GM may drop Pontiac, GMC brands

[buyacargetacheck]

OK, more rumor, more newspaper chatter. BUT, if true this indicates that the President's Task Force is marketing savvy.

Ask yourself, if you were starting a brand new auto company today, would you have a duplicate truck brand? Would you invest in a duplicate "performance" brand? Probably not. And we see that no one else around the world is rushing to duplicate the GM brand model either.

The other one that needs to drop is Buick, as much as I love her. Toyota changed the branding model for the industry and now buyers expect entry-level luxury at the premium brand. LaCrosse and Enclave should be restyled and sold for slightly more as Cadillacs. The margins and total profit potential is greater and GM shores up Cadillac at the same time.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20090416/AU...iac++GMC+brands

[Intrepidation]

Autoblog is reporting it as well

[CaddyXLR-V]

Good bye GM. Why not just rename the whole company Chevy? That's basically what's going on anyway.

Toyota does it.

Edited April 16, 2009 by CaddyXLR-V

[Chevy Nick]

Can we move the G8 to Chevy? Call it either the Caprice or Impala?

[PurdueGuy]

GMC = profitable. Getting rid of it is dumb.

[buyacargetacheck]

What's dumb is not taking full advantage of the Chevrolet dealer network and the Chevrolet Silverado name to outsell the F-150. How much advertising could GM buy for the Silverado in exchange for GMC front and rear clip engineering, dealer support, publications and manuals, parts supply, etc? Might it be enough to outsell the F-150 and make the Silverado even more profitable than it already is? It's called polishing a brand.

GMC = profitable. Getting rid of it is dumb.

[buyacargetacheck]

Seriously, it's not a bad idea given the "GM" name is in the toilet thanks to years of mismanagement and a clueless, arrogant BOD. That's what Ford is doing: one Ford, one blue oval around the world. GM could do the same thing by ditching high-cost Opel and concentrating on Chevy in Europe where it's gaining traction. Chevy is well-known everywhere else. One gold bowtie around the world.

Good bye GM. Why not just rename the whole company Chevy? That's basically what's going on anyway.

Toyota does it.

[CaddyXLR-V]

What's dumb is not taking full advantage of the Chevrolet dealer network and the Chevrolet Silverado name to outsell the F-150. How much advertising could GM buy for the Silverado in exchange for GMC front and rear clip engineering, dealer support, publications and manuals, parts supply, etc? Might it be enough to outsell the F-150 and make the Silverado even more profitable than it already is? It's called polishing a brand.

If you own a Chevy, and you have a choice to sell it for $20,000, or spend $100 to change it into a GMC which you can sell for $24,000, which choice would you take? Sales records mean nothing.

I supposed Toyota should never have made a Lexus version of the Land Cruiser either?

Chevy can't be everything to everyone, no matter how hard they try. There will always be people who want a less common vehicle, or people that avoid pedestrian brands, whether that brand is Toyota or Chevy. But they might buy a GMC, even at a higher price.

The Denali brings in buyers with more money than Escalade buyers. Think about that for a minute.

[buyacargetacheck]

Apparently, Obama is doing what GM should have done by itself years ago. Do you think this would be any different if McCain were President? Did you forget McCain voted against the auto bailout??? http://michellemalkin.com/2008/12/12/final...he-uaw-bailout/

GM has no clue right now and having to bow at the altar of Obamafest makes it worse.

[gm4life]

As for the rumor if this is true, it is a sad day and GM would be nuts to do this. Lots of upper end people consider GMC trucks because of the Denali trim and have a "upper end" buyer in General. Anyone who would advocate for GM to get rid of either of these brands needs to get there heads out of there ass. GMC is pure profit and like Camino has said BPG without GMC or Pontiac would fail. Its that simple. I would never get a GMC Truck, as I like Chevrolet Trucks better but, there is still very much so a reason they are around. As for Pontiac you know my thoughts, I would be happy with some sporty Mazda-ish stuff and BMW-ish stuff. I think both Pontiac after the two idea's they are considering for keeping the brand our good, and GMC has a good future indeed.

[buyacargetacheck]

If your numbers were accurate you might have a case. But they sound made-up. Maybe you're not aware that the Silverado actually starts at $25 more than does the Sierra?

Lexus and Land Cruiser? I have no problem with GM making a Cadillac Tahoe: it's called the Escalade. Nor would I have a problem with a Cadillac Traverse: a restyled Buick Enclave.

If you own a Chevy, and you have a choice to sell it for $20,000, or spend $100 to change it into a GMC which you can sell for $24,000, which choice would you take? Sales records mean nothing.

I supposed Toyota should never have made a Lexus version of the Land Cruiser either?

Chevy can't be everything to everyone, no matter how hard they try. There will always be people who want a less common vehicle, or people that avoid pedestrian brands, whether that brand is Toyota or Chevy. But they might buy a GMC, even at a higher price.

The Denali brings in buyers with more money than Escalade buyers. Think about that for a minute.

[CaddyXLR-V]

If your numbers were accurate you might have a case. But they sound made-up. Maybe you're not aware that the Silverado actually starts at $25 more than does the Sierra?

Lexus and Land Cruiser? I have no problem with GM making a Cadillac Tahoe: it's called the Escalade. Nor would I have a problem with a Cadillac Traverse: a restyled Buick Enclave.

They were made up. But it still holds true. Denali buyers on average make more than Escalade buyers. The Denali line sells for close to the same price as the Escalade line as well. Those buyers probably won't buy an Escalade because it's too flashy, and wont buy a Chevy because it's too mainstream.

[CaddyXLR-V]

I just don't get how the market is getting more fragmented because everyone is looking for a vehicle that suits them better, but getting rid of brands is supposed to help.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Ask yourself, if you were starting a brand new auto company today, would you have a duplicate truck brand? Would you invest in a duplicate "performance" brand? Probably not. And we see that no one else around the world is rushing to duplicate the GM brand model either.

Why do companies manufacture generics for other companies under other labels?

Why does Dell sell laptops under the Inspiron and XPS names when they really do the same things?

Its brand and marketing. You don't divest of yourself a brand that has a strong name recognition like GMC has. GMC is profitable and is still well respected brand, it is rather pointless to get rid of it.

The only argument is that you could get more advertising out there for Chevy for the same money and that a company tends to do better when it focuses on its strengths instead of being a jack of all trades.

[buyacargetacheck]

GM's over-segmenting markets, I suspect, has less to do with solid marketing and more to do with keeping factories churning and not being able to let go of the past. Seriously, do GM's ideal customer descriptions make any sense???:

Chevrolet Equinox: "blends function and style into a very sporty, yet upscale compact crossover"

GMC Terrain: "an appealing choice for existing traditional SUV customers"

So is GM saying that the Terrain has no function, style, is not compact, and is not sporty?

I just don't get how the market is getting more fragmented because everyone is looking for a vehicle that suits them better, but getting rid of brands is supposed to help.

[CaddyXLR-V]

GM's over-segmenting markets, I suspect, has less to do with solid marketing and more to do with keeping factories churning and not being able to let go of the past. Seriously, do GM's ideal customer descriptions make any sense???:

Chevrolet Equinox: "blends function and style into a very sporty, yet upscale compact crossover"

GMC Terrain: "an appealing choice for existing traditional SUV customers"

So is GM saying that the Terrain has no function, style, is not compact, and is not sporty?

I think GM just sucks at marketing. They seem to have no clue what sporty means, they just use it on everything.

[longtooth]

Chevy could have a Denali this n' that with de-contented LTZ-line offerings. Both Chevy & GMC sold the Suburban until the field became overly cluttered in the '90s. That's when the posturing aspect of owning a full-size SUV really took off.

[PurdueGuy]

Chevy could have a Denali this n' that with de-contented LTZ-line offerings. Both Chevy & GMC sold the Suburban until the field became overly cluttered in the '90s. That's when the posturing aspect of owning a full-size SUV really took off.

They both still sell the suburban, they just changed the name, though I'm not sure if you knew that and your point had more to do with names than vehicles.

All things equal, I'd rather buy a GMC than a Chevy. I'd probably pay a little more for it, too. Though right now, I'd rather have a Suburban than a Yukon XL due to styling - I just love the new Tahoe/'burban styling!

[BigPontiac]

Or Chevy could just stop selling trucks and competing with GMC. General Motors Corp trucks could be paired with any other GM brand that wants to sell trucks. Cars and cross-overs for the other brands -- trucks to GMC. Done.

[G. David Felt]

This is stupid, I only look at Chevy for the Corvette and the returning Camero. In regards to trucks, I only drive and buy GMC trucks, I like the looks and style inside and out way better than Chevy. Plus as others have stated here, Chevy is just your basic entry brand like Toyota and while I am in the upper middle income bracket, I prefer to drive an american brand that has a higher luxury level than plane Jane Chevy or Ford or Dodge.

Pretty much my auto's speak for me.

1991 GMC Suburban

1999 GMC 1500

2004 CTS

2005 SRX

2006 Escalade ESV Platinum

2006 Hummer H2

With Hummer up in the air and if they kill Profitable GMC, then that leaves me with Cadillac as my only Luxury choice and they will have to add other options of truck styles then as Chevy will not be able to sell or gain the mid level luxury that GMC has.

Key is focus on the Chevy - BPG - Cadillac 3 step approach and maximize the name brands.

[hyperv6]

I love Pontiac but the loss is nothing to me anymore as Pontiac left me a long time ago.

The only Pontiac I would even consider is a G8. After spending time in a V6 Malibu I would have no issue replacing my GTP with it. It is a lot better car than my GTP ever was.

I have owned and prefered GMC just because of the grills and for the most that is all the main differance has been 90% of the time. THe latest gen did at least have a new different body and I do like it better than the present Chevy. I have hopes they may update Chevy with some of the GMC trim. It would make for a cheap update for the better.

The sad truth is losing these division will not kill the general. It is a case of if your not going to do it right why so it. As of now they only have two cars worth a damn and no others planned in the public eye. They only have two that are real performance cars anyway so why call them a performance division.

I know some feelings are hurt and that is just part of like. Adapt or die. GM has to do and so do we.

I have a new Chevy and it is the performance car that Pontiac did not sell. It does everything I asked for. As I said Pontiac left me not me leaving it.

GMC will never replace Chevy as too much name Equity there. Though it would be a very good idea.

The funny thing is if gas stayed low GM would be better off killing all the cars and just sell the trucks. they are high volume and high profit. Too bad you can't count on cheap gas for long.

[buyacargetacheck]

Do you really think GMC is a step up from Chevy? Really? GMC is the same truck, in some cases, for less money. And there are no "basic entry" brands any longer. Only in GM's past. There are full-line mainstream brands and deluxe brands. Middle brands for "upper middle class" buyers is a mythological anachronism from GM's 1957 marketing plan. Cadillac is also a middle class brand.

Which one is the "luxury" GMC? Quick, don't look at the badges:

http://www.automedia.com/2009-New-Car-Buye...rs_Interior.jpg

http://www.automobilemag.com/multimedia/ph...r/photo_03.html

This is stupid, I only look at Chevy for the Corvette and the returning Camero. In regards to trucks, I only drive and buy GMC trucks, I like the looks and style inside and out way better than Chevy. Plus as others have stated here, Chevy is just your basic entry brand like Toyota and while I am in the upper middle income bracket, I prefer to drive an american brand that has a higher luxury level than plane Jane Chevy or Ford or Dodge.

Pretty much my auto's speak for me.

1991 GMC Suburban

1999 GMC 1500

2004 CTS

2005 SRX

2006 Escalade ESV Platinum

2006 Hummer H2

With Hummer up in the air and if they kill Profitable GMC, then that leaves me with Cadillac as my only Luxury choice and they will have to add other options of truck styles then as Chevy will not be able to sell or gain the mid level luxury that GMC has.

Key is focus on the Chevy - BPG - Cadillac 3 step approach and maximize the name brands.

[Croc]

Do you really think GMC is a step up from Chevy? Really? GMC is the same truck, in some cases, for less money. And there are no "basic entry" brands any longer. Only in GM's past. There are full-line mainstream brands and deluxe brands. Middle brands for "upper middle class" buyers is a mythological anachronism from GM's 1957 marketing plan. Cadillac is also a middle class brand.

You're entirely right, but GMC is the sole success story of "brand management" with marketing. For whatever reason, consumers think GMCs are better than Chevrolets, and many people do NOT cross-shop the two. It makes no logical sense, but then again, it makes GM money.

[longtooth]

They both still sell the suburban, they just changed the name, though I'm not sure if you knew that and your point had more to do with names than vehicles.

All things equal, I'd rather buy a GMC than a Chevy. I'd probably pay a little more for it, too. Though right now, I'd rather have a Suburban than a Yukon XL due to styling - I just love the new Tahoe/'burban styling!

Just the name.

At one time there were GMC & Chevy Suburbans.

[Intrepidation]

You're entirely right, but GMC is the sole success story of "brand management" with marketing. For whatever reason, consumers think GMCs are better than Chevrolets, and many people do NOT cross-shop the two. It makes no logical sense, but then again, it makes GM money.

I never did get that logic. They're the same flippin' vehicles. Same interior, mostly the same body panels, same suspension tuning. What few things GMC may have that Chevy doesn't could easily be incorporated into the Chevy.

[Robert Hall]

I never did get that logic. They're the same flippin' vehicles. Same interior, mostly the same body panels, same suspension tuning. What few things GMC may have that Chevy doesn't could easily be incorporated into the Chevy.

Purely a triumph of marketing... 'professional grade' and a more upscale marketing image for what is essentially the same vehicle. They are less identifical than the were 10 years ago, though some models (Canyon/Colorado, vans) are still just badge-engineered.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Repeat after me people, (G L O B A L - B R A N D S !). If you're not a Global brand, you're history ...

Edited April 16, 2009 by Pontiac Custom-S

[ZL-1]

In the case of GMC, if it sells at higher price points andsince it doesn't require much investment, then leave it be. As far as the other brands go, it is the case of global brands taking place (Buick-Opel would be a global brand in this scheme with Holden sharing Chevy and Opel products).

Too bad they're giving up on SAAB, their only brand with a global presence that can be considered as premium, but hey... maybe GM is happy selling 50 Cadillacs a month in Europe.

Edited April 16, 2009 by ZL-1

[longtooth]

They could still sell both side-by-side. (GMC & Chevy)

[Camino LS6]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm tired of all the speculation.

Call me when an actual decision is made.

[Oracle of Delphi]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm tired of all the speculation.

Call me when an actual decision is made.

Might be tomorrow @ 10:15 Eastern ...

[wildcat]

For what it's worth, Jamie LaReau of Automotive News reported this afternoon a story titled "THE AUTO INDUSTRY BAILOUT:

GM to keep GMC, Pontiac; no plans to quicken dealer consolidation" which quotes Mark LaNeve as saying Pontiac and GMC are staying.

DETROIT -- A senior General Motors executive today denied reports that President Barack Obama's automotive task force has pressured the automaker to dump GMC and Pontiac.

Company sales chief Mark LaNeve also denied rumors that GM plans to terminate the franchise agreements of poorly performing dealers before June 1 to accelerate its dealership consolidation campaign.

"The strategy we laid out for you [in February] is still the strategy," LaNeve, GM's vice president of vehicle sales, service and marketing, said today in an interview with Automotive News.

"Are we working it, tweaking it, examining every aspect of it? Yes, but nothing has changed with our strategy," he said. Reports that "GMC is going away are just unfounded, unsubstantiated and untrue," LaNeve said.

In a Feb. 17 report to the U.S. Treasury Department, GM said it planned to go to market with four core brands: Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC. Pontiac would remain as a much smaller brand. GM is trying to sell Hummer, Saab and Saturn.

And that is still the plan, LaNeve said. "They're not pressuring us to give up on anything," he said. "Buick and GMC are very profitable brands, and we have plans to make them even more profitable."

LaNeve said Pontiac and GMC are staying? Hmm, too bad we don't have it from a reputable source

Edited April 16, 2009 by wildcat

[Camino LS6]

Might be tomorrow @ 10:15 Eastern ...

...or not.

Back and forth, back and forth...

At this point I have to wonder if it will even manage to be over when its over.

[longtooth]

...or not.

Back and forth, back and forth...

At this point I have to wonder if it will even manage to be over when its over.

I'll tell you this: It isn't worth worrying about.

[Oracle of Delphi]

...or not.

Back and forth, back and forth...

At this point I have to wonder if it will even manage to be over when its over.

der Fritz is definitely having a conference at that time tomorrow ...

[G. David Felt]

You're entirely right, but GMC is the sole success story of "brand management" with marketing. For whatever reason, consumers think GMCs are better than Chevrolets, and many people do NOT cross-shop the two. It makes no logical sense, but then again, it makes GM money.

Exactly, Chevy has pounded into the public, built like a rock, cowboys, union workers blue coller. GMC has gone after the Professional Grade. Shows up scale vehicles, small custom companys doing higher end custom work. As a white coller worker and one that plays hard off road and on road and tows boats, I want a Professional Grade Truck.

Croc has hit the Nail on the Head, This is one of GM's Success of Brand Management. I talked to some construction workers working on the building next door and they all drive Chevy or Dodge trucks except a few and the few are the managers who over see the work force. They consider themselves semi white coller and like the image of the Professional Grade Trucks GMC puts out over the average trucks Chevy or Dodge produce for the worker bee's.

This is all about successful Brand management and that white coller will pay a few thousand more for the GMC Professional Grade over the Chevy.

In the case of GMC, if it sells at higher price points andsince it doesn't require much investment, then leave it be. As far as the other brands go, it is the case of global brands taking place (Buick-Opel would be a global brand in this scheme with Holden sharing Chevy and Opel products).

Too bad they're giving up on SAAB, their only brand with a global presence that can be considered as premium, but hey... maybe GM is happy selling 50 Cadillacs a month in Europe.

In regards to your SAAB, they might sell a few thousand in Europe compared to the 50 or so Cadillacs, but here in the US, they barely sell at all compared to Cadillac. Over all SAAB LOST their Premium status long ago and became also Rans next to Lincoln and Cadillac. Cadillac is picking itself up and moving in the right direction, SAAB starved of proper product is best just killing it off. Even the country GOV see's it as best left to a history lesson.

[Camino LS6]

der Fritz is definitely having a conference at that time tomorrow ...

OK.

I hope he has something definitive to say about something - anything.

Limbo is not a good thing.

[Oracle of Delphi]

OK.

I hope he has something definitive to say about something - anything.

Limbo is not a good thing.

So sayth the CPF ...

[cire]

OK.

I hope he has something definitive to say about something - anything.

Limbo is not a good thing.

I agree with you. The speculation, rumors, announcements, and denials are getting a little tiresome. I would feel much better about GM receiving bailout money if they were to release a clear and coherent plan that states what they are going to do and how they are going to accomplish it. I think this would instill at least a tiny ounce of the general public's confidence in the corporation and its future. Right now, the corporation looks just as indecisive and directionless as it has in the past.

Edited April 16, 2009 by cire

[wildcat]

LaNeve: "The strategy we laid out for you [in February] is still the strategy . . . Are we working it, tweaking it, examining every aspect of it? Yes, but nothing has changed . . . "

So what progress HAVE they made then? Are they just letting "the clock run out" til June 1st? What will Fritz Henderson say at his press conference tomorrow morning?

[G. David Felt]

LaNeve: "The strategy we laid out for you [in February] is still the strategy . . . Are we working it, tweaking it, examining every aspect of it? Yes, but nothing has changed . . . "

So what progress HAVE they made then? Are they just letting "the clock run out" til June 1st? What will Fritz Henderson say at his press conference tomorrow morning?

This could be very eye opening and shocking or it could lead many to say told ya so, Bankrupt on June 1st.

[ocnblu]

Getting rid of Hummer, Saturn and SAAB is enough. Keeping established, well-known brands is of utmost importance.

[Satty]

Repeat after me people, (G L O B A L - B R A N D S !). If you're not a Global brand, you're history ...

So Cadillac is gone too?

[Camino LS6]

So Cadillac is gone too?

[Oracle of Delphi]

Cadillac will be here long after some brands are dust ...

[haypops]

In my opinion the reason we have so many posts arguing this proposal is that it is just too close of a call. The Chevy only fraction is overestimating the cost of keeping GMC and the GMC fans are kidding themselves if they really believe most GMC truck buyers wouldn't get a Chevy if they had too. GMC's biggest plus is it makes the BPG dealers much more profitable.

[SAmadei]

Cadillac will be here long after some brands are dust ...

Like Opel?

If GMC is good enough for the A-Team, it's good enough for me. ;-)