Lutz: Despite good cars, Saturn probably dies ...

[Oracle of Delphi]

Jamie LaReau

Automotive News

February 16, 2009 - 12:01 am ET

DETROIT — Bob Lutz says General Motors' struggling Saturn brand probably won't survive.

"My personal favorite would be to see Saturn survive and prosper," GM's vice chairman told Automotive News. "But frankly, the reality is that that is probably not going to be the outcome."

He added: "We spent a huge bundle of money in giving Saturn an absolutely no-excuses product lineup, top to bottom. They had a better and fresher lineup than any GM division, and the sales just never materialized. So we have to act on that. It's our duty."

New Jersey Saturn dealer Stuart Lasser took Lutz's comments as confirmation of his worst fears.

"That really seals our fate," said Lasser, owner of Saturn of Denville, Saturn of Mount Olive and Saturn of Livingston. "I think they knew this fact months ago, and they never shared it with us."

Lutz, who announced last week that he will retire by year end, said GM lacks the time or resources to help the brand make a comeback.

On Dec. 2, GM told Congress it will focus most of its resources on its "core brands" — Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC — and make Pontiac a niche brand with one or two products. That left Saturn, Saab and Hummer in the cold.

GM put Hummer up for sale in June. Saturn and Saab are under review.

GM has told Saturn dealers that it has allocated funds to build Saturn vehicles through 2012 and in some cases 2013. But it has not committed money to future products.

Saturn's sales fell 21.7 percent to 188,004 in 2008. GM had hoped to sell about 100,000 units annually of the Aura sedan, the 2006 North American Car of the Year. But the car hasn't come close to that target since its August 2006 launch. Last year 59,380 were sold.

Lutz doesn't fault dealers: "We have some very excellent Saturn dealers who've made a commitment to the brand."

Some Saturn dealers say GM damaged the brand with its Dec. 2 announcement.

"I would agree with the comment that saying that Pontiac is under review probably had some impact on Pontiac sales," Lutz said.

"Saying that Saab is under review probably had some impact on Saab sales.

"But the lack of Saturn sales has been ongoing for a couple of years," he added.

"The Aura never really made its volume commitments, the Vue is halfway there, and the Outlook has not done nearly as well for Saturn as the Buick Enclave and GMC Acadia."

Lutz said he isn't sure why Saturn has not done better.

"The fact is," he said, "we don't have the time or the resources to take 10 years to figure it out and possibly turn it around."

Link: http://www.autonews.com/article/20090216/A.../902160352/1021

[Croc]

WOOHOO!!

[ocnblu]

A misguided project from the very start. That startup money would have been better spent continually improving the J-cars at the other divisions... if we are to adhere to GM's founding mission, you need to grab the young customer with a great entry-level car at each of the core brands and keep him for life as his situation improves. Saturn was a distraction from that. Yes, the original S-series was a good car in a lot of ways, and still enjoys a following, but that's where The Experiment ended. The Day of Reckoning has come.

My local Saturn dealership has been there almost from the start. They always treated my mom (with her 2 SL2s) and me with my troublesome ION QC2 well. That was never a problem. I wish all Saturn dealership personnel well in the future.

With this announcement... how in the world are they going to be able to keep the lights on in those dealerships until 2012? Service departments carry many a dealership through lean times, but I see sales totally flatlining with this, and that ain't good. The switch has been thrown.

[Croc]

They will either switch franchises or go out of business. Saturn dealerships in the middle of nowhere could start selling SAABs if not other dealership is nearby. Or a niche brand like Pontiac.

Edited February 16, 2009 by Croc

[Brougham-Holiday]

They killed Oldsmobile for this P.O.S division, and end up killing it anyway.

"Only GM" sucks this much c**k.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

"But the lack of Saturn sales has been ongoing for a couple of years," he added.

"The Aura never really made its volume commitments, the Vue is halfway there, and the Outlook has not done nearly as well for Saturn as the Buick Enclave and GMC Acadia."

Lutz said he isn't sure why Saturn has not done better.

Gee... I dunno... Maybe it could be the COMPLETE and TOTAL lack of marketing.

Or maybe it could be that Saturn only has 400 dealers in comparison to Buick/Pontiac's 500,000 (sarcasm)

Why are GM execs so stupid? Seriously? It's not hard at all to see what remains BROKEN (and will remain broken) with General Motors and it's rich plethora of divisions.

I guess Buick will be the next division to get the "GM bait and switch" of a whole new product line up and prospects of world domination,[bait] with only 2 years to get the job done.[switch]

First Oldsmobile, now Saturn, next Buick.

(To hell with Pontiac, GM didn't even give them the 'bait' in the first place. They've just worked feverishly over the last decade to destroy that division's product line)

After Buick, we'll see Cadillac on the skids... Mark my words (The american public wants a slow, painful death for what this country was. And GM is the poster child for that)

[vt_hokie]

Saturn became pointless a long time ago, when GM turned it into another redundant division selling random rebadged GM stuff. I miss my old reliable, durable plastic body SL2, but I currently own a Subaru Legacy and I will likely not buy another GM vehicle again.

[ZL-1]

Saying that Saab is under review probably had some impact on Saab sales.

Pardon the sarcasm, but... no $h!, Sherlock!

Re Saturn, the idea of Buick as a core brand and getting the Opel-based Regal reopened the door for these two brands to get in bed together. Saturn is now irrelevant, and my hope is that some lessons learned about dealership experience and costumer service are not wasted.

Edited February 16, 2009 by ZL-1

[Robert Hall]

Meh. Saturn's models are redundant with several other brands. Not sure what the point of it is these days.

[MyerShift]

Seriously?

A no excuses line up, top to bottom?

I'm sorry Mr. Robert Lutz but Saturn had no where near a "no excuses" lineup.

The Astra was late and had pitiful engines/options choices and availability.

Aura was not a Vectra but a G6 in drag.

Corsa never came.

Outlook was a distraction from what the rest of the lineup was to represent.

I guess that I must say I am glad they are finally eliminating Saturn.

I had a feeling they could never move the cheap plastic car brand upmarket with some half-hearted Euros and wannabe's.

[cire]

Meh. Saturn's models are redundant with several other brands. Not sure what the point of it is these days.

Basically it only exists to give people an alternative to the Malibu/Impala/G6 (Aura), the Equinox/Torrent (Vue), and the Solstice (Sky). The Astra and Outlook are not even worth mentioning. Unfortunately, this is not a strong business case for the continuation of the division.

[MyerShift]

The Astra and Outlook are not even worth mentioning.

Oh, I do disagree here on this (well, at least for the Astra).

As a product overall, it is light years ahead of anything from GMNA and even better to drive and more special feeling than Volkswagen's cars of the same class.

[gm4life]

Thank God it is about time. Buick and Pontiac can pick up some new models, helping make them stronger brands now that Saturn is toast. Saturn had a place in the 90's but ever since the dawn of the Vue and the like I knew they were going down hill. Nothing could save them not even a new line-up. If you would have given that to Pontiac ro Buick I will bet the results would have been different. GM is finally taking some of my advice kill Saturn. Trust me I will not miss that brand or its products, how about a Pontiac Astra?

[cire]

Seriously?

A no excuses line up, top to bottom?

I'm sorry Mr. Robert Lutz but Saturn had no where near a "no excuses" lineup.

The Astra was late and had pitiful engines/options choices and availability.

Aura was not a Vectra but a G6 in drag.

Corsa never came.

Outlook was a distraction from what the rest of the lineup was to represent.

I guess that I must say I am glad they are finally eliminating Saturn.

I had a feeling they could never move the cheap plastic car brand upmarket with some half-hearted Euros and wannabe's.

Wow! Someone finally acknowledges that the Aura is not a true Opel product. I don't know how many posts I have seen on many different forums that claim it is a rebadged Vectra when it isn't. It is a GMNA exclusive that is styled to imitate an Opel (much like the Outlook, which received a very unsuccessful Opel imitation design).

The merging of Saturn and Opel was a misguided, halfhearted, poorly executed effort. Saturn's "warm & fuzzy" cult-like affordable image made it an unsuitable candidate for a pairing with Opel (misguided). Two of the brand's products (Aura and Outlook) were not Opel products and the issues with the imported Astra hatchbacks are fairly well documented on this forum (halfhearted). The relaunch of the brand contained limited marketing and what little marketing that the brand received was ineffective in changing the purpose or perception of the brand (poorly executed). I agree that Mr. Lutz is sort of delusional if he thinks that Saturn's revitalization program was a first-rate effort.

Once GM eliminated the aspects of the division that made it unique (distinct composite body vehicles built on a dedicated platform at a dedicated production facility and sold at dedicated customer service oriented dealerships) is when the division became completely redundant and unnecessary (although I still say that it wasn't really necessary in the first place). It's time to bring this experiment to a close.

[MyerShift]

You're welcome.

Gosh, considering, my favourite Astra wouldn't even be a firebreather OPC/VXR but rather the 5-door Cosmo with 1.9L CDTi, 6-speed manual, leather, xenons, and climate control in dark green.

I was (and am) disappointed.

[cire]

Oh, I do disagree here on this (well, at least for the Astra).

As a product overall, it is light years ahead of anything from GMNA and even better to drive and more special feeling than Volkswagen's cars of the same class.

I was referring more to its sales performance as well as the public's awareness of it. The Astra is an impressive product on many levels (although it should have been produced in North America in a modified form that would have made it more successful in this market; an accompanying sedan variant would have helped also), but it failed to resonate with U.S. buyers for many reasons.

The Outlook should have never existed in the first place (along with the short lived Relay minivan). To me, it somewhat represents the antithesis of the Saturn brand. I also think it is overshadowed by the rest of its Lambda platform mates, which are better looking and more appropriate products for their respective brands (although the logic of having the Enclave and Acadia in the same dealer network somewhat baffles me).

[pow]

They really lost it with the ION - then diverted their attention to rebadged minivans, 16-mpg SUVs, and large redundant sedans.

C&D called the ION "the most disappointing all-new American car in a decade."

[MyerShift]

I was referring more to its sales performance as well as the public's awareness of it. The Astra is an impressive product on many levels (although it should have been produced in North America in a modified form that would have made it more successful in this market; an accompanying sedan variant would have helped also), but it failed to resonate with U.S. buyers for many reasons.

The Outlook should have never existed in the first place (along with the short lived Relay minivan). To me, it somewhat represents the antithesis of the Saturn brand. I also think it is overshadowed by the rest of its Lambda platform mates, which are better looking and more appropriate products for their respective brands (although the logic of having the Enclave and Acadia in the same dealer network somewhat baffles me).

Ah, yes, I see and would have to agree.

I have only ever seen two, possible three Astras out on the road ever.

I rarely see the Mk V Golf, but I do see many Mk V Jettas. However, in Chicago, Golfs were EVERYWHERE.

[turbo200]

Seriously?

A no excuses line up, top to bottom?

I'm sorry Mr. Robert Lutz but Saturn had no where near a "no excuses" lineup.

The Astra was late and had pitiful engines/options choices and availability.

Aura was not a Vectra but a G6 in drag.

Corsa never came.

Outlook was a distraction from what the rest of the lineup was to represent.

I guess that I must say I am glad they are finally eliminating Saturn.

I had a feeling they could never move the cheap plastic car brand upmarket with some half-hearted Euros and wannabe's.

exactly. outside of astra, saturn did a commendable job with refining style on already produced GM vehicles with little to no other improvements. aura was released with newer equipment, the new DOHC powertrain, and a slightly higher qualtiy interior, that's all folks. GM literally did what it has done in all cases, catch up with competition that is on its way towards a new design already, but never leapfrog the competition and think far ahead in terms of design or engineering. GMNA is getting too predictable in this sense. they are perpetually designing cars that in many major ways only match the current competition that may already be 2 or 3 years old. this is not a way to build consumer repoire.

[turbo200]

They really lost it with the ION - then diverted their attention to rebadged minivans, 16-mpg SUVs, and large redundant sedans.

C&D called the ION "the most disappointing all-new American car in a decade."

i do agree. but even then, I don't see ion as a turning point in any general direction. yes, they lost a lot of sales with that generation, that was simply because the competition was too strong. certainly sales were lost in that generation, and it was viewed as subpar. but the important move was where they'd go next from there. the consumer is inattentive and tough to train at times. they don't care if you do something bad, they just ignore it, and if you do something good, you are often rewarded. saturn was barely coming to at that point. ion was one forgettable mistake, all they had to do was refine that theme, but continue on with a philosophy of simple inexpensive cars.

i truly don't see a turning point for saturn until this new design theme happened. it was too fast, too big of a change. saturn was already largely irrelevant, aside from the fact that ion and vue were decently reliable and immensely affordable. this was thier secret, those cars were cheap, and people knew the dealership experience would be, well, nice. the complete deviation from any line or facias that had any semblance of what saturn used to be, and forgetting thier original specialty was just simple cheap cars, nothing special, hurt the brand definitely. completely ignoring any design connection, completely disregarding the familiar saturn face amidst multiple relaunches at competing brands, new and evolved design themes, was a big mistake. saturn was still a babe, new and uncharted territory. bringing a 5 door hatch with a less desirable shape and attractive themes than its closest competitor in a limited market, asking more money, and giving it a smaller engine and less overall space, were mistakes. calling this the replacement to your only big selling model line was an even more cataclysmic mistake.

finally, that GM ran out of money, time,and good fortune is the real culprit here. that or GM's inability to greenlight good design, give the proper attention to good engineering, or to keep commitments to product launches or brand building. GM, it seems, is in a perpetual spiral. i said a long time ago good design could save it. i'm just not sure they understand what that means.

Edited February 17, 2009 by turbo200

[SingleStylish]

Not happy and not sad.

Some cars had great design, like the Sky. However, the same cars lacked build quality. Other vehicles like Vue #1 were complete crap from the get-go. Ultimately, Saturn began selling on the fact that it wasn't GM. GM integrated it, homogenized it, and gave it the same half-ass built cars the rest of GM got.

Saturn could have been... better.

[thedriver]

Humph. I knew this would happen when Saturn shifted away from their core product. Heck, I wrote an essay about the death of Saturn around here a year or two ago. I am not saying I am happy tho. I have gotten my wife, her parents and 3 friends into Saturns, but all back in the plastic panel days... I just wish it could be turned around. I think it is possible, but GM is unwilling or unable to do it.

[pow]

Humph. I knew this would happen when Saturn shifted away from their core product. Heck, I wrote an essay about the death of Saturn around here a year or two ago. I am not saying I am happy tho. I have gotten my wife, her parents and 3 friends into Saturns, but all back in the plastic panel days... I just wish it could be turned around. I think it is possible, but GM is unwilling or unable to do it.

There was a NYT feature that suggested "Saturn" - the original Saturn concept - was already dead. If you look at their lineup today, it's looking much more like Opel.

[thedriver]

Exactly. That was the point of my essay.

[regfootball]

saturn is the easiest to kill but saturn sells more cars per dealer than any other GM brand. something like 470 saturns per dealer whereas buick only sells 51 buicks per dealer........

Edited February 17, 2009 by regfootball

[Croc]

saturn is the easiest to kill but saturn sells more cars per dealer than any other GM brand. something like 470 saturns per dealer whereas buick only sells 51 buicks per dealer........

But that doesn't matter, since Buick-Pontiac-GMC is ONE division within GM from an operational standpoint. "How many Buicks + Pontiacs + GMCs are sold per dealership?" would be a much more relevant question, though the most relevant question would be "How does the average profit margin of each Saturn sold per dealership compare to that of ___ ?" OR "...compare to that of B + P + GMC ?"

[regfootball]

But that doesn't matter, since Buick-Pontiac-GMC is ONE division within GM from an operational standpoint. "How many Buicks + Pontiacs + GMCs are sold per dealership?" would be a much more relevant question, though the most relevant question would be "How does the average profit margin of each Saturn sold per dealership compare to that of ___ ?" OR "...compare to that of B + P + GMC ?"

not all dealers are bpg yet. so that is one reason pontiac stays.

saturn is easy to kill. fewer dealers to buy out and an easier entity to sell off. saturn still outsells bpg i believe, if not its darn close. i think bpg combined is like 375 units / month. pontiac of course leads, followed by gmc and then buick.

gmc is the only one that might profit. pontiac and saturn would have equal profits and buick only makes profit because of enclave.

really saturn lost out because they are easier to separate and buy out. only reason. so gm will make buick a core brand, and give them all the resources, but each dealer sells 51 buicks per month and saturn sells about 9 times that per dealer with the 'opel product'.

so i am not sure how killing pontiac and trying to market the snot out of an old man's brand like buick will recover all those sales. at least don't kill pontiac!!!!!!!!! gmc is being kept because its the moneymaker that will prop up buick while they scramble to figure out how to market the figgin thing.

maybe saturn will be sold to GME change the name to Opel and we'll get the real goods here.

[PurdueGuy]

Other vehicles like Vue #1 were complete crap from the get-go.

There are a couple drivetrain setups in the Vue that are undesireable (variable trans and the early 3.0L 6cyl), but I don't see how the Vue overall is "complete crap".

[Croc]

There are a couple drivetrain setups in the Vue that are undesireable (variable trans and the early 3.0L 6cyl), but I don't see how the Vue overall is "complete crap".

I think he means the very first VUE...you know, the very 80s boxy one with square headlights and similar throwback interior quality.

[PurdueGuy]

I think he means the very first VUE...you know, the very 80s boxy one with square headlights and similar throwback interior quality.

< so very confused...

[Croc]

< so very confused...

Linked from wikipedia:

From 2002-2007

Edited February 17, 2009 by Croc

[Robert Hall]

Linked from wikipedia:

From 2002-2007

Ya, the headlights on that look like those from '90s Saturns or an Olds Calais...makes me think what a small Oldsmobile crossover might have looked like, circa 1992.

The styling over all went well with the Ion and the last of the S-series, definitely looked 'Saturn'.

Edited February 17, 2009 by moltar

[PurdueGuy]

sorry, I overlooked the "very" part and thought Croc meant that it was built in the 80's. lol I don't mind the first gen Vue's styling, though they should've painted all the panels. Styling still doesn't make a vehicle "crap".

[Croc]

sorry, I overlooked the "very" part and thought Croc meant that it was built in the 80's. lol I don't mind the first gen Vue's styling, though they should've painted all the panels. Styling still doesn't make a vehicle "crap".

Poor drivetrain and interior quality do, though.

[PurdueGuy]

Poor drivetrain and interior quality do, though.

Other than the variable trans & early V6 (3.0L), show me a poor drivetrain. The ecotec is solid, the honda V6 is solid, I've heard no major complaints about the auto or manual trannies...

If you're referring to the variable trans & early V6, I hardly think it's fair to call the entire vehicle line crap based on that. I haven't heard of the interiors falling apart, so I'm gonna guess the interior gripes are your personal opinion more than anything.

[Croc]

Other than the variable trans & early V6 (3.0L), show me a poor drivetrain. The ecotec is solid, the honda V6 is solid, I've heard no major complaints about the auto or manual trannies...

If you're referring to the variable trans & early V6, I hardly think it's fair to call the entire vehicle line crap based on that. I haven't heard of the interiors falling apart, so I'm gonna guess the interior gripes are your personal opinion more than anything.

Look, I don't want to get into some kind of argument on this or anything, but models generally sink and fail to resonate with the public when a) the styling is cheap and dumpy, b) the drivetrains are unremarkable at best, and bad at worst, and c) the interior is a generation behind in design and materials.

The original VUE debuted with all three factors strongly against it. The original drivetrains that debuted with it were horrendous--so much so that GM switched out the CVT and the 3.0L pretty quickly. The styling of the original VUE could have debuted with the original S-series and no one would have really noticed anything wrong with that, but it debuted in 2002, when the S-series was on its way out and 10 years old. So a decade behind, style-wise. Interior...oh good lord where to begin. Here's an excerpt from Edmunds:

What It Was Like Inside

From the day the Vue first arrived in our garage, its interior seemed suspect. Glancing around the cabin, we took in the Vue's cheap materials and asymmetrical gaps between dash panels. Already, it appeared that poor build and materials quality would prevent us from welcoming the Vue with open arms.

Immediately noticeable were the exposed screw heads that lined the A-pillars inside the upper doorframes. And there were other exposed screws in the cabin, mostly surrounded by cheap plastic materials. Our concerns regarding the lack of quality construction on a nearly $26,000 vehicle were validated. The driver seat creaked as we climbed aboard. The door squeaked as we pulled it shut. In fact, noted time and again were both the driver's and passengers' irritation with the single act of closing any of the Vue's four doors. While the Vue's polymer panels may be dent-resistant, and therefore easy to maintain, they hardly offer a reassuring "thunk" that most doors give to signal that they are indeed shut tight. With the Vue, you were never quite sure if the door closed on the first try, and often turned to open it up again, only to find that it actually had closed the first time.

Inferior materials aside, there were other notable complaints regarding the Vue's interior. Some larger members of our staff commented that the front seats did not seem adequately sized to handle a six-foot, 200-pound occupant. Smaller staffers seemed to adapt more easily, and some noted that even with the lack of lumbar support, they were able to remain comfortable during long drives. Rear-seat passengers complained that the seat bottom was too short, and therefore didn't offer much thigh support. Installing child safety seats was also an issue, since the front edge of the seats typically hung over the edge of the rear bench — causing the parents on staff to worry that their tykes weren't properly secured.

The Vue's instrumentation was also a source of frustration during our year-long test. There were unusual, and in our opinion, unnecessary lights that we often found distracting. For example, all Vues have daytime running lights, and even though the lights are always on, an indicator light in the dash is constantly illuminated. In addition, one editor observed, "I didn't like that the indicator for the cruise control is a light on the steering wheel rather than a light in the gauge cluster. I found it annoying on road trips."

Others complained about the unusual stereo controls with buttons placed in odd locations, the console-mounted window buttons (half of which were blocked by the shifter) and the lack of shut-off adjustment for the front dash vents. Positive impressions of the interior were few, and included the simple climate controls and easy-to-read digital compass and ambient temp display in the rearview mirror.

The rear seats were easy to fold down and we appreciated the pop-up dividers to secure bags of groceries and other goods in the large cargo space. Although the cargo bay was generously sized, the rear seats wouldn't fold completely flat, and the slight incline allowed items to roll or slide across the floor. While this was more annoying than troublesome, it called upon the driver's creativity to safely secure cargo.

Climbing into the Vue was easier than other SUVs in its class as a result of the low step-in height. But unfortunately, once inside, it was difficult to overlook the Vue's substandard materials and workmanship.

Pretty much sums it up right there.

[PurdueGuy]

Look, I don't want to get into some kind of argument on this or anything, but models generally sink and fail to resonate with the public when...

Then why was it a good seller?

It's all matter of opinion of course. Also keep in mind that you can find a bad review of any vehicle. Was the Vue the best product out at the time? Maybe not. I don't see where it's justified as being called "crap", though.

[SingleStylish]

Did you buy one? If so, of course you didn't find it crap. If you didn't, how can you defend it?

Sales of the Escape, CRV, RAV4, and others will probably show the Vue was not a sales leader. GM even defined the current generation as "gaining slightly." For the brand it was a big seller. By no other measure was it a complete success.

[Croc]

Did you buy one? If so, of course you didn't find it crap. If you didn't, how can you defend it?

Sales of the Escape, CRV, RAV4, and others will probably show the Vue was not a sales leader. GM even defined the current generation as "gaining slightly." For the brand it was a big seller. By no other measure was it a complete success.

Exactly. Also, I have never seen a glowing review of the original VUE.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Ya, the headlights on that look like those from '90s Saturns or an Olds Calais...makes me think what a small Oldsmobile crossover might have looked like, circa 1992.

The styling over all went well with the Ion and the last of the S-series, definitely looked 'Saturn'.

I wonder if this was in fact the production version of the Olds Recon concept? (Because Olds WAS supposed to get a small crossover)

Hmmm.....

[thedriver]

My wife's parents have one of these Vues and absolutely love it, no problems since day one.

[fightingbee]

I also love my '03 "crap"

[Drew Dowdell]

I like Saturn, but I have an issue with the idea that Saturn is there to "compete with the imports". Uhm.... Chevy is there to compete with the imports too. If anything, the Malibu and Aura show that you don't need a separate brand to compete with Honda... you just need great product. I think the direction they were taking Saturn was the right idea. Making it a Euro-niche people's car brand was about the only place for it to go. Something to compete with VW and low end Volvo/Audi.

[turbo200]

I like Saturn, but I have an issue with the idea that Saturn is there to "compete with the imports". Uhm.... Chevy is there to compete with the imports too. If anything, the Malibu and Aura show that you don't need a separate brand to compete with Honda... you just need great product. I think the direction they were taking Saturn was the right idea. Making it a Euro-niche people's car brand was about the only place for it to go. Something to compete with VW and low end Volvo/Audi.

aura never met sales estimates. first and second year of production were in regular, sounder economic times, can't blame the crisis. malibu has beaten the last generation's sales by a lot. however overall volume is half of what camry does and more than 150k off from altima and accord.

[Drew Dowdell]

aura never met sales estimates. first and second year of production were in regular, sounder economic times, can't blame the crisis. malibu has beaten the last generation's sales by a lot. however overall volume is half of what camry does and more than 150k off from altima and accord.

I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or not.

I'm saying that the Aura proves that having a "non-domestic" nameplate doesn't matter. Malibu is doing much better than Aura has and it's making a good name for itself. It was never going to beat the CamCordtima in sales in this first "very good" generation. Now Chevy has a whole bunch of new, happy, customers who don't have to be embarrassed to drive a Chevy.

It took the Camry a few generations to get to the spot it's in now. This Malibu is a great place to start from and basically proves that Saturn is not needed as an "import fighter". Chevy can do the job just fine thanks as long as you give them great product.

You don't beat the imports by trying to disguise yourself as an import. You beat the imports by being a superior domestic product.

[Intrepidation]

You don't beat the imports by trying to disguise yourself as an import. You beat the imports by being a superior domestic product.

Ding!

[G. David Felt]

Product line DEAD! I saw today that GM has confirmed that Saturns will be closed by 2011. So we really only have this year and next before they are history.

[Drew Dowdell]

Ding!

Corollary: Nearly all of the mainstream imports had to make themselves more "American" in order to reach their current statuses. The current Accord is bigger than a 1987 Taurus. The 1987 Accord has more in common size wise with today's Aveo.

[Intrepidation]

Saturn dealers want to spin-off from GM, start own company

[Robert Hall]

Saturn dealers want to spin-off from GM, start own company

Interesting.

This article gets me thinking of Saturn's old tag line: 'Saturn. A different kind of company. A different kind of car."