is considering alternatives to help Saturn survive. My guess is to avoid paying out the dealer network.

Well thank God, tht's comforting

esp. considering Oldsmobile is

dead, Pontiac is in the ICU and

being violently choked by a

bunch of (new) bean counters &

instead of a slew of RWD, V6/V8

powered Zeta products in

dealerships like the masses have

been begging for, we're getting

a bunch of FWD mediocrity.

Again.

Saturn can go take a LONG walk

down a short pier any day IMHO.

[regfootball]

This is one of the big things that I worry about in GM's attempt to return to its prior glory. IMHO, I don't think GM is going to attract serious conquest buyers with great product alone. They need to beat Toyota and Honda on price, as well. That is with a low MSRP, not a high MSRP with a mountain of cash back incentives... that just confuses the customer, as well.

I can understand simple taxes and law and I fix cars, computers, houses. I'm building my own solar PV array right now. However, I have no idea WTF GM is doing with pricing and financing right now. And guess what... its keeping me out of the showroom.

gm is making it impossible to shop for cars.

saab? saab sales were up in sept when they had massive rebates. the next month, they pulled a bunch of the money and sales dived again.

they need to get msrp's closer to what they sell for and maybe they wouldn't have 2 attempt to manipulate the market with incentives.

they bitch about uaw wages (30 hours per car) but then play with THOUSANDS each month in marketing incentives.

No wonder the dealers bitch. they have no idea how to make money or if they can even sell cars. the incentives are greater than the profit they can make selling something. gotta piss ya off. why should car A be 3 grand less incentives in march, than feb. shoppers in feb get a price of 22k, and come back in march, its 25k. the dealer cant move the car because its like 15% more now and so that means they can't make a profit. if they sell it when its cheaper, their margin is less. and leasing went bye bye so there is no way to sell anything there.

the car should sell for the same price most of the time. these wild price swings month to month and monthly promotions are dumb. it might work for kohl's lowest prices of the season but for cars it will piss off shoppers. i know i am pretty much done. trouble is, used car shopping is even tougher.

this country is overmarketed. we create all this marketing stuff to justify marketing jobs. and even if these promotions and incentives generate traffic, ultimately with cars you still won't part with the cash until the real price meets what you think the car is ultimately worth.

gm is really being a pain with their lease return incentives too. a trailblazer shopper can get 4k if they are coming out of a lease. wouldn't someone who is NOT leasing want that 4 grand too?

Edited January 7, 2009 by regfootball

[Chicagoland]

"Saturn should be marketed to those who consider themselves to be "individualists" or "nonconformists"."

Then what is Pontiac, Buick going to get? Non-conformists get Japanese or no car at all.

Saturn's extra cost for the 'special buying experience' is not worth anything. And the bath taken at resale makes the costs even worse. Try to trade in an Astra in 5 years, bet it will be worth same as used Deawoos.

[Robert Hall]

"Saturn should be marketed to those who consider themselves to be "individualists" or "nonconformists"."

Then what is Pontiac, Buick going to get? Non-conformists get Japanese or no car at all.

Nothing non-conformist about that....the conformist masses are content with their FWD Japanese generics....

[fightingbee]

Nothing non-conformist about that....the conformist masses are content with their FWD Japanese generics....

Yeah, but talk to them and they all think they are non-conformist for bying thier import.

BTW: Do they ever not have "the big one" sale at Kohl's?

Edited January 7, 2009 by fightingbee

[vt_hokie]

FWIW I bought a SL and a J car in 1994 and the Saturn was of better quality. It was not just plastic pannels as my two delta vehicles (ION and HHR) both use engines built under Saturn patent. Obvioulsly I am one who will set foot in a Chevy showroom.

No question. Better reliability, better crashworthiness, easier maintenance, and better looking imho. An SL1 or SL2 was far superior to a Cavalier of the same vintage.

Edited January 7, 2009 by vt_hokie

[daves87rs]

No question. Better reliability, better crashworthiness, easier maintenance, and better looking imho. An SL1 or SL2 was far superior to a Cavalier of the same vintage.

Eh, A buddy of mine and I used to owm a J and a S series of that vintage...they were about the same..

[The O.C.]

Eh, A buddy of mine and I used to owm a J and a S series of that vintage...they were about the same..

Disagree.

I went from an '89 Skyhawk to a '92 SL1.......the Saturn was FAR superior in terms of fit-and-finish, material quality, seating comfort, even engine refinement, ride-and-handling, etc.

I'll always have a (very) soft heart for my beloved Skyhawk......but there is no escaping the fact that the new Saturns of the day made the J's feel ancient seemingly overnight.

[fightingbee]

The '95+ J cars made the two much closer, but the S still felt just a bit more fun to drive, especally if it was one of the 2's with it's Twin Cam motor, 4 wheel discs (sometimes), stiff suspension, and speed-sensitive steering.

[vt_hokie]

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=45

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=80

[NOS2006]

*cough, cough*

"We are completely behind Saturn."

[ZL-1]

"We are completely behind Saturn."

"(...) so we can push it down a cliff."

That's the part of the sentence he didn't say. :AH-HA_wink:

[gm4life]

Saturn is toast. And never should have been sadly. A waste of money that could have been spent on better Chevrolet's, Pontiac's and Buick's need I go on.

[cire]

Saturn is toast. And never should have been sadly. A waste of money that could have been spent on better Chevrolet's, Pontiac's and Buick's need I go on.

I never did understand why GM undertook expansion projects (Saturn, Saab, and Hummer), when its established brands (Chevrolet, Pontiac, GMC, Oldsmobile, Buick, and Cadillac) were unfocused and needed desperate attention and direction. I don't like or dislike Saturn, but I agree that it was a totally unnecessary waste of effort and resources for GM. GM needed to work on improving products and customer service within their existing brand hierarchy and dealerships, not start a new brand or buy existing ones that have only served to add to the corporation's problems.

[gm4life]

I have respect for Saturn but never saw a need for them when they had plenty of core brands that they could have been working on.

[fightingbee]

As I think it was discussed here some time ago, Saturn's coming to being seemed to be Roger Smith's baby back in the 80's. That is one reason some higher-ups in GM were never Saturn fans either - It was like telling them their brands were hopeless to conquest import buyers so we have to make up a new brand and distance ourselves from it marketing-wise.

I really liked and appreciated Saturn and my two vehicles I have owned from them, but I am also not horribly suprised by their seemingly apparent demise as they have a fairly incoherent identity between where they started and where they are now, which both puts off many the old S-car buyers and doesn't fully convince many of the "upscale" buyers they try marketing to currently.

[PurdueGuy]

I have respect for Saturn but never saw a need for them when they had plenty of core brands that they could have been working on.

I would agree with that, except that with Saturn they did things that could not be done with an established brand:

-unique labor agreement

-unique mentality about how the dealership works

-new production methods (which required the unique contract agreement to be implemented)

You simply couldn't do any of those things with an existing brand. And guess what... they worked very well. Unfortunate that everything that was unique about Saturn couldn't make a small car with a small profit margin profitable enough to offset a huge and underutilized manufacturing facility, so even though the S-Series was selling in volumes that put half of GM's BRANDS (let alone products) to shame (compare 300k+ S-Series sales for multiple years to the numbers someone posted for brand sales for '08), they couldn't come up with the funds to continue development of new product until GM assimilated them into the status quo of the rest of the brands. It's been downhill since, even with an ever-expanding lineup of product.

[HarleyEarl]

Whatever one thinks of Saturn, myself included, they did post big sales in their day.