Saturn's rebirth vexes Chevy dealers

[-Camaro-]

The reason no one aspires to own a Saturn is because there has never been a Saturn worth aspiring for.  Now there is.

Same can be said about Buick and Cadillac 5 years ago. Maybe GM should have a wakeup call? Any tarnished name can be revived in the eyes of the public with cars people actually like! No matter how tarnished the name is. Although it'd have to be a very good looking vehicle and be able to compete with the top competition. Edited February 21, 2006 by -Camaro-

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

This is ridiculous....

GM needs SATURN AND CHEVROLET

Case in point:

"Sky is just a flat-out home run," said Bergstrom, chairman of Bergstrom Automotive in Neenah, Wis. "I've never had that before. They've never even considered a Saturn."

THIS is what we need with EVERY division, but Saturn is the easiest candidate to elicit this.

If Saturn "is not making money, it shouldn't be anointed with such wonderful product," said Gordon Stewart, president of Stewart Management Group in Harper Woods, Mich., which has GM stores in Michigan and Florida. "Why does it continue to be fed at the expense of the other divisions?"

At face value, that statement is great. But taken in context it represents bias.... Saturn has NEVER made money because it has been STARVED.

If GM stays in the same mindset that is displayed in that comment, then it'll be a continuous rapid decline for their business... The BUSINESS model is not working well enough to just stay narrow minded and 'trim the fat'

The business MUST be re-invented.

Previously, Saturn wasn't distinctive in any way other than the sales environment."

WOW.. Someone's uninformed...

***GM must build and differentiate ALL of it's divisions. Chevrolet, SATURN and Cadillac especially...

Saturn has HUGE potential and should not be hindered anymore than any other GM division.

If THAT'S the case, GM's market share wouldn't be in the freefall that it is.....(because GM's quality/reliability is just as good as anyone else's....)

That's a loaded comment.... It's all about perception.

[Chicagoland]

"Saturn never made money".

Well, if the Cavalier was a single division, it also would not have made any $$$$ either!! Saturn has one small car for 9 years, and then the L series was a flop.

Cutting a brand costs at least 1 Bill, any Saturn haters want to pay that? Or go to a dealer and say "you must close'

[regfootball]

This is ridiculous....

GM needs SATURN AND CHEVROLET

Case in point:

THIS is what we need with EVERY division, but Saturn is the easiest candidate to elicit this.

At face value, that statement is great. But taken in context it represents bias.... Saturn has NEVER made money because it has been STARVED.

If GM stays in the same mindset that is displayed in that comment, then it'll be a continuous rapid decline for their business... The BUSINESS model is not working well enough to just stay narrow minded and 'trim the fat'

The business MUST be re-invented.

WOW.. Someone's uninformed...

***GM must build and differentiate ALL of it's divisions. Chevrolet, SATURN and Cadillac especially...

Saturn has HUGE potential and should not be hindered anymore than any other GM division.

That's a loaded comment.... It's all about perception.

truly excellent post FOGM

hey GORDON (Gordon Stewart)...stop your piss ass whining! YOUR GRAVY TRAIN DAYS ARE OVER.....get your sales up. Saturn has you on notice......LIVE WITH REALITY....people like the Saturn shopping experience. When was the last time anyone said they enjoyed shopping in YOUR dealership? Just because the corporate GM tit is gonna start playing hardball stop candy assing its dead weight anymore..........I bet your jealous and want one of those goldmines for yourself.....

Edited February 21, 2006 by regfootball

[CaddyXLR-V]

Are you high?  No it won't!  Out of all the divisions, Saturn has the most "non-image" of them all, except maybe SAAB.  Saturn is known for great dealers, though.  So...if the product is there...what would take long to essentially create an image?  With Buick, you have to fight the geriatric image.  That's a hard image to shake...especially when the current product does nothing to combat it.

Thats what I was thinking. Saturn has no negative image to fight, since it wasn't around through GM's dark years. No image is easier to fix than bad image. I'm talking about bad image, in the eyes of people buying Hondas and Toyotas, not the in the eyes GM fans on this site. Of course we all think _______(insert GM brand here) should get whatever Saturn is getting, because we are fans of those brands, so we dont see them as having a negative image.

[turbo200]

Saturn won't be going after Acura, Audi, Volvo, or anyone else in the entry level luxury crowd. Aura will contend with Camry, Accord, Passat, etc.....when pricing is released for Aura it will line right up with Camry and Accord. This is what GM is hoping to finally have in Saturn, a viable import competitor. Malibu and G6 all priced under the competition. Impala and Grand Prix are bigger cars and offer more powerful engines for similar price, regardless of if that content is especially inspiring or competitive.

Research GM has done has shown the Saturn brand is the brand people least associate with GM, and all the negative baggage GM has. Research has also shown Saturn is the brand import customers will consider before considering any GM brand. Combine this with the best customer satisfaction surveys this side of Lexus, and you will see why Saturn has a potential unseen by GM anywhere else.

Buick is completely different from Saturn, no question. And the target market Buick continues to pursue with the current product, with thier outdated platforms, ungainly proportions, and unquestionably mature styling is completely different from Saturn. Saturn has exciting product coming. Lucerne doesn't register on the list of people considering cars like Passat, or Avalon for that matter, but for different reasons. Lucerne has a mature look and Buick has a fogey image that VW doesn't have, and thus a Passat becomes more desirable to young people than anything Buick could ever produce.

[turbo200]

The image of Buick is really badly tarnished at this point. Like OC said, to convince people to consider Buick among brands like VW, Acura, Audi, Volvo, would take decades of marketing and product efforts. I truly feel it can be done along with maintaining the current audience with more exciting, modern product. The Enclave is the first example of how this can happen. Go to Autoweek and read how many people are saying this is the first Buick they could ever consider, and you will see how just one product can incur a sea of change. Now, just transfer everything that makes Enclave so good, class leading interior design and materials, elegant and sporty/modern exterior, far reaching design cues; transfer this onto cars for Buick, that are truly relevant in today's marketplace. I maintain the only way Buick will be around is with cars like the Velite that are romantic, distinctly American in nature, yet completely sophisticated in design. The Velite is not totally American in design. Cars like it, with RWD are necessary. RWD has increasingly become a premium feature, and the more automakers that start to produce expensive RWD cars, which is happening, the more this will be true.

Buick does have a role to fill within GM. Sports cars/sedans is where Pontiac needs to be, with extreme styling. Cadillac serves extravagant tastes, extravagant features, and great performance, ultimate luxury. Saab is European and has distinctive Saab design along with more utility in thier hatchback models [all Saabs should be hatches or coupes in the future, imo]. Saturn serves a slightly premium audience of Chevrolet. Chevrolet is the mass market brand with classy features, classy design, and great quality. All that's left is Buick----the cushy, but modern competitor to the likes of Lexus [though dramatically lower priced and with lesser tech] and VW. Passat is a good target for where Buick needs to head in the future. They can also have a smaller RWd competitor to the S40, TSX, and lesser models of A4 and C-class---call it Skylark and build it off of Camaro.

This would take a lot of effort, wouldn't work well until at least the second generation of product.......but as seen with Cadillac, a brand can go from geriatric to cool as fast as you can say what the hell is that new car [CTS] and where did GM inherit this platform from [sigma].

[ehaase]

This aura type car should be Buicks small classy luxury sedan.

Eventually both the Aura and LaCrosse will use the Epsilon II platform, so eventually the two cars will have a lot in common.

[enzl]

This would take a lot of effort, wouldn't work well until at least the second generation of product.......but as seen with Cadillac, a brand can go from geriatric to cool as fast as you can say what the hell is that new car [CTS] and where did GM inherit this platform from [sigma].

This, along with some of the marketing metrics mentioned above, are exactly why Saturn desserves support. Amongst the 'enthusiast' sites, Saturn products don't register, but, I suspect, most Honda, Toyota & VW's really don't either...

...Saturn's non image is exactly what many consumers like...I think GM is shooting for the 'designer' Target (stores) crowd....they want clever, interesting design in a useful package, at a reasonable price. Most Americans are proud of a 'smart' buy...and designer looks with utility is where most consumer products are going, regardless of cost...

Edited February 22, 2006 by enzl

[PurdueGuy]

Yeah the people who buy them like them, what about everyone who wouldn't be caught dead in one? Which are teens/young adults. The Aura isn't going to change that or the sky. Their image is just as bad as Buick's if not worse! I'd say it's just as bad a Mercury's image, which is probably the worst and most people forgot about them. If Buick just built the NICE cars that they had they wouldn't have a bad image, but they didn't, they built the weak cars with no "soul".

You have STUDYS to back up this viewpoint? I don't, but I can tell you that what I see doesn't line up with what you do. If you have actual studies, I'll back off, but I think your view of Saturn's image is skewed by your own bias.

BTW, I AM a young adult who likes Saturn.

[Croc]

You have STUDYS to back up this viewpoint?  I don't, but I can tell you that what I see doesn't line up with what you do.  If you have actual studies, I'll back off, but I think your view of Saturn's image is skewed by your own bias.

BTW, I AM a young adult who likes Saturn.

Don't back off, he is as biased against Saturn as razoredge.

[Petra]

For a while, the Saturn experiment was successful in producing a truly "different kind of company". The question is: Has GM learned from the experiment? If so, then, IMO, it will be all worthwhile. If not, then they might as well scrap Saturn before it becomes another division full of uninspired platform-sharers.

Just my opinion, and worth exactly what you paid for it.

[ellives]

VW has about 1.x% of US market share. I suspect, other than the 60's bug period they've always had this much. The real enemy is Toyota and they should have a bulleyes plastered on them and every Toyota dealership in the country.

This would take a lot of effort, wouldn't work well until at least the second generation of product.......but as seen with Cadillac, a brand can go from geriatric to cool as fast as you can say what the hell is that new car [CTS] and where did GM inherit this platform from [sigma].

This, along with some of the marketing metrics mentioned above, are exactly why Saturn desserves support. Amongst the 'enthusiast' sites, Saturn products don't register, but, I suspect, most Honda, Toyota & VW's really don't either...

...Saturn's non image is exactly what many consumers like...I think GM is shooting for the 'designer' Target (stores) crowd....they want clever, interesting design in a useful package, at a reasonable price. Most Americans are proud of a 'smart' buy...and designer looks with utility is where most consumer products are going, regardless of cost...

Edited February 22, 2006 by ellives

[The O.C.]

Don't back off, he is as biased against Saturn as razoredge.

I'll submit that I think the Saturn of today is about 180-degrees from the Saturn when they started (with the exception of the dealer body.)

I replaced a 1989 Buick Skyhawk coupe with a 1992 Saturn SL1.

I was THRILLED by the car, and it garnered attention everywhere I went. At the time, the styling, interior, and even powertrain were symbiotic of what the imports were offering at the time....and a major advancement over the "import fighters" that GM was offering (J-cars, etc.)

I FELT like I was driving a Honda, etc. compared to my Skyhawk (and I say that in a good way....)

Now, the Saturn product is by-and-large also-rans when compared to the import competition.

HOWEVER, I do think that products like the SKY and AURA could really bring SOME of the magic back to Saturn. ("some" because I feel you can never regain the spirit of individuality and uniqueness that they had when they were a separate corporation from the parent company, GM.)

[-Camaro-]

You have STUDYS to back up this viewpoint?  I don't, but I can tell you that what I see doesn't line up with what you do.  If you have actual studies, I'll back off, but I think your view of Saturn's image is skewed by your own bias.

BTW, I AM a young adult who likes Saturn.

My own bias? Yeah right. I wouldn't be so quick to spew out crap like that. First of all, I'm just going by everyone that I've been around think, and the whole general population around me. I know that isn't everybody in the world, but it's a good way to see what people think. Saturn's image IS tarnished with 9 years of the same stuff that most people that have money don't want. Btw, I used to like saturn. I thought they looked decent and was a big fan. I still like some of them, but I'm not going to deny people generally don't want to drive them. Atleast from what I've seen. I've never seen anyone in my age group go, "I want a Saturn". I've seen them say "I'd only drive one if it was free". I wouldn't be asking for studies from people either unless you have studies that prove otherwise, because I could just say the same thing.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Buick is completely different from Saturn, no question. And the target market Buick continues to pursue with the current product, with thier outdated platforms, ungainly proportions, and unquestionably mature styling is completely different from Saturn. Saturn has exciting product coming. Lucerne doesn't register on the list of people considering cars like Passat, or Avalon for that matter, but for different reasons. Lucerne has a mature look and Buick has a fogey image that VW doesn't have, and thus a Passat becomes more desirable to young people than anything Buick could ever produce.

I disagree 100%

The Lucerne DEFINATELY competes head on with the Avalon set... Toyota has as much of an 'aging buyer' problem as any of GM's divisions.

And the new Buick product, while not necessarily class leading in every aspect is, at the very least, competitive and appealing.

The image of Buick is really badly tarnished at this point. Like OC said, to convince people to consider Buick among brands like VW, Acura, Audi, Volvo, would take decades of marketing and product efforts. I truly feel it can be done along with maintaining the current audience with more exciting, modern product. The Enclave is the first example of how this can happen. Go to Autoweek and read how many people are saying this is the first Buick they could ever consider, and you will see how just one product can incur a sea of change. Now, just transfer everything that makes Enclave so good, class leading interior design and materials, elegant and sporty/modern exterior, far reaching design cues; transfer this onto cars for Buick, that are truly relevant in today's marketplace. I maintain the only way Buick will be around is with cars like the Velite that are romantic, distinctly American in nature, yet completely sophisticated in design. The Velite is not totally American in design. Cars like it, with RWD are necessary. RWD has increasingly become a premium feature, and the more automakers that start to produce expensive RWD cars, which is happening, the more this will be true.

I agree 100% here though..

For what it's worth, look at what the Rendezvous did for Buick despite it's deficiencies... Lowered the average buyers age and opened the division up to new people.

ANY brand can be saved... The question being; can GM keep a good enough FOCUS to save them.

...Saturn's non image is exactly what many consumers like...I think GM is shooting for the 'designer' Target (stores) crowd....they want clever, interesting design in a useful package, at a reasonable price. Most Americans are proud of a 'smart' buy...and designer looks with utility is where most consumer products are going, regardless of cost...

I agree 100%!!!

Saturn has the same advantage that Mercury has in that it's DEVOID of an image. It's easier to start from zero than a negative number.

***I think there are 2 fundamental flaws with this argument...***

1) Saturn is not and will never be Chevrolet... They'll never sell the numbers that Chevy sales and they won't compete much with the Chevrolet line up, ESPECIALLY if Chevy pioneers the new RWD platform.

2) I think the GM dealer body is in SAD shape... The company is on the ropes right now and all the dealers can do is act 1980's bureaucratic and bitch about the decisions that the COMPANY makes... GM needs to teach these people that they don't RUN the company and that they need to support the new vision. Either that, or they can all NOT be selling GM cars in a few years.

[ellives]

Making statements of generalities is a pissing contest no one can win. I *will* say the people I hear say things like "I'd only drive one if it was free" are kids that don't have money to buy anything so can safely be ignored. By the time they DO have money they'll realize how stupid the comment is.

Since you made mention of "everyone I've been around" I'll point out the fact there are a few Saturn owners I work with. Interestingly they're the more technical and intelligent bunch of the company. There are also a LOT of Toyota owners out there who are really nothing more than conservative lemmings. There is no intellectual component of what they buy from a technical perspective. They buy based on what everybody else is buying for the most part. And ya know what? I don't blame them. It takes a lot of brain cycles to study things out and make up your own mind. A lot of times it's just easier to do what everybody else is doing? If they're all wrong, it's ok cuz it will take a HUGE swing in attitude and momentum to change things and so will take a long time. By then they'll have traded their Toyotas. It's the way we are in the US - everything is disposable.

My own bias? Yeah right. I wouldn't be so quick to spew out crap like that. First of all, I'm just going by everyone that I've been around think, and the whole general population around me. I know that isn't everybody in the world, but it's a good way to see what people think. Saturn's image IS tarnished with 9 years of the same stuff that most people that have money don't want. Btw, I used to like saturn. I thought they looked decent and was a big fan. I still like some of them, but I'm not going to deny people generally don't want to drive them. Atleast from what I've seen. I've never seen anyone in my age group go, "I want a Saturn". I've seen them say "I'd only drive one if it was free". I wouldn't be asking for studies from people either unless you have studies that prove otherwise, because I could just say the same thing.

[Guest flowmotion]

Atleast from what I've seen. I've never seen anyone in my age group go, "I want a Saturn". I've seen them say "I'd only drive one if it was free".

Yeah, and these young guys are slobbering over Buicks? "Oh yeah, I wish gramps would die so I could inherit his super sweet LeSabre!" Right.

I won't disagree that Saturn's have a reputation for being uncool garbage -- just like everything else GM makes -- but you have to understand that reputation is not as "deep" as it is at the tradtional nameplates.

I wouldn't be asking for studies from people either unless you have studies that prove otherwise, because I could just say the same thing.

You honestly don't think GM has done those studies? That Saturn is getting this product and Buick/Pontiac isn't ought to tell you something.

Edited February 22, 2006 by flowmotion

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

The whole Buick image is the complete opposite of how I like my cars. I want to hear my engine, I like to hear my supercharger whining. I like direct tight steering, not vague, mushy steering. I hate Buicks oval grill. When I think of Buick, I picture a 75 year old going 10mph under the speed limit. The last Buick I would consider was killed in 87. GM can't make Buicks appeal to me, yet still appeal to their core buyers. If Buick's were made to fit my tastes, many Buick fans on this site would not be fans anymore.

See... THIS is the very ESSENCE of General Motors and WHY their divisions have SUCH potential if used right...

GM doesn't HAVE to worry about broadening 3 divisions of vehicles to appeal to an ever widening, ever diversifying marketplace...

GM CAN focus Buick AWAY from your tastes because they HAVE another division that WILL appeal to your tastes....

If GM could spread it's divisions out to where they covered the ENTIRE market with SPECIFIC, focused, quality offerings, then their 8 divisions would turn from a liability into an asset over night IMO.

***Not picking on you at all CaddyXLR-V I just think you hit on an excellent point***

Ignorant people that say they would never buy a Buick, Pontiac or Chevy, say that because they dont know anything but statis quo, if Buick had these two models of cars sitting on their lot the ignorant perception would change. It certainly is no worse perception than the one that saturin already has. The buzz around the aura and sky would be even louder if similar cars were comming to Buick. You put the saturin product and R&D money into Buick and Pontiac and you can make this division thing work, keep up this one model here and one model there and you are killing the divisional potential......just what does everybody think been going on for the past 15 years ? .........to much worrying about saturn then Fiat and Saab. Thing is, saturin has been far more expensive. I have never met a person in my entire life that aspires to own a saturin.........think about it !

I agree about the perception part....

[ellives]

This made me laugh. Keep in mind how image conscious kids are today. If they get even an inkling that something is "uncool" they'll drop it like a hot potato. This is probably the biggest reason Scion was born. I can't argue with the strategy.

I suppose if the Buick "Gramps" has is a bench seat, shift-on-the-column version of Buick there won't be a lot of Grandkids looking to get it but if it was a bucket seat, console shift with decent wheels and no white walls I'll bet they wouldn't mind it. They wouldn't buy one because of the "image" thing but they wouldn't mind driving it.

Heck, my own son suggested we sell his Honda and keep the Seville I just sold. He's driven both - a LOT - so has a lot of experience and can speak himself as to why he came to this conclusion. (I'm sure he's watching.)

Yeah, and these young guys are slobbering over Buicks? "Oh yeah, I wish gramps would die so I could inherit his super sweet LeSabre!" Right.

I won't disagree that Saturn's have a reputation for being uncool garbage -- just like everything else GM makes -- but you have to understand that reputation is not as "deep" as it is at the tradtional nameplates.

You honestly don't think GM has done those studies? That Saturn is getting this product and Buick/Pontiac isn't ought to tell you something.

[ellives]

I agree but go back to the point I've made in the past: GM *must* articulate why each division appeals to each market segment. Saying each division name should bring very immediate and specific images to mind. Even the banter on this site demonstrates the broad ranges of perceptions people have about each of the divisions. This simply can't happen going forward. Every brand should bring to mind a one word reaction from people. You should be able to ask a market study group the old psychology word association game with the brands.

When I say the following brands, what one word comes to mind:

Here's mine:

Cadillac - Luxury

GMC - truck

Chevy - basic

Pontiac - fun

Saab - quirky

Buick - grampa

Hummer - hulking

Saturn - interesting

I don't know what GM's idea of what the word list should be. What's yours?

See... THIS is the very ESSENCE of General Motors and WHY their divisions have SUCH potential if used right...

GM doesn't HAVE to worry about broadening 3 divisions of vehicles to appeal to an ever widening, ever diversifying marketplace...

GM CAN focus Buick AWAY from your tastes because they HAVE another division that WILL appeal to your tastes....

If GM could spread it's divisions out to where they covered the ENTIRE market with SPECIFIC, focused, quality offerings, then their 8 divisions would turn from a liability into an asset over night IMO.

***Not picking on you at all CaddyXLR-V I just think you hit on an excellent point***

I agree about the perception part....

[CaddyXLR-V]

This made me laugh. Keep in mind how image conscious kids are today. If they get even an inkling that something is "uncool" they'll drop it like a hot potato. This is probably the biggest reason Scion was born. I can't argue with the strategy.

I suppose if the Buick "Gramps" has is a bench seat, shift-on-the-column version of Buick there won't be a lot of Grandkids looking to get it but if it was a bucket seat, console shift with decent wheels and no white walls I'll bet they wouldn't mind it. They wouldn't buy one because of the "image" thing but they wouldn't mind driving it.

Heck, my own son suggested we sell his Honda and keep the Seville I just sold. He's driven both - a LOT - so has a lot of experience and can speak himself as to why he came to this conclusion. (I'm sure he's watching.)

I think Cadillacs image never got that bad. I think people want to see Cadillac succeed. They are sort of protected from the bad image GMs other brands have IMO. That is why the CTS was the hit it was. I dont think it would have been received as well as it was if it were a Buick.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I think Cadillacs image never got that bad. I think people want to see Cadillac succeed. They are sort of protected from the bad image GMs other brands have IMO. That is why the CTS was the hit it was. I dont think it would have been received as well as it was if it were a Buick.

I disagree and agree.....

I agree because I too think Cadillac *ALWAYS* had a pretty good image in the mind of most consumers. But I disagree that successful product cannot turn around an image...

Just look at Nissan... better yet, a more comparable example would be Chrysler and the 300.

Until it and the Crossfire came along, Chrysler was NOT desired and commonly had the '1970's Detroit" stigma.

[ellives]

I think you're rewriting history. I've been driving Cadillacs since I was 17 years old (roughly 30 years) and as the years went on people dumped on Cadillacs more and more. Heck even today they're called "old man" cars. That's a trait both Buick and Cadillac share I guess. The CTS and the Escalade turned this around. THE XLR doesn't count because it's really an exotic. I bet you 99% of people would recognize the model or the car if they saw one on the road.

You could argue to a certain extent the introduction of the Northstar helped a little (I remember it being mentioned on the sitcom "The Nanny") but it's really when the "Art and Science" program kicked off that Cadillac came back into style.

This tells us a lot about the car business. For one, that you CAN revive and car company (not that Cadillac doesn't have problems but it's miles from where it was 10 years ago) and secondly that the right product makes or breaks car companies.

Cadillac was the easy division to fix in my mind because it clearly is identified with "the best" and "luxury." Obviously it's not considered the "Best" these days but it's a pretty good product and the Cadillac brand will probably always be used as a term signifying the "best." You don't often hear people say something is the "Cadillac" of a particular category. This is why the other divisions are so much tougher because their brand image is muddled and needs to be clarified... urgently.

I think Cadillacs image never got that bad. I think people want to see Cadillac succeed. They are sort of protected from the bad image GMs other brands have IMO. That is why the CTS was the hit it was. I dont think it would have been received as well as it was if it were a Buick.

[Guest flowmotion]

This suddenly reminds me of High School, when my friend got his Scirocco rear-ended and was driving around in his grandmothers' humungous Olds 98 Regency. P-I-M-P-I-N'

I suppose if the Buick "Gramps" has is a bench seat, shift-on-the-column version of Buick there won't be a lot of Grandkids looking to get it but if it was a bucket seat, console shift with decent wheels and no white walls I'll bet they wouldn't mind it. They wouldn't buy one because of the "image" thing but they wouldn't mind driving it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Where's Gramps going to get his sofa-mobile if Buick stops selling them?

Isn't that exactly what GM did to Oldsmobile ? -- Trying to be stylish and just chasing away the last few traditional customers instead?

Look at it this way and it's a no-brainer:

Cost to retrofit Saturn's image among import buyers: LOW

Risk of ruining Saturn's image among existing customers: NONE

Cost to retrofit Buick's image among import buyers: HIGH

Risk of ruining Buick's image among existing customers: HIGH

In computer world they have this term "legacy" which translates to "too good to get rid of, not good enough to pour more money into". Which pretty much describes Buick -- it's always going to be there as long as people keep buying them, but it's not the future.

[CaddyXLR-V]

I disagree and agree.....

I agree because I too think Cadillac *ALWAYS* had a pretty good image in the mind of most consumers. But I disagree that successful product cannot turn around an image...

Just look at Nissan... better yet, a more comparable example would be Chrysler and the 300.

Until it and the Crossfire came along, Chrysler was NOT desired and commonly had the '1970's Detroit" stigma.

I didn't say successful product cant change an image, just that some brands would be alot easier than others. Buick will take a few generations of cars before their image changes, while Cadillac should be able to do it in 2 generations.

[-Camaro-]

Yeah, and these young guys are slobbering over Buicks? "Oh yeah, I wish gramps would die so I could inherit his super sweet LeSabre!" Right.

I won't disagree that Saturn's have a reputation for being uncool garbage -- just like everything else GM makes -- but you have to understand that reputation is not as "deep" as it is at the tradtional nameplates.

You honestly don't think GM has done those studies? That Saturn is getting this product and Buick/Pontiac isn't ought to tell you something.

I never said they were, but I know they're not slobbering over Saturns and they may be kids with very little money, but I can guarantee you that when they do earn more money they won't buy a Saturn or even go to a dealer that sales them. But I guess they're not really targeting kids. Saturn has an image like kia. They're known by lots of people, but not many people will consider buying them, imo. You guys keep saying people who think saturn shouldn't get product and have a bad image are just biased to the older brands, but the same could be said about you that you're biased towards Saturn.

Not to mention I guess no one can say how well Saturn's brand image is, because you can't be around millions of people to tell and who you're around will influence your thoughts of its image.. For example if you're around people who don't like it, you're going to think no one likes it, but at the same time if you're around people who like it and own it you're going to think people have a good view of them.

P.S. Like I pointed out earlier, 5 years ago people didn't like Cadillacs except old people. No one thought they were good looking and would rather have something else, but look at them now. Lots of people like them now and think they're cool and good looking. Their image has gone up alot and image isn't just what people who buy them think, btw.

Edited February 22, 2006 by -Camaro-

[ellives]

Cadillac has already done it in one generation. CTS. You could argue the Escalade took two but the first generation of it didn't count as it was just a warmed over Denali with the crest and shield added.

As was said on another post Chrysler did it in one with the 300C. Again you could argue it took two with the 300 because there was the 300M before it but lets face it, the only things about those two that are really in the same family is the 300 itself. In fact I remember when I learned about the 300C, I instantly thought it was going to be a hit and discussed it at the time vs. the current generation STS as the 300C seemed to hit all the notes from the reports I read and for $20-30k less than the STS. (I know they're not really in the same league but I can overlook a lot for that amount of coin.)

The bottom line is Buick could do the same thing with bold product.

I didn't say successful product cant change an image, just that some brands would be alot easier than others. Buick will take a few generations of cars before their image changes, while Cadillac should be able to do it in 2 generations.

[ellives]

Have you noticed that Olds is gone? They don't make an Electra 225 any more either. I don't think there's anything particularly stylish about the Avalon but old fogies are buying them big time right now.

I don't think you're quite right about your assessment below. The cost of anything GM does right now is high. They can't afford to NOT spend in the right places. They've got to sharpen the image of each division's mission and build cars to meet each.

This suddenly reminds me of High School, when my friend got his Scirocco rear-ended and was driving around in his grandmothers' humungous Olds 98 Regency. P-I-M-P-I-N'

Where's Gramps going to get his sofa-mobile if Buick stops selling them?

Isn't that exactly what GM did to Oldsmobile ? -- Trying to be stylish and just chasing away the last few traditional customers instead?

Look at it this way and it's a no-brainer:

Cost to retrofit Saturn's image among import buyers: LOW

Risk of ruining Saturn's image among existing customers: NONE

Cost to retrofit Buick's image among import buyers: HIGH

Risk of ruining Buick's image among existing customers: HIGH

In computer world they have this term "legacy" which translates to "too good to get rid of, not good enough to pour more money into". Which pretty much describes Buick -- it's always going to be there as long as people keep buying them, but it's not the future.

[turbo200]

VW has about 1.x% of US market share. I suspect, other than the 60's bug period they've always had this much. The real enemy is Toyota and they should have a bulleyes plastered on them and every Toyota dealership in the country.

Toyota is without a doubt the head honcho, and their image is protected for a few reasons: sterling quality, legendary reliability, great cars that meet the target market perfectly, legendary reputation, legendary reputation. BUT, VW enjoys a great perception within the marketplace, and even though the new cars are just beginning to do well [Jetta is doing well], their image is terrific. They have a very youthful image that is reinforced by quality cars with that Teutonic feel. As far as image, they are doing quite well, and will enjoy a prosperous future in the U.S. as long as they focus on what each marque does well. For them, it is entirely about good product, aimed squarely at the young, hip, and aspirational crowd. A VW is a car to be proud of in many circles.

[turbo200]

I disagree 100%

The Lucerne DEFINATELY competes head on with the Avalon set... Toyota has as much of an 'aging buyer' problem as any of GM's divisions.

And the new Buick product, while not necessarily class leading in every aspect is, at the very least, competitive and appealing.

I wasn't saying the Lucerne isn't competitive with the Avalon. They are, right now, a different buyer set, and Avalon buyers wouldn't likely consider a Buick because of a lot of the negative stigma Buick enjoys. Buick, as nice as the Lucerne is, has made some bad apples that are mainly rental vehicles, and is seen as geriatric. The Passat has a completely different buyer set as well that would never consider the Lucerne, in general. Most Passat and Avalon buyers like that they are buying a VW or Toyota, respectively, and just would never consider a Buick. That's something Buick, and to a larger extent, GM, have to conquer.

[balthazar]

And toyota and vw have to conquer the fact that a lot of Lucerne buyers would never consider buying a toyota (points to own father). In fact toyota actually has in that the avalon is snidely referred to by a number of journalists and toyota spokespersons as a 'japanese Buick'. But toyta has repeatedly failed to match the appeal, quality & value of the LeSabre, and the Lucerne has improved upon those and many other traits remarkably. toyota's overall image is one of geriatrics; look no farther than scion for evidence of that- the badge-jobs are across the room in the dealership and should be "toyotas" but a new name was vital for any success due to the negative association as 'your father's toyota' (last numbers I saw showed scion cannabalizing sales off toyota) .

VW's reputation is a car for service department groupies- people in this consumer demographic are not interested in a known trouble-prone car.

[The O.C.]

When I say the following brands, what one word comes to mind:

Here's mine:

Cadillac - Luxury

GMC - truck

Chevy - basic

Pontiac - fun

Saab - quirky

Buick - grampa

Hummer - hulking

Saturn - interesting

I don't know what GM's idea of what the word list should be. What's yours?

Okay.....but about Buick being "grampa"....

What do you do when more and more of the "grampas" in this world ARE ending up in Accords and Camrys and Avalons because....more and more of them GREW UP in imports....unlike a generation ago that grew up in domestic cars.....

THAT's why IMHO Buick HAS to start weening themselves off the blue-hair set of yesterday....and focus on the blue-hairs of tomorrow.....because their perceptions and desires will certainly not stay the same.

[The O.C.]

I disagree and agree.....

I agree because I too think Cadillac *ALWAYS* had a pretty good image in the mind of most consumers. But I disagree that successful product cannot turn around an image...

Just look at Nissan... better yet, a more comparable example would be Chrysler and the 300.

Until it and the Crossfire came along, Chrysler was NOT desired and commonly had the '1970's Detroit" stigma.

Regarding Cadillac.....I had a distrubing conversation with a friend (31 yrs old) yesterday.

He was asking me my opinions on new cars 'cause he wants to get one. He's a non-enthusiast current driving an Eclipse V6 coupe.

He asked me about the TL, G35, A4, and Volvo S40. That was his current list.

I gave him my opinions on each then I asked him....."what about a Cadillac CTS?" And I proceeded to plug the CTS's positives.

His response was..."I will NOT drive a Cadillac no matter how good it is."

I asked "why?"

And he said....."it's an old man's car."

No &#036;h&#33;......I didn't expect THAT. Maybe from a Buick suggestion....but not from a Cadillac suggestion.

I just shook my head.....and went back to discussing the other four cars with him. Looks like he'll settle on the A4 I'm guessing. (BTW....interestingly enough, he said he thought the G35 was too much "old mans car" as well....)

[The O.C.]

In fact I remember when I learned about the 300C, I instantly thought it was going to be a hit and discussed it at the time vs. the current generation STS as the 300C seemed to hit all the notes from the reports I read and for $20-30k less than the STS. (I know they're not really in the same league but I can overlook a lot for that amount of coin.)

Not in the same league?

Well, personally.....compare any STS to a loaded 300C (even v-Series vs. SRT- and I don't find ONE thing I like better about the STS....

I'd take the 300C any day of the week.....and, like you said, for way less money.

Edited February 22, 2006 by The O.C.

[The O.C.]

Not in the same league?

Well, personally.....compare any STS to a loaded 300C (even v-Series vs. SRT- and I don't find ONE thing I like better about the STS....

I'd take the 300C any day of the week.....and, like you said, for way less money.

Okay, for some reason, whenever I hit the "eight" on my keypad, it gives me this.....

WTF?

(see above post from me.....and where I tried to say "SRT-eight"

Edited February 22, 2006 by The O.C.

[ellives]

That's just ignorance but it's the perception some have about Cadillac. This is the challenge GM has to overcome. Hopefully he'll enjoy the slave labor he'll be doing when he's nearing retirement age.

Oh and by the way he should study the demographics for the CTS. It's anything but an "old man's" car. Now the DeVille / DTS he might have an argument.

Regarding Cadillac.....I had a distrubing conversation with a friend (31 yrs old) yesterday.

He was asking me my opinions on new cars 'cause he wants to get one.  He's a non-enthusiast current driving an Eclipse V6 coupe.

He asked me about the TL, G35, A4, and Volvo S40.  That was his current list.

I gave him my opinions on each then I asked him....."what about a Cadillac CTS?"  And I proceeded to plug the CTS's positives.

His response was..."I will NOT drive a Cadillac no matter how good it is."

I asked "why?"

And he said....."it's an old man's car." 

No &#036;h&#33;......I didn't expect THAT.  Maybe from a Buick suggestion....but not from a Cadillac suggestion.

I just shook my head.....and went back to discussing the other four cars with him.  Looks like he'll settle on the A4 I'm guessing.  (BTW....interestingly enough, he said he thought the G35 was too much "old mans car" as well....)

[ellives]

Sorry but they're not in the same league. The interior particularly. In the end they're not after the same market so debate on this one is fruitless. The 300C is about size, and in your face size and with the V8 it's about pure horsepower. The STS is much more refined.

This is one place GM really needs to respond and hard. Chrysler has a hit with a very large car with a big engine - this USED to be GM's domain and one where they were constantly beaten up. The public is kinda fickled. Ya think?

Not in the same league?

Well, personally.....compare any STS to a loaded 300C (even v-Series vs. SRT- and I don't find ONE thing I like better about the STS....

I'd take the 300C any day of the week.....and, like you said, for way less money.

[haypops]

With all the talk about Buick being an old man's car, and Baby boomers being such bad people(some of you posters really suck), I thought the following piece from the car connection was interesting.

Young Buyers Overrated, Says Study

A new study from AutoPacific stands on its head the notion that automakers have to chase young buyers. The study says automakers ought to worry less about the youth market and instead pay more attention to the Baby Boomers, who range in age from 41 to 60. Baby Boomers have the cash needed to spend on cars, the study says, while younger buyers may like them but can't afford them.

The study appears as a spate of new books, such as Generation Debt: Why Now Is a Terrible Time to Be Young, by Anya Kamenetz, are arguing that young Americans face a tough row economically because of dramatic shifts in the economy.

If the books are accurate, it appears the auto industry, like the Spanish explorer Ponce de Leon, are chasing a fountain of youth that may not exist. Baby Boomers, on the other hand, are the most affluent Americans, with three-quarters of the nation's financial assets and $2 trillion in disposable income annually. Boomers control more than 50 percent of all discretionary income and will become more affluent as they inherit a great amount from their parents, the report noted.

The average American household purchases 13 cars over a lifetime.  Seven vehicles are purchased after the head of the household turns 50, according to AutoPacific, which also notes that 50 percent of Boomer households already own 3 or more vehicles. 

AutoPacific also estimates from its research that 54 percent of Boomers expecting to keep their vehicle 4 years or less, while 26 percent will turn them over in 3 years or less, making them very active consumers of automotive hardware.-Joe Szczesny

[regfootball]

Regarding Cadillac.....I had a distrubing conversation with a friend (31 yrs old) yesterday.

He was asking me my opinions on new cars 'cause he wants to get one.  He's a non-enthusiast current driving an Eclipse V6 coupe.

He asked me about the TL, G35, A4, and Volvo S40.  That was his current list.

I gave him my opinions on each then I asked him....."what about a Cadillac CTS?"  And I proceeded to plug the CTS's positives.

His response was..."I will NOT drive a Cadillac no matter how good it is."

I asked "why?"

And he said....."it's an old man's car." 

No &#036;h&#33;......I didn't expect THAT.  Maybe from a Buick suggestion....but not from a Cadillac suggestion.

I just shook my head.....and went back to discussing the other four cars with him.  Looks like he'll settle on the A4 I'm guessing.  (BTW....interestingly enough, he said he thought the G35 was too much "old mans car" as well....)

TELL YOUR FRIEND HE'S A G*DDAMN MORON and show him the STSv, CTSv and XLRv.......

or is he just afraid the Cadillac is not gonna get him the p*ssy / laid that an import car would.......

Edited February 22, 2006 by regfootball

[regfootball]

Not in the same league?

Well, personally.....compare any STS to a loaded 300C (even v-Series vs. SRT- and I don't find ONE thing I like better about the STS....

I'd take the 300C any day of the week.....and, like you said, for way less money.

in 5 years everyone will think the 300 looks horrifically absurd and out of date

[Snate]

in 5 years everyone will think the 300 looks horrifically absurd and out of date

Most Chrysler dealerships around me already have decent incentives on the 300's. I don't think they can even move the V6 models.

[regfootball]

in about 3-5 more years we'll be seeing all those 300's cruising around the hood......it will become the QUINTISSENTIAL ghetto cruiser......it will be interesting to know how many of those are stolen, too......

Edited February 22, 2006 by regfootball

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

RE: Cadillac being an "old man's car"

This shows 2 things 1) Cadillac still has a ways to go. 2) This guy OBVIOUSLY isn't that well informed about cars (Like 75% of the population) So, GM needs to get the word out better.

Cadillac will ALWAYS be an old persons car to some people, simply because it isn't chasing 20 year olds.

RE: VW and reliable cars (Turbo200's post)

I thought VW and reliability was an oxymoron.

RE: The 300.

I think the 300 will age very well and it has done an EXCELLENT job for Chrysler.

[turbo200]

And toyota and vw have to conquer the fact that a lot of Lucerne buyers would never consider buying a toyota (points to own father). In fact toyota actually has in that the avalon is snidely referred to by a number of journalists and toyota spokespersons as a 'japanese Buick'. But toyta has repeatedly failed to match the appeal, quality & value of the LeSabre, and the Lucerne has improved upon those and many other traits remarkably. toyota's overall image is one of geriatrics; look no farther than scion for evidence of that- the badge-jobs are across the room in the dealership and should be "toyotas" but a new name was vital for any success due to the negative association as 'your father's toyota' (last numbers I saw showed scion cannabalizing sales off toyota) .

VW's reputation is a car for service department groupies- people in this consumer demographic are not interested in a known trouble-prone car.

no trying to turn this into a pissing match between toyota and buick, or you and I. simple fact is toyota has been gaining market share, and Buick has been losing market share. Obviously Buick buyers are willing to shop the competition even though there may be the staunchly loyal set; toyota also has buyers that do cross-shopping, but the number is much lower than your average Buick or Chevy simply because a lot of Toyota buyers don't want to consider any other make. VW has a great image among the youth, despite the reliability problems which many have easily overlooked in light of thier great design and perceived quality assembly.

[turbo200]

No &#036;h&#33;......I didn't expect THAT.  Maybe from a Buick suggestion....but not from a Cadillac suggestion.

I just shook my head.....and went back to discussing the other four cars with him.  Looks like he'll settle on the A4 I'm guessing.  (BTW....interestingly enough, he said he thought the G35 was too much "old mans car" as well....)

Though Cadillac's image has improved tenfold and is now being considered by many more than before; I see mostly older people driving Cadillacs. I'm not talking about 40's either, 50's, 60's and above drive the most Cadillacs around here-----except for the Escalade, a phenomon within itself. As you know the Los Angeles area, the young and old here are tremendously wealthy, the average car around here is a Mercedes or BMW, car mecca for sure, I see plenty of young foreign guys driving around in thier pimped MB CL-classes, CLS, S-class, and of course all Hollywood actresses and BH moms drive SLs. There is still a great market Cadillac is missing out on, for whatever reason the XLR didn't hit the target market like the SL has, also the advantage of having that vaunted badge on the hood. an exciting coupe with drop dead gorgeous styling would help thier image a lot here in the city, as would a more exciting STS. Bottom line, Cadillac still has a ways to go, and increasingly when I check out the drivers of Caddys, excluding the CTS and Escalade, they are a majority the older crowd.

[ellives]

Hey - THAT's a reason most guys could relate to but then the wouldn't be thinking with the right head. Unfortunately it underscores the challenge GM has. Luckily I'm just making my way to the age where my car fits my age cuz I've been driving Cadillacs since I was a kid.

And one more thing, I'm shooting for Cadillac to make a TV commercial with me in it like the one Toyota has running with buyers spouting off mileage numbers. My oldest STS has 120K miles on it and I'm quite sure will make it over 200K easily. It still smokes pretty much anything out there and the styling continues to be contemporary (unlike the 300C when it's... let me think - 10 years old.) Heck someone I work with asked me a month or so ago if I bought a new car. THERE's something to spout off about to potential buyers: 10 years old with 120K miles and still people are asking whether I bought a new car.

TELL YOUR FRIEND HE'S A G*DDAMN MORON and show him the STSv, CTSv and XLRv.......

or is he just afraid the Cadillac is not gonna get him the p*ssy / laid that an import car would.......

[regfootball]

no trying to turn this into a pissing match between toyota and buick, or you and I. simple fact is toyota has been gaining market share, and Buick has been losing market share. Obviously Buick buyers are willing to shop the competition even though there may be the staunchly loyal set; toyota also has buyers that do cross-shopping, but the number is much lower than your average Buick or Chevy simply because a lot of Toyota buyers don't want to consider any other make. VW has a great image among the youth, despite the reliability problems which many have easily overlooked in light of thier great design and perceived quality assembly.

A coworker and his wife, early thirties, VOWED to never again get a VW after their experience with their 02 Jetta and I am guessing they are not the only ones like that. That, plus VW's stratospheric price hikes = they had better watch it.

[Cadillacfan]

The direction for both brands is clearly drawn for Chevy and Saturn.

Chevy will be the economy class. Offering sub-compact vehicles to large family sedans. Then offering lower priced SUVs.

Saturn will be the mid-luxury class with Opel design influences and a few cars exported from Germany.

Chevy is fine where it is. Saturn is going to be fine where it's going.

This article sounds like it's a bit outdated with it's story.

[ellives]

What about Corvette? Doesn't seem like an economy class car to me.

The direction for both brands is clearly drawn for Chevy and Saturn.

Chevy will be the economy class.  Offering sub-compact vehicles to large family sedans.  Then offering lower priced SUVs.

Saturn will be the mid-luxury class with Opel design influences and a few cars exported from Germany.

Chevy is fine where it is.  Saturn is going to be fine where it's going.

This article sounds like it's a bit outdated with it's story.