May 2006 Sales: General Motors Corp.

[VenSeattle]

Evok... all I can say is 'Thank You.'

Your last two posts make perfect sense and helped explain the underlying reasoning behind your original posts. I especially enjoyed your reply to ehaase's question.

[4gm]

I understand that cutting a division or 2 would free up resources for GM and therefore different projects for remaining divisions would get more money than they would otherwise. That would mean vehicles getting better interior materials. Maybe more standard and optional features like traction control, onstar, etc. Things like that add to how desirable a car is to the average customer. It also means less tooling, less fctory workers to pay and less factory space to pay for. I get that.

But would having more development money have made the Malibu any less hideous before it got it's current nosejob? Would it have made the Ion any less goofy looking? Would it have made the designs, not the materials, of most of GM's current cars any better?

Would it have cost GM any more money to make the front end on the Lucerne and current Impala more distinctive?

And what about Cadillac and it's multi-billion dollar investment? The CTS is/was a hit. The SRX and STS are struggling.

The GTO got great reviews for it's ride, handling and interior packaging. But nobody bought it. It was too Plain Jane for a car regardless of whether or not it wore a GTO badge.

What if all GM did differently in the recent past was change the designs they approved for different projects?

What if the Saab 9-3 looked like the Ford Iosis concept? What if the Cobalt looked like the Opel Astra hatchback? What if Pontiac made a G6 version of something that looked the Alfa Romeo Brera? And what if Buick made something that looked like the Bentley Continental coupe?

And what if GM got rid of Buick, Pontiac, Saturn and Saab tomorrow? Would current Camry and Accord owners suddenly trade in their cars for a Malibu? Would every Lexus owner turn around and buy a Cadillac?

I think not.

Like I said, I understand how axing a division or models for a division frees up investment dollars. But if nobody ends up buying the cars greenlit for production, whats the point?

Edited June 7, 2006 by 4gm

[Imaj]

DETROIT - General Motors dealers in the United States sold 345,157 new cars and trucks in May, down 16 percent compared to year-ago levels, reflecting continued strategic reductions in incentives and daily rentals, which were down 28 percent

and the sales decline continues! I guess we'll never see GM's market share at 30% ever again!

[xdre]

Ford and Chrsyler Groups midsized vehicles are a disaster and have been for some time.  They face the same issue as GM.

That is likely to change, however. The Fusion triplets are a growing threat, and I suspect the Avenger/Sebring will be equally as competitive. The new Malibu can't get here fast enough, because the current one will continue to lose sales to the domestic alternatives, and I suspect the Impala will as well. I can only hope that the Impala at least remains profitable in the duration.