First Drive: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse

[enzl]

Here's the problem:

What does the Traverse bring to market that the 3 existing vehicles don't have?

Answer: Nothing.

The 'bu brought substantive improvements to the Ep I package--in a distinct wrapper.

The Traverse doesn't even do that. Granted, Chevy will sell alot of these, but again GM is displaying the utter impossibility of supplying it dealer network with adequately differentiated product.

If this is the best they can do, better to shutter some divisions or sell 'em.

[CSpec]

GM has far too much brand overlap. I was recently watching a program about British Leyland, and many of their problems were based on the fact that many of their divisions competed directly with each other, much as many of GM's brands do. They waste development dollars trying to give many brands essentially the same car, and they don't have anywhere near the needed market share to pull that off. G6, Malibu, Aura, all are in the exact same segment. All are on the same platform. If there were only one, GM could have spent twice as much on just one of them to make a fantastic product and still saved money. Sure they are tuned for slightly different tastes, but it's not anything substantial. The G6 is just a FWD family sedan in the same way that the Malibu or Camry are, and it sure is no Altima. GM needs to stop wasting money on completely redundant product and stop competing with itself.

[balthazar]

It's okay. You can tell that the profile is borrowed from the Enclave, but it is not as obvious of a rebadge job as some of the General's other offenses in their "create-a-clone" past. They did do a better job of disguising the fact that the overall profile is shared with the Enclave. I don't think a casual observer would really notice the similarity. They also gave the two vehicles their own distinct interior designs. Overall, it's an admirable effort...

The Traverse is no more a 'rebadge' than -say- the altima/maxima... or the toureg/cayenne- pairs you interestingly never hear that reference made to.

>>"This pricing strategy helps preserve the Sloanian walk-up from Chevy to Saturn to GMC to Buick."<<

Idiots!

Edited June 30, 2008 by balthazar

[regfootball]

The Traverse is no more a 'rebadge' than -say- the altima/maxima... or the toureg/cayenne- pairs you interestingly never hear that reference made to.

>>"This pricing strategy helps preserve the Sloanian walk-up from Chevy to Saturn to GMC to Buick."<<

Idiots!

its apparently perfectly fine for us to blatant proliferation of asian brand vehicles that all look and feel the same and are all priced the same. i doubt joe average who runs out and buys a RAV4 is fully aware of how big a pile of average that vehicle is. I've gotten stuck in a rav4 rental and its junk. yet we have the forester, rav4, outlander, crv......all equally mediocre and being sold and spewed in multiple dealerships. Perhaps we can weed out all that redundant subpar crap. Really, do you think the CRV and RAv4 are any so different that we can suggest that the world we be a whole lot better without one of THEM?

GM has every right to design and sell products however they see fit. GM also has done the brand closing thing and all that did was cost money and market share. So, all you experts, tell me how YOU see this working out?

Where I bought my last new GM vehicle, they sell all the brands except Saab and Hummer. I can if i want choose from any of the Lambdas i want to be honest i like having that choice.

How many freaking versions of a 3 series do we have? is the 1 series neccessary? hardly. Look at the new maximas trunk lid....do you really think its all that different from an altima? Do we really need a maxima and an Altima?

I'm kind of tired of armchair critique of GM. When GM does the product right, its totally fine to have a multibrand strategy. The Lambdas all are done right. Only idiots would write off the lambdas in this class and go buy a highlander without at least test driving a lambda. But since everyone has herd mentality, i understand that. When GM decides it is financially doable to kill brands then i am ok with that also. point being is all you guys do is repeat the blather in the press or whatever the hot opinion is. 7-8 years ago it was all about niche models and every detroit automaker had to make all sorts of brand proliferation and model duplication to keep up with asia and germany. well now, i guess the old double standard is reared its head again.

it would be funny to see as people suggest......have only chevy and cadillac. how freaking absurd. How would you sell a nice vehicle like the Aurora? Chevy aurora? too nice for chevy. Cadillac aurora? wasnt nice enough for caddy. some folks cant afford caddy and some folks dont want the low rent status of chevy (or toyota for that matter). I dont want a toyota and i dont want a lexus. how come toyota doesnt offer me a brand line in between? None of toyotas brands are performance focused. None of toyotas portfolio has european styling.

Edited June 30, 2008 by regfootball

[enzl]

The Traverse is no more a 'rebadge' than -say- the altima/maxima... or the toureg/cayenne- pairs you interestingly never hear that reference made to.

Umm..wrong on both counts....the Alt/Max are highly differentiated inside and out...the Traverse basically shares everything but front and rear fascias and mild interior changes---even awkwardly placing the Enclaves 3rd side window in a way which looks stupid and compromises rear visability.

The Toureg/Cayenne are platform mates that cannot easily be confused, nor do they share 1 body panel.

The point you've obviously missed is that all 4 lambdas simply compete with each other.....on pricing, equipment---hell, at B-P-GMC stores, 2 sit on the showroom floor together, while the Outlook langushed without Chevy's competition--what do you think will happen now?

Lambdas are a great product, heroically mismanaged & a super example of the one step forward--two step back GM that is now circling the drain due to idiotic decisions like the Traverse---to make matters worse, handing Spring Hill to Chevy production means no option of selling Saturn with a unique production facility!

This is a great product, marketed and sold by morons. With bad timing. And an inability to learn from past mistakes. This is why GM is doomed without a clean sweep of the Boardroom & Exec suites.

Edited June 30, 2008 by enzl

[enzl]

its apparently perfectly fine for us to blatant proliferation of asian brand vehicles that all look and feel the same and are all priced the same. i doubt joe average who runs out and buys a RAV4 is fully aware of how big a pile of average that vehicle is. I've gotten stuck in a rav4 rental and its junk. yet we have the forester, rav4, outlander, crv......all equally mediocre and being sold and spewed in multiple dealerships. Perhaps we can weed out all that redundant subpar crap. Really, do you think the CRV and RAv4 are any so different that we can suggest that the world we be a whole lot better without one of THEM?

GM has every right to design and sell products however they see fit. GM also has done the brand closing thing and all that did was cost money and market share. So, all you experts, tell me how YOU see this working out?

Where I bought my last new GM vehicle, they sell all the brands except Saab and Hummer. I can if i want choose from any of the Lambdas i want to be honest i like having that choice.

How many freaking versions of a 3 series do we have? is the 1 series neccessary? hardly. Look at the new maximas trunk lid....do you really think its all that different from an altima? Do we really need a maxima and an Altima?

I'm kind of tired of armchair critique of GM. When GM does the product right, its totally fine to have a multibrand strategy. The Lambdas all are done right. Only idiots would write off the lambdas in this class and go buy a highlander without at least test driving a lambda. But since everyone has herd mentality, i understand that. When GM decides it is financially doable to kill brands then i am ok with that also. point being is all you guys do is repeat the blather in the press or whatever the hot opinion is. 7-8 years ago it was all about niche models and every detroit automaker had to make all sorts of brand proliferation and model duplication to keep up with asia and germany. well now, i guess the old double standard is reared its head again.

it would be funny to see as people suggest......have only chevy and cadillac. how freaking absurd. How would you sell a nice vehicle like the Aurora? Chevy aurora? too nice for chevy. Cadillac aurora? wasnt nice enough for caddy. some folks cant afford caddy and some folks dont want the low rent status of chevy (or toyota for that matter). I dont want a toyota and i dont want a lexus. how come toyota doesnt offer me a brand line in between? None of toyotas brands are performance focused. None of toyotas portfolio has european styling.

GM undermines its own good intentions by marketing obviously similar product in different showrooms.

You obviously don't understand marketing, nor the expenses of having 4 outlets sell, service, advertise and develop modestly different items. It's not competitors offerings that matter, its the fact that you're robbing from peter to pay paul when your own product competes.

It's simply dumb. If you don't understand the costs involved, it's easy for you to opine that it's great product and leave it at that.

Your reference to competing companies making competing product as an excuse shows you simply don't understand the problem with 8 channels needing constant feeding or what's really going on with consumers simply ignoring most of what GM has going on---why make that worse with 25% less available marketing dollars?

[regfootball]

GM undermines its own good intentions by marketing obviously similar product in different showrooms.

You obviously don't understand marketing, nor the expenses of having 4 outlets sell, service, advertise and develop modestly different items. It's not competitors offerings that matter, its the fact that you're robbing from peter to pay paul when your own product competes.

It's simply dumb. If you don't understand the costs involved, it's easy for you to opine that it's great product and leave it at that.

Your reference to competing companies making competing product as an excuse shows you simply don't understand the problem with 8 channels needing constant feeding or what's really going on with consumers simply ignoring most of what GM has going on---why make that worse with 25% less available marketing dollars?

and your opinion on this ignores that if Gm shuts down 3/4 of its brands and half its dealers they are not gonna sell nowhere near the number of cars they do now.

basically they would prob drop down to 12% or so market share instead of 20.....and then they would not even be able to field full lineups. at that point they would not even be able to supply platforms for their successful operations overseas.

basically everyone thinks its an easy solution. chevy and cadillac and truth is if that is what happens then no one will care. GM cannot run on chevy alone.

your mindset is to quit, even with good product on the floor.

quit quit quit. i think i will call you the quitter.

Edited June 30, 2008 by regfootball

[enzl]

and your opinion on this ignores that if Gm shuts down 3/4 of its brands and half its dealers they are not gonna sell nowhere near the number of cars they do now.

basically they would prob drop down to 12% or so market share instead of 20.....and then they would not even be able to field full lineups. at that point they would not even be able to supply platforms for their successful operations overseas.

basically everyone thinks its an easy solution. chevy and cadillac and truth is if that is what happens then no one will care. GM cannot run on chevy alone.

your mindset is to quit, even with good product on the floor.

quit quit quit. i think i will call you the quitter.

If 'quitting' means survival, then yes, please call me a quitter.

Quick Analogy: If your foot had gangrene, and your choice was to amputate or contract a body-wide illness of life-threatening proportions, what would you do?

This is GM's situation. It is dire. Not bad, not 'turning around', simply awful at best. They may not last another product cycle in their current form. If my choice is die or change---I think I'd take the change. You, obviously, feel different.

My suggestion is to sell Hummer, sell Saab and try to make sense of the rest of the line-up, knowing that I can now take resources thrown down the toilet and give the next Aura to Pontiac, the next 9-3, 9-5 to Caddy or Buick, the next Astra to Pontiac or Chevy--the H4 could be a great GMC---all without supporting the blackhole that Saab, Hummer or Saturn has become.

As I've been one of the few people on this board with the right ideas all along, wouldn't it stand to reason I might be right now? (I just work in the industry, what do you do?)

Bear this in mind---if they listened to me, they wouldn't be in this situation. If they listened to you, they'd still be wearing '29' pins and praying for Ch11 help.

I'm OK with you thinking I'm wrong. You clearly demonstrate a lack of complete understanding of the situation. GM needs to make MONEY, regardless of how many CARS they make. Forget about notions like market share....look at Europe and you'll get an idea of what a fractured marketplace does to everyone's share of the business.

Edited June 30, 2008 by enzl

[CSpec]

GM needs to make MONEY, regardless of how many CARS they make. Forget about notions like market share....look at Europe and you'll get an idea of what a fractured marketplace does to everyone's share of the business.

Exactly. Whatever needs to go for GM to be profitable, so be it. "Ruining" brands heritage or killing "storied" brands is better than having the whole company go under based because of "honor". People need to stop rooting for individual brands and just worry about GM's very survival.

[regfootball]

gutting the brands is not any more of a guarantee of positive direction for survival then maintaining them is. it only is because someone in the press said so.

if you think GM has the cash on hand to buy their way out of all the dealer contracts and union contracts to radically pare down quickly then you are on just as much acid as the rest of us.

personally my opinion, and i have said this for 8-10 years, is that all GM brands should be under one superstore roof with a lot fewer dealers. maybe each brand has only 3-5 models except for chevy, but the key is hold onto the brands and gain dealer consolidation. any GM brand in any showroom means the brands can rise and fall easily with the tide of the market. if pontiac is slow, buick may thrive. the cars can be more precisely tailored to the image of each brand. the money sucking dealer network is what is killing GM, not the brands, that is what needs to be cut. Actually, there is no reason why we can't cut the dealers out almost in entirety. We can do a lot more with the web these days and then it would be customer focused.

I would guess if GM didnt have its dealer network bleeding them dry all the time, they might actually be able to become inventive and shrewed in utilizing marketing dollars more to accomodate the customer, and not the fat ass who sits on big asphalt lots holding real estate with acres of cars on them. that is a marketing cost that needs to be cut, not brands. GM should not have to pay for inefficient retail practices predicated by dealers who seem to prefer to not cut a damn f@#king thing themselves.

its high time GM did not have to feed those bloated out of touch monsters anymore.

Edited June 30, 2008 by regfootball

[enzl]

gutting the brands is not any more of a guarantee of positive direction for survival then maintaining them is. it only is because someone in the press said so.

if you think GM has the cash on hand to buy their way out of all the dealer contracts and union contracts to radically pare down quickly then you are on just as much acid as the rest of us.

personally my opinion, and i have said this for 8-10 years, is that all GM brands should be under one superstore roof with a lot fewer dealers. maybe each brand has only 3-5 models except for chevy, but the key is hold onto the brands and gain dealer consolidation. any GM brand in any showroom means the brands can rise and fall easily with the tide of the market. if pontiac is slow, buick may thrive. the cars can be more precisely tailored to the image of each brand. the money sucking dealer network is what is killing GM, not the brands, that is what needs to be cut. Actually, there is no reason why we can't cut the dealers out almost in entirety. We can do a lot more with the web these days and then it would be customer focused.

I would guess if GM didnt have its dealer network bleeding them dry all the time, they might actually be able to become inventive and shrewed in utilizing marketing dollars more to accomodate the customer, and not the fat ass who sits on big asphalt lots holding real estate with acres of cars on them. that is a marketing cost that needs to be cut, not brands. GM should not have to pay for inefficient retail practices predicated by dealers who seem to prefer to not cut a damn f@#king thing themselves.

its high time GM did not have to feed those bloated out of touch monsters anymore.

Note that I said SELL, not close-down brands....because of State franchise laws--you know, the ones that protect individuals that have put $Millions into a franchise, you MUST sell them off, not close them down. There will be lawsuits, but it simply isn't the same as a shut-down like Olds.

Second, they've been combining channels (B-P-GMC) and Hummer with Saab & Caddy for years....how has that worked out? You've still got to eliminate franchisees to create these 'Superstores', so net-net, its the same as a shutdown of brands.

Blaming dealers is like blaming McDonalds franchisees for selling tainted meat, when all of their food-stuffs comes from the corporate suppliers in the first place.

GM has been 'serving' tainted meat for years. If they were selling at a 30-40%marketshare, magically, there'd be plenty of business for all dealers. The absolute loss of focus on product for years has now come home to roost. Most people simply scoff at the idea of buying a GM product--and that's GM's fault, not the dealers.

Dealer are to blame for a whole other set of issues, but they didn't build sh!t product and then foist it on the public. They served the burgers supplied to them.

Next time you go on rant, do yourself a favor and look up the info you're ranting about---it just makes no sense to listen to someone when they're completely ignorant as to the topic. And, while your argument before was that GM wasn't badge-engineering, now they are (only) because of the dealers? A little manic, no?

GM has the money to right the ship IF they execute a product plan perfectly. What evidence is there that they can do that while right-sizing the ship? None, with this management team in place.

You've been given the diagnosis, whether you care to admit it or not.

[turbo200]

Note that I said SELL, not close-down brands....because of State franchise laws--you know, the ones that protect individuals that have put $Millions into a franchise, you MUST sell them off, not close them down. There will be lawsuits, but it simply isn't the same as a shut-down like Olds.

Second, they've been combining channels (B-P-GMC) and Hummer with Saab & Caddy for years....how has that worked out? You've still got to eliminate franchisees to create these 'Superstores', so net-net, its the same as a shutdown of brands.

Blaming dealers is like blaming McDonalds franchisees for selling tainted meat, when all of their food-stuffs comes from the corporate suppliers in the first place.

GM has been 'serving' tainted meat for years. If they were selling at a 30-40%marketshare, magically, there'd be plenty of business for all dealers. The absolute loss of focus on product for years has now come home to roost. Most people simply scoff at the idea of buying a GM product--and that's GM's fault, not the dealers.

Dealer are to blame for a whole other set of issues, but they didn't build sh!t product and then foist it on the public. They served the burgers supplied to them.

Next time you go on rant, do yourself a favor and look up the info you're ranting about---it just makes no sense to listen to someone when they're completely ignorant as to the topic. And, while your argument before was that GM wasn't badge-engineering, now they are (only) because of the dealers? A little manic, no?

GM has the money to right the ship IF they execute a product plan perfectly. What evidence is there that they can do that while right-sizing the ship? None, with this management team in place.

You've been given the diagnosis, whether you care to admit it or not.

I don't even know if they have the money now or they're just gonna bank on the upcoming stuff in the next two years, the new chevy small car, camaro.....I can't recall what the list is like right now.

you're right on in the pairing of the brands wouldn't be successful since they all sell essentially identical cars in the same segments.

reg if you care to educate yourself about the financial dilemma GM finds itself in go here; you'll find what some insiders are saying. this may not be the full picture, this may not be as dark as the full picture really is. Heed the calls to educate yourself before you go talking about things you really know nothing about.

No one here is for shuttering all the brands and just leaving Chevy and Caddy, and I can't think of one person here that wouldn't like to somehow salvage one or another brand. the problem is there isn't a way for GM to feasibly manage them all at this time. There isn't enough money, sales are contracting, and there just hasn't been a consistent management of these brands to justify some of them. that last point is the biggest problem. the brands seem to be money sucking, instead of self-sustaining, many are in that position. marketing costs can be extreme, you have operations, engineering etc

[daves87rs]

If 'quitting' means survival, then yes, please call me a quitter.

Quick Analogy: If your foot had gangrene, and your choice was to amputate or contract a body-wide illness of life-threatening proportions, what would you do?

This is GM's situation. It is dire. Not bad, not 'turning around', simply awful at best. They may not last another product cycle in their current form. If my choice is die or change---I think I'd take the change. You, obviously, feel different.

My suggestion is to sell Hummer, sell Saab and try to make sense of the rest of the line-up, knowing that I can now take resources thrown down the toilet and give the next Aura to Pontiac, the next 9-3, 9-5 to Caddy or Buick, the next Astra to Pontiac or Chevy--the H4 could be a great GMC---all without supporting the blackhole that Saab, Hummer or Saturn has become.

As I've been one of the few people on this board with the right ideas all along, wouldn't it stand to reason I might be right now? (I just work in the industry, what do you do?)

Bear this in mind---if they listened to me, they wouldn't be in this situation. If they listened to you, they'd still be wearing '29' pins and praying for Ch11 help.

I'm OK with you thinking I'm wrong. You clearly demonstrate a lack of complete understanding of the situation. GM needs to make MONEY, regardless of how many CARS they make. Forget about notions like market share....look at Europe and you'll get an idea of what a fractured marketplace does to everyone's share of the business.

With taking out a few battle words there, I would have to agree with enzl here..

The next G8 or GTO won't mean &#036;h&#33; if GM can't make money on it's main products out there....

You want to know what 4 lamdas mean to me? REBATES. Lots of them. Great product? Well, that's only if you can sell them...

The Chevy and Buick are fine. The GMC will fade with the gas prices, and nobody cares about the Outlook anymore....Saturn got a minivan no one cared about, and now with an SUV with the same fate.

Saturn should just be about the cars. PERIOD.

GM could keep their basic divisions if they cut product...then, as sales rise, add models again.

Even at ths late stage in the game, even Ford has realized this and is making those nessary changes....

[daves87rs]

I don't even know if they have the money now or they're just gonna bank on the upcoming stuff in the next two years, the new chevy small car, camaro.....I can't recall what the list is like right now.

you're right on in the pairing of the brands wouldn't be successful since they all sell essentially identical cars in the same segments.

reg if you care to educate yourself about the financial dilemma GM finds itself in go here; you'll find what some insiders are saying. this may not be the full picture, this may not be as dark as the full picture really is. Heed the calls to educate yourself before you go talking about things you really know nothing about.

No one here is for shuttering all the brands and just leaving Chevy and Caddy, and I can't think of one person here that wouldn't like to somehow salvage one or another brand. the problem is there isn't a way for GM to feasibly manage them all at this time. There isn't enough money, sales are contracting, and there just hasn't been a consistent management of these brands to justify some of them. that last point is the biggest problem. the brands seem to be money sucking, instead of self-sustaining, many are in that position. marketing costs can be extreme, you have operations, engineering etc

Models need to be cut -not brands......

Tearing away brands at this point would be like putting a gun to your head-you only have to look at Olds example....

GM needs to cut products, and make those left count.

The only brands that need to go are Hummer and Saab, as both can be replaced in the line up......

[regfootball]

Note that I said SELL, not close-down brands....because of State franchise laws--you know, the ones that protect individuals that have put $Millions into a franchise, you MUST sell them off, not close them down. There will be lawsuits, but it simply isn't the same as a shut-down like Olds.

Second, they've been combining channels (B-P-GMC) and Hummer with Saab & Caddy for years....how has that worked out? You've still got to eliminate franchisees to create these 'Superstores', so net-net, its the same as a shutdown of brands.

Blaming dealers is like blaming McDonalds franchisees for selling tainted meat, when all of their food-stuffs comes from the corporate suppliers in the first place.

GM has been 'serving' tainted meat for years. If they were selling at a 30-40%marketshare, magically, there'd be plenty of business for all dealers. The absolute loss of focus on product for years has now come home to roost. Most people simply scoff at the idea of buying a GM product--and that's GM's fault, not the dealers.

Dealer are to blame for a whole other set of issues, but they didn't build sh!t product and then foist it on the public. They served the burgers supplied to them.

Next time you go on rant, do yourself a favor and look up the info you're ranting about---it just makes no sense to listen to someone when they're completely ignorant as to the topic. And, while your argument before was that GM wasn't badge-engineering, now they are (only) because of the dealers? A little manic, no?

GM has the money to right the ship IF they execute a product plan perfectly. What evidence is there that they can do that while right-sizing the ship? None, with this management team in place.

You've been given the diagnosis, whether you care to admit it or not.

wouldnt surprise me to see someone get pissy when someone else brings to light the notion of the dealers and their moguls sucking hind tit off the general public for so long. anything threatening any modification to the gravy train would make one upset, no doubt. its not GM's fault the car market is down as a whole by 30% or whatever this year. deal with it.

you want GM to downsize, then downsize your operation too. tear up your union-esque franchise laws and give them the flexibility to do the marketing and distribution moves they need to. cut your building and land and blacktop in half. get rid of half your staff. give up your franchises and consolidate without a payoff. go find a new line of work for yourself if you don't like the pasta on your plate. to turn it back around and blame gm completely is ludicrous.........toyota was down this month......unexpectedly so.......are you gonna go bad on them now since apparently the public is not showing them love either?

GM's model portfolio has holes....but we are in a 12.5 million annual market now instead of 14.5 or 16 or 17. honda seems to the be the only one who can make a go of this market right now. to lay all YOUR hostility and blame on GM for a situation THEY did NOT entirely create is quite simply being a simpleton about it. ALL manufacturer's portfolios and marketing ability are being tested right now, GM is NOT the only one. They bring the Traverse to market and will by all accounts generate more sales and profit by doing so while taking share from others at the same time. Whether they do it through 1 channel or 4 is kind of pointless if they as you say cannot eliminate brands and must sell them down.

As for the outlook, if it even only sells 24k-30k a year, that is in the neighborhood of 10% of their sales being held while they continue to bring out new models. Let's see, i don't think that you would want to lose 10% of your used car sales to your competitor if that gave them the momentum to keep growing their business and continue to squeeze you out.

There is no fault at all to having 4 lambdas in the showroom. NONE. its one of the hottest segments and most profitable. while GM has these brands and the dealer arrangements cannot be rectified with massive cash outlay, then there is no harm in doing this. none at all. even if i said 'cut two' half this board would trip over their own teeth trying to decide which two to cut. we already have one FOOL suggesting the ACADIA is the one to get cut. I'm like 'wow......assinine'

I don't see rebates on the lambdas either. the crossover market is there. its open for whoever claims it. chevy is sending out another coach to claim the land before someone else does. you cannot say the same thing about the buick terrazza etc. that market was dying. one of GM's strengths is multiple coverage of the market, so if a segment is booming there is no crime in plugging it. if demand drops, then get rid of the extra models.

as far as overproduction, in the past that has been as much of a factor of union issues than anything. plants needed to run due to labor contracts.

remember, products hitting showroom now were greenlighted 3-4 years ago. GM and others cannot make tectonic shifts in all their model lines in 6 months. If you can't even cut GM or FOrd or anyone a little slack for that, then you really are being unreasonable. DO you think toyotas 8 SUV's have anything to do with their suckage? Do they still rebadge the LandCruiser and whatever Lexus version that is too?

wow GM's stock even went up today. hmmmmm.

Edited July 2, 2008 by regfootball

[turbo200]

for the first part of your post: your rationalization of the situation has nothing to do with it. enzl's dealer like all others are business and must make money to survive, or they close down, like we have witnessed so many others doing.

toyota has nothing to do with it. their sales are almost always consistently up; thier dealers are marching along with strong profitability; it's GM's cars that require tons of rebates, on a more consistent level than the imports. it's GM's sales that have been propped up through trucks for the last decade. this is the major reason for talk of cutting brands. when truck sales are massively down, almost nothing, the rationale for keeping a truck brand around that is a drain on marketing resources gets harder. otoh, as many have noted, GMC development costs are minute.

GM is in a time of contraction. The dealers have to respond as well and start contracting. That will be hard. For GM it will mean less representation and slightly less volume, but it is needed to go towards a clearer path for profitability.

Cutting a brand is also a strategic move to ensure profitability and sustainability of not only the brand portfolio but the company itself in NA. Remember, GM didn't make a profit for the year last year or the year before it.

[enzl]

wouldnt surprise me to see someone get pissy when someone else brings to light the notion of the dealers and their moguls sucking hind tit off the general public for so long. anything threatening any modification to the gravy train would make one upset, no doubt. its not GM's fault the car market is down as a whole by 30% or whatever this year. deal with it.

you want GM to downsize, then downsize your operation too. tear up your union-esque franchise laws and give them the flexibility to do the marketing and distribution moves they need to. cut your building and land and blacktop in half. get rid of half your staff. give up your franchises and consolidate without a payoff. go find a new line of work for yourself if you don't like the pasta on your plate. to turn it back around and blame gm completely is ludicrous.........toyota was down this month......unexpectedly so.......are you gonna go bad on them now since apparently the public is not showing them love either?

GM's model portfolio has holes....but we are in a 12.5 million annual market now instead of 14.5 or 16 or 17. honda seems to the be the only one who can make a go of this market right now. to lay all YOUR hostility and blame on GM for a situation THEY did NOT entirely create is quite simply being a simpleton about it. ALL manufacturer's portfolios and marketing ability are being tested right now, GM is NOT the only one. They bring the Traverse to market and will by all accounts generate more sales and profit by doing so while taking share from others at the same time. Whether they do it through 1 channel or 4 is kind of pointless if they as you say cannot eliminate brands and must sell them down.

As for the outlook, if it even only sells 24k-30k a year, that is in the neighborhood of 10% of their sales being held while they continue to bring out new models. Let's see, i don't think that you would want to lose 10% of your used car sales to your competitor if that gave them the momentum to keep growing their business and continue to squeeze you out.

There is no fault at all to having 4 lambdas in the showroom. NONE. its one of the hottest segments and most profitable. while GM has these brands and the dealer arrangements cannot be rectified with massive cash outlay, then there is no harm in doing this. none at all. even if i said 'cut two' half this board would trip over their own teeth trying to decide which two to cut. we already have one FOOL suggesting the ACADIA is the one to get cut. I'm like 'wow......assinine'

I don't see rebates on the lambdas either. the crossover market is there. its open for whoever claims it. chevy is sending out another coach to claim the land before someone else does. you cannot say the same thing about the buick terrazza etc. that market was dying. one of GM's strengths is multiple coverage of the market, so if a segment is booming there is no crime in plugging it. if demand drops, then get rid of the extra models.

as far as overproduction, in the past that has been as much of a factor of union issues than anything. plants needed to run due to labor contracts.

remember, products hitting showroom now were greenlighted 3-4 years ago. GM and others cannot make tectonic shifts in all their model lines in 6 months. If you can't even cut GM or FOrd or anyone a little slack for that, then you really are being unreasonable. DO you think toyotas 8 SUV's have anything to do with their suckage? Do they still rebadge the LandCruiser and whatever Lexus version that is too?

wow GM's stock even went up today. hmmmmm.

Reg--I've openly admitted working for a large dealer group---but that doesn't mean I'm blind to the issues dealers have created for themselves, nor the necessity to get rid of alot of them. But here's where you're showing your ignorance: The franchise laws protect many different businesses, from Chevy's to Subway shops---in your zeal to paint me as a heartless rep of the dealer zombie's, you completely ignore the fact that franchise laws mostly protect the small biz owner that has taken his life savings to open a local Taco Bell...so, again, your ignorance is open, obvious and defeats your entire argument.

If we were offered enough to sell our domestic franchises (and remember, it cost $millions to set up most mid-sized dealerships) we'd sell---it's simple economics. The consequences of tearing up franchise laws would, in essence, steal $ from employers in order to give it to GM? How is that fair? And more importantly, I've seen NO evidence they'd do anything smart with the $ anyway---so why not let my vampire sales-zombies sell away?

As for rebadges--it's simply stupid. It'll kill the Saturn and looks like bad-old GM all over again. The Traverse should be out, but not with 3 sisters that are largely the same. And, as for your lesson in product planning---IF GM had bothered to develop decent small cars, they would magically have them to sell---today---immediately. Instead they're trying to pimp Aveos and sorry Cobalts against real competition...please.

[regfootball]

GM did drop the ball on small.....but look at the nice astra we have now and look at the new Cobalt spy photos coming down the pipe.

even if GM had 3 or 4 new small cars out now I am not sure that makes up for the silly consumer reports phenomenon.

as far as the dealer thing. i would feel sorry for joe employee who lost their job due to closing but i have no sympathy for any mogul that has bled the public for decades, only holds onto franchises for the value of selling them or getting bought out, and merely to hold up the value of the commerical real estate they own that would no doubt tank if dealers had to go down left and right. Its no incentive to right size your business if every dealer cut their operation in half to sell cars more efficiently. Demand and value of those big visible properties would crash and with it goes Mr McCombs or Denny Heckers wealth. My father was in a business that sold implements and machinery to a family that has owned dealerships for 50+ years and now has many mega dealers across the country. The investment of that family over time has probably been large, but its not like its all been recent. They were fortunate enough to get in on the ground 5+ decades ago and have milked the public in that time period and have multiplied their wealth because of it in many other areas, real estate etc. times have changed for them too and maybe that means downsizing their gravy train as well.

although i give that bunch credit....they sell GM brands except hummer and saab under one roof and its where i bought my last GM and its where i will buy my next (even though its 5 hours away). why? ALL the GM brands and all the selection that comes with it. At least they had the foresight to not be divisive about the brands and take them all on. I for one am damned happy that I can choose which Lambda I want all under the same roof. this is the approach GM should be taking and in my opinion, dealers that are waiting out GM and standing in the way of making this happen are poison. The chevy pontiac dealer 10 minutes from my house is a run down &#036;h&#33;hole that only keeps its doors open to sell used cars and prop up the value of its franchise so they can get bought out when GM finally gives. This is a chevy dealer that has never remodeled in over 20 years, refuses to deal on price, and sold only 56 cars (told to me by another dealer) in the first six months and there is another chevy buick dealer 5 miles away that runs a much more professional operation that deserves to absorb the franchise. they have poor service and sales and just need to get out. Why dont they>? not to sell cars but they are waiting for the handout is all i can assume and dont want to devalue their real estate because all the dealers have moved to another strip and they will lose their arse if they have to sell.

Edited July 2, 2008 by regfootball

[enzl]

GM did drop the ball on small.....but look at the nice astra we have now and look at the new Cobalt spy photos coming down the pipe.

even if GM had 3 or 4 new small cars out now I am not sure that makes up for the silly consumer reports phenomenon.

as far as the dealer thing. i would feel sorry for joe employee who lost their job due to closing but i have no sympathy for any mogul that has bled the public for decades, only holds onto franchises for the value of selling them or getting bought out, and merely to hold up the value of the commerical real estate they own that would no doubt tank if dealers had to go down left and right. Its no incentive to right size your business if every dealer cut their operation in half to sell cars more efficiently. Demand and value of those big visible properties would crash and with it goes Mr McCombs or Denny Heckers wealth. My father was in a business that sold implements and machinery to a family that has owned dealerships for 50+ years and now has many mega dealers across the country. The investment of that family over time has probably been large, but its not like its all been recent. They were fortunate enough to get in on the ground 5+ decades ago and have milked the public in that time period and have multiplied their wealth because of it in many other areas, real estate etc. times have changed for them too and maybe that means downsizing their gravy train as well.

although i give that bunch credit....they sell GM brands except hummer and saab under one roof and its where i bought my last GM and its where i will buy my next (even though its 5 hours away). why? ALL the GM brands and all the selection that comes with it. At least they had the foresight to not be divisive about the brands and take them all on. I for one am damned happy that I can choose which Lambda I want all under the same roof. this is the approach GM should be taking and in my opinion, dealers that are waiting out GM and standing in the way of making this happen are poison. The chevy pontiac dealer 10 minutes from my house is a run down &#036;h&#33;hole that only keeps its doors open to sell used cars and prop up the value of its franchise so they can get bought out when GM finally gives. This is a chevy dealer that has never remodeled in over 20 years, refuses to deal on price, and sold only 56 cars (told to me by another dealer) in the first six months and there is another chevy buick dealer 5 miles away that runs a much more professional operation that deserves to absorb the franchise. they have poor service and sales and just need to get out. Why dont they>? not to sell cars but they are waiting for the handout is all i can assume and dont want to devalue their real estate because all the dealers have moved to another strip and they will lose their arse if they have to sell.

Umm...Rich people employ people like you and me.

If they're less rich (which you propose is no bad thing), both of us have no jobs. They go off on vacation to Bermuda.

You simply don't know what you're talking about....either about GM woes or business in general.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Umm..wrong on both counts....the Alt/Max are highly differentiated inside and out...the Traverse basically shares everything but front and rear fascias and mild interior changes---even awkwardly placing the Enclaves 3rd side window in a way which looks stupid and compromises rear visability.

The Toureg/Cayenne are platform mates that cannot easily be confused, nor do they share 1 body panel.

The point you've obviously missed is that all 4 lambdas simply compete with each other.....on pricing, equipment---hell, at B-P-GMC stores, 2 sit on the showroom floor together, while the Outlook langushed without Chevy's competition--what do you think will happen now?

Lambdas are a great product, heroically mismanaged & a super example of the one step forward--two step back GM that is now circling the drain due to idiotic decisions like the Traverse---to make matters worse, handing Spring Hill to Chevy production means no option of selling Saturn with a unique production facility!

This is a great product, marketed and sold by morons. With bad timing. And an inability to learn from past mistakes. This is why GM is doomed without a clean sweep of the Boardroom & Exec suites.

The GMT360s only shared one body panel, yet all we heard was re-badge this and re-badge that.

It's double standard and one of the reasons that the asians can get away with it is because their offerings are so damn bland in the first place that no one even notices them duplicating the same thing across 2-3 divisions.

[enzl]

The GMT360s only shared one body panel, yet all we heard was re-badge this and re-badge that.

It's double standard and one of the reasons that the asians can get away with it is because their offerings are so damn bland in the first place that no one even notices them duplicating the same thing across 2-3 divisions.

You are simply wrong. Just look at the GMT-360's....if they only share 1 body panel, than GM's designers should have been fired---the appearance that the T-blazer and Ranier are the same is the problem, not a body panel count.

If you really think that the Max/Altima or Toureg/Cayenne are in the same discussion, I can't help you, man.

The media didn't design the 360's--GM did. Time to own our mistakes. The competition is stealing your lunch and you're worried about how many interchangable body panels there are...FOG, I'm sure GM's got a job for You!

The media, it turns out, was pretty spot on about product and planning and the D3's dim propects...don't play the victim, this train was coming a long time ago...don't turn this into a 'media bias' issue.

GM was dumb. They failed enthusiasts, shareholders, dealers, loyal customers...you name them, GM reached out and screwed everyone they touched--

I'm right. Been proven right countless times. You're wrong---and your ridiculous defense of one of GM's MOST badge engineered product lines only serves to prove how pointless your argument is, period.

How about just leaving my replies alone? Between you and 'Biz, I don't know who the greatest source of misinformation is on this site.

[CARBIZ]

You are simply wrong. Just look at the GMT-360's....if they only share 1 body panel, than GM's designers should have been fired---the appearance that the T-blazer and Ranier are the same is the problem, not a body panel count.

If you really think that the Max/Altima or Toureg/Cayenne are in the same discussion, I can't help you, man.

The media didn't design the 360's--GM did. Time to own our mistakes. The competition is stealing your lunch and you're worried about how many interchangable body panels there are...FOG, I'm sure GM's got a job for You!

The media, it turns out, was pretty spot on about product and planning and the D3's dim propects...don't play the victim, this train was coming a long time ago...don't turn this into a 'media bias' issue.

GM was dumb. They failed enthusiasts, shareholders, dealers, loyal customers...you name them, GM reached out and screwed everyone they touched--

I'm right. Been proven right countless times. You're wrong---and your ridiculous defense of one of GM's MOST badge engineered product lines only serves to prove how pointless your argument is, period.

How about just leaving my replies alone? Between you and 'Biz, I don't know who the greatest source of misinformation is on this site.

So why don't we all just lay down and play dead, then? If all we want to do is sit around and bitch about everything that GM has done wrong I can pick up any damned newspaper or magazine for that. Analysts and media types only get paid to sell and nothing sells like negativity. You, of all people should know that! Hell, with the amount of negativity you spew, I am surprised you aren't President, for Gawd's sake.

There is a difference between pointing out what GM is doing right or wrong and simply &#036;h&#33;ting over everything that comes out of Detroit.

Frankly, I am sick of your hate-on of Wagoner and his cronies. We could just write your diatribes for you:

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH....FIRE RICK WAGONER....BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, FIRE RICK WAGONER.

That is so bloody helpful.

[regfootball]

The GMT360s only shared one body panel, yet all we heard was re-badge this and re-badge that.

It's double standard and one of the reasons that the asians can get away with it is because their offerings are so damn bland in the first place that no one even notices them duplicating the same thing across 2-3 divisions.

i guess he needs to go to canadian driver dot com and read their new maxima review. there is an ass end picture of the thing which has a primo shot of the trunk lid. then look at the altima's trunk lid. looks pretty fricking similar to me. its the same car under the skin. rebadge? no more or less than a lot of GM's model proliferation.

sportage=tucson

entourage=sedona

landcruiser=lexus gx whatever

outlander=citroen and peuguot

tsx=accord

toyota skirts it by calling models 'scions' but then bundles their sales numbers back into 'toyota'.

tc=paseo

xb=?

xa=?

xd=?

everyone knows those things are toyota rice, no wonder toyota is considering ditching the brand.

the bottom line is if the product is good, reabadging and platform proliferation is no big deal. When the trailblazer and envoy came out i heard of many people paying well over sticker to get one and they all sold like gangbusters. GM blanketed the market. the flaw was not updating the interiors and powertrains over time. the lambdas come out of the gate as an excellent product and we hear of promised improvements, already we have a new engine. the segment is booming. gm has more tools and concessions in place to manage the production without binding union issues. the outlook is a bridge product or placeholder to help prop saturns volume and steady it until the euro people mover fills that hole. that's why chevy didnt get it out of the gate.

reagrding rebates, g6 was way up last month with only 1k on the hood. yet GM is the rebate king? 1k on a 5 year old car that increases sales is not a bad thing people. wasn't aura up too? that's all with less fleet and less rebate. yet camry was down. what does that say? well GM has more midsize choices than toyota. maybe GM is on to something.

Edited July 2, 2008 by regfootball

[regfootball]

So why don't we all just lay down and play dead, then? If all we want to do is sit around and bitch about everything that GM has done wrong I can pick up any damned newspaper or magazine for that. Analysts and media types only get paid to sell and nothing sells like negativity. You, of all people should know that! Hell, with the amount of negativity you spew, I am surprised you aren't President, for Gawd's sake.

There is a difference between pointing out what GM is doing right or wrong and simply &#036;h&#33;ting over everything that comes out of Detroit.

Frankly, I am sick of your hate-on of Wagoner and his cronies. We could just write your diatribes for you:

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH....FIRE RICK WAGONER....BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, FIRE RICK WAGONER.

That is so bloody helpful.

an enzl + buickman combo platter, we'd all kill ourselves and start marching for the chinese communist army.

i get the impression enzl is not concerned about whether GM fails or not, as long as he can sell some sort of car to unconscious customers in an easy unquestioned process and he doesn't seem concerned about whether the companies and ownership and decision making are here, as long as the buck in his own pocket is bigger and quicker.

Edited July 2, 2008 by regfootball

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

You are simply wrong. Just look at the GMT-360's....if they only share 1 body panel, than GM's designers should have been fired---the appearance that the T-blazer and Ranier are the same is the problem, not a body panel count.

If you really think that the Max/Altima or Toureg/Cayenne are in the same discussion, I can't help you, man.

At first I thought you were just wearing rose colored glasses, but I guess you're just blind. It's the same game GM plays, except it's ok for the imports to do it.

The media didn't design the 360's--GM did. Time to own our mistakes. The competition is stealing your lunch and you're worried about how many interchangable body panels there are...FOG, I'm sure GM's got a job for You!

And GM did a good job. 'Twas the media that started the whole "badge engineering" anti-GM The consumer isn't smart enough to know that the trucks are the same thing. I'd put MONEY on it. Go show 10 people 15 pictures of crossovers and throw the Enclave and Traverse in there. Then see how many of them can tell that these are the same vehicle. Consumers don't even know what engine is in the car most of the time, even though it says what it is on top of the damn thing. I know this, I worked in auto parts.

My point is this: EVERY COMPANY USES PLATFORMS and ELEMENTS in various cars. In the 90s, the media lambasted GM an Co because it's cars were too different. COMMON PLATFORMS they said, just like the asians. And just like that argument, the badge engineering argument is MADE UP for the detriment of Detroit and nothing more.

GM was dumb. They failed enthusiasts, shareholders, dealers, loyal customers...you name them, GM reached out and screwed everyone they touched--

GM also got screwed a lot too, and TOO many times it was by dealers just like you.

I'm right. Been proven right countless times. You're wrong---and your ridiculous defense of one of GM's MOST badge engineered product lines only serves to prove how pointless your argument is, period.

It doesn't count if the very entity that created the argument reinforces it. (The media) You're suffering from confirmation bias, that's all.

How about just leaving my replies alone? Between you and 'Biz, I don't know who the greatest source of misinformation is on this site.

You're right? Okay, so that's why the Lambda program is failing so badly in the market? That's why the GMT360s were a complete bust in the market.

Edited July 2, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

i guess he needs to go to canadian driver dot com and read their new maxima review. there is an ass end picture of the thing which has a primo shot of the trunk lid. then look at the altima's trunk lid. looks pretty fricking similar to me. its the same car under the skin. rebadge? no more or less than a lot of GM's model proliferation.

The sad part is; it's homogeny on the part of ALL the asian brands that allow them to get by with this.

It's just another 'appliance' that is devoid of all personality and style.

[Robert Hall]

The sad part is; it's homogeny on the part of ALL the asian brands that allow them to get by with this.

It's just another 'appliance' that is devoid of all personality and style.

GM's FWD mass market cars are no different, though... all functional transportation appliances.

[CARBIZ]

The ugly truth in Big Business is that too many 'top' business people sold their souls to the Devil a long time ago. Although Wagoner & Co. do have a lot of their own personal fortune tied up in GM stock, undoubtedly he would not lose his multi million dollar home if GM went belly up. That much is regrettable. Corporate America suffers because the 'owners' no longer 'own' the company. They can just jump ship and run something else - and they have the contacts on other Boards to do just that.

Henry Ford did not buy GM stock just in case his company didn't do well.

There are a lot of GM 'supporters' who are talking out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, they proclaim they 'support' GM and 'hope' it will do well, but really they just bash and bash everything GM does. Makes one wonder what hat they are really wearing.

IMO, it is these companies that have grown in good times to control several or even dozens of dealers that are part of the problem: in catering to all the brands, they are loyal to none. If GM goes down, they don't care. Odds are, the property their GM dealer is sitting on is worth more than last year's sales, so they can sell it and continue to sell Hyundai or Toyota or Honda or whatever other make they have jumped into bed with.

THIS IS PART OF THE PROBLEM.

One of the most successful GM dealers in the Toronto area is successful because the owner owns nothing else but that dealer. All his eggs are in one basket. He is known to greet customers in the service drive-thru in the morning. When is the last time some President of a 15 dealer network did that?

Look at it from GM's point of view: a lot of these 'dealer companies' were built by GM, but now that GM has hit the skids, those same dealer bodies are bitching from the sidelines. How much credibility do these guys really have?

[enzl]

All the hue and cry makes me laugh...I'm simply telling it as it is...you guys are so caught up in your GM-spin that you can't see the forest for the trees.

If the 4 minivans, 4 lambdas, 360's, 355's and GMT900's aren't enough proof that similar-looking product in GM's arsenal has been a constant issue--and that GM's rep has suffered for it (go back and look at the X's, A's, N's et al... )to get a history of mediocre differentiation.

You HONESTLY think the Toureg gets confused with the Cayenne? Really? Or the Altima looks like the new Max? Even Hyundai/Kia has done a better job of hiding common roots, other than their minivans...

I'm simply calling it as I see it. I'm negative because the situation is terrible...as I've been saying for my years on this board...and now, the worst has come to pass, and I'm wrong?

You were wrong about the future 2 years ago---everything I warned about has come true---yet I'm the moron? You can't let your personal animosity let me be correct--in your own minds.

I am confident my business and I will be left standing in all of this. My organization will sell more GM product than anyone in our region. We're doing our best to make it work. What are you doing that's MORE supportive?

A patriot speaks against his government in order to support change to make things better.

You guys keep up with the status quo. GM's doing great, according to you.

Edited July 3, 2008 by enzl

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

You guys keep up with the status quo. GM's doing great, according to you.

Yeah... Because everything that CARBIZ and I say around here is "GM status quo"

[enzl]

Yeah... Because everything that CARBIZ and I say around here is "GM status quo"

Might as well be, IMO.

[Intrepidation]

I'm glad that enzl puts up with the blind loyalty and continues to post meaningful, well thought out arguments that balance out some of the more radical "Let's defend GM at all costs, they have never done anything wrong, it's everyone else's fault gallery"

While it can be pointed out that there are some levels of bias against Detroit, and some of it is indeed unfair and unnecessary, the fact of that matter is that the biggest problems they face are of their own doing.

Most recent example: instead of investing money and R&D into small and midsize cars and trucks and SUVs, they invested mostly on the latter. Now that $4 gas has everyone in a panic for small cars, the Big 3 are caught flat on their asses. I mean, what do you they have to offer for small cars? The Cobalt? Caliber? Aveo? Focus? These pretty mediocre products are selling now because they are cheap and relatively good on gas, but with the exception of the SS, SRT4 and SYNC!!11, have little in the way of desirability. They are products that remind you that you made a sacrifice, instead of merely downsizing to something that's still nice and is good on gas. Thing is though, and this is key, Mulally has made sweeping changes within Ford, and is making decisive decisions which may yet save the company, while GM continues to sit with its thumb up its butt, wondering what it should do. The company is like a chicken running around with it's head cut off, and who knows what's going on at Chrysler.

The first key is to admit you screwed up. The second key is to actually fix it. FWD Caddies, too many similar vehicles that compete with each other, and killing platforms and thereby wastes precious money is not fixing the problem.

Also take into account that enzl isn't a GM hater or basher, if he did it would be "OMG GM sucks, Toyota rules, etc." He's critical to it because he wants it to succeed and it gets frustrating when it shoots itself in the foot, taking 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

That's my little speech.

Edited July 3, 2008 by Dodgefan

[balthazar]

>>"You HONESTLY think the Toureg gets confused with the Cayenne? Really?"<<

If the person is not any sort of car enthusiast; yes I do. Not only are the pair very obviously similar, neither is unique or remotely eye-catching. That's my take. If design has any sort of weight in this segment....

Mmmm, boy! ( ) OR:

Edited July 3, 2008 by balthazar

[Intrepidation]

I think Enclave/Traverse/Acadia would be fine...since they well differentiated and the Acadia and Enclave don't share showroom space, and therefore wouldn't really compete with each other.

I think a better comparison would be:

VS

[regfootball]

all those euro suv's are really fat pigs. tuoareg, no room or space and weighs a lot. q7 same thing. 5500 pounds, some of them.

[enzl]

It's obvious I'm beating my head against the wall. I'll take the Toureg v. Cayenne or Altima v. Max (I note there are no takers for that pic comparison)

against:

Terrazza v. Uplander v. Montana OR Colorado v. Canyon OR N cars OR X cars OR 9-7X, T-blazer, Ranier, Bravada, Envoy--I mean, that list alone is COMIC!

Keep on sipping the Kool-Aid boys---I'll be sure to keep the lights on for ya!

Thanks to DF above---You gotta admit there's a problem before you can fix things---here's hoping there's a few more 'pessimists' on staff to help GM right the ship.

[Robert Hall]

all those euro suv's are really fat pigs. tuoareg, no room or space and weighs a lot. q7 same thing. 5500 pounds, some of them.

They are obese, but GM's big CUVs and SUVs aren't exact lightweights either..

[IfICouldWouldYou?]

I'm glad that enzl puts up with the blind loyalty and continues to post meaningful, well thought out arguments that balance out some of the more radical "Let's defend GM at all costs, they have never done anything wrong, it's everyone else's fault gallery"

While it can be pointed out that there are some levels of bias against Detroit, and some of it is indeed unfair and unnecessary, the fact of that matter is that the biggest problems they face are of their own doing.

Most recent example: instead of investing money and R&D into small and midsize cars and trucks and SUVs, they invested mostly on the latter. Now that $4 gas has everyone in a panic for small cars, the Big 3 are caught flat on their asses. I mean, what do you they have to offer for small cars? The Cobalt? Caliber? Aveo? Focus? These pretty mediocre products are selling now because they are cheap and relatively good on gas, but with the exception of the SS, SRT4 and SYNC!!11, have little in the way of desirability. They are products that remide you that you made a sacrifice, instead of merely downsizing to something that's still nice and is good on gas. Thing is though, and this is key, Mulally has made sweeping changes within Ford, and is making decisive decisions which may yet save the company, while GM continues to sit with its thumb up its butt, wondering what it should do. The company is like a chicken running around with it's head cut off, and who knows what's going on a Chrysler.

The first key is to admit you screwed up. The second key is to actually fix it. FWD Caddies, too many similar vehicles that compete with each other, and killing platforms and thereby wastes precious money is not fixing the problem.

Also take into account that enzl isn't a GM hater or basher, if he did it would be "OMG GM sucks, Toyota rules, etc." He's critical to it because he wants it to succeed and it gets frustrating when it shoots itself in the foot, taking 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

That's my little speech.

Brand loyalty? I have one word: Dodge. Now there is blindness. Chrysler has been 3rd place since Walter rented the Waldorf Astoria to show off his new cars. They've brushed bankruptcy more times than Bill Clinton never had sexual relations with that woman.

To me, Enzl and Carbiz are opposite sides of the same coin. However, GM has enough armchair critics who are piling on these days.

[IfICouldWouldYou?]

>>"You HONESTLY think the Toureg gets confused with the Cayenne? Really?"<<

If the person is not any sort of car enthusiast; yes I do. Not only are the pair very obviously similar, neither is unique or remotely eye-catching. That's my take. If design has any sort of weight in this segment....

Mmmm, boy! ( ) OR:

+1

Too many self appointed enthusiasts don't realize that most people out there don't know and don't care. Many on C&G are guilty of shoving their own brand of beliefs down our throats.

[CSpec]

I'm glad that enzl puts up with the blind loyalty and continues to post meaningful, well thought out arguments that balance out some of the more radical "Let's defend GM at all costs, they have never done anything wrong, it's everyone else's fault gallery"

While it can be pointed out that there are some levels of bias against Detroit, and some of it is indeed unfair and unnecessary, the fact of that matter is that the biggest problems they face are of their own doing.

Most recent example: instead of investing money and R&D into small and midsize cars and trucks and SUVs, they invested mostly on the latter. Now that $4 gas has everyone in a panic for small cars, the Big 3 are caught flat on their asses. I mean, what do you they have to offer for small cars? The Cobalt? Caliber? Aveo? Focus? These pretty mediocre products are selling now because they are cheap and relatively good on gas, but with the exception of the SS, SRT4 and SYNC!!11, have little in the way of desirability. They are products that remide you that you made a sacrifice, instead of merely downsizing to something that's still nice and is good on gas. Thing is though, and this is key, Mulally has made sweeping changes within Ford, and is making decisive decisions which may yet save the company, while GM continues to sit with its thumb up its butt, wondering what it should do. The company is like a chicken running around with it's head cut off, and who knows what's going on a Chrysler.

The first key is to admit you screwed up. The second key is to actually fix it. FWD Caddies, too many similar vehicles that compete with each other, and killing platforms and thereby wastes precious money is not fixing the problem.

Also take into account that enzl isn't a GM hater or basher, if he did it would be "OMG GM sucks, Toyota rules, etc." He's critical to it because he wants it to succeed and it gets frustrating when it shoots itself in the foot, taking 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

That's my little speech.

Bravo! bobo, are you reading this thread? This post might make a comeback in December. People here are so obsessed with brands and "history" and "tradition" at the expense of GM's survival. No money, no brands. Period. People here also consistently deny all reports from people that have worked for/with GM that all say that management is notoriously arrogant. One piece I read about someone who worked for GM in the 90s said that he was shocked at the plain old lack of talent.

View please the following:

"I taught a bundle of GM lower and middle management folks at a private business college in MI in the 1990s. Believe me, if you think the UAW is the cause of GM's problems, you are much mistaken. Job description by job description, task by task, I left the experience amazed at the shallowness of management talent at that company at that time. "

[Intrepidation]

Brand loyalty? I have one word: Dodge. Now there is blindness. Chrysler has been 3rd place since Walter rented the Waldorf Astoria to show off his new cars. They've brushed bankruptcy more times than Bill Clinton never had sexual relations with that woman.

To me, Enzl and Carbiz are opposite sides of the same coin. However, GM has enough armchair critics who are piling on these days.

Except you forget one thing: when Chrysler royally f**ks up, I don't defend it and blame everyone else for the problem. Want examples? (since you obviously never pay attention to any posts I make criticizing them)? The Compass is junk...cheap interior and it looks like @$$. The Sebring is ugly, cheap, and unrefined, the fact that they still haven't found the intelligence to spin off a sedan off of the Caliber platform so they have a small sedan again baffles me, and then there's the cheap interiors throughout the lineup. Then there's the range of powewrtrains that are outdated and outclassed and/or unrefined besides the 4.7 and Hemi V8s...which don't do much good in this era of high gas prices. Basically, with the exception of the LX cars, the new Ram, and the Wrangler, the entire lineup is in sad shape, and the 30% drop in sales reflect that.

Of course I'm a Chrysler fan, but unlike some people I'm willing to admit their screw ups, I just don't like pointless, stupid, bashing.

Try again.

Edited July 3, 2008 by Dodgefan

[CARBIZ]

Of all coincidences, our district manager dropped by today. We had a wee pow-wow about the bankruptcy situation, the bad news on the media, etc. Wow, if you think I am touchy on the issue, he makes me look like an import humper!

In his learned opinion, GM needs to take off the gloves and start attacking the media. GM is doing more things right than at any time in its history, yet it is still taking it up the #ss for perceived injustices of the past. He feels GM needs an entire war department to go after the media outlets that keep bringing up the negative bulls#%t that is threatening to swamp the boat.

As a side bar, I want to go on record as saying it isn't just about GM that I am sick of the media. I am just sick of the media in general. Whether it is a politician innocently calling Asians 'Orientals' (as happened recently in Toronto), or some drunk driver that accidentally kills a pedestrian, the media harps and harps on issues until they are beaten to death.

I can barely watch the news any more because every station or paper is trying to come up with a new slant on how to beat a 'hot' subject to death. Everyone is reaching for that Pullitzer and they don't care whose lives they destroy in the process. In the 40 odd years that I have been paying attention to 'current events,' I gotta say that the freedom of the press has gotten out of hand. Maybe there is too much competition between the various outlets, or maybe liberal arts degrees aren't worth the paper they are printed on, but from innocent slanting of an article to outright fabrications, I venture to say that fully HALF of what we read in print or see on TV is pure, unadulterated crap.

It shames me to think of how this freedom of the press is being abused. I can hardly blame the Chinese government for wanting to clamp down on the press in their country. Our press has become a wasteland of the disenfranchised, jaded and lazy.

This is not merely about blaming the press for GM's failures. This is about the entire downfall of our civilization unless we start demanding more from the press.

[regfootball]

It's obvious I'm beating my head against the wall. I'll take the Toureg v. Cayenne or Altima v. Max (I note there are no takers for that pic comparison)

against:

Terrazza v. Uplander v. Montana OR Colorado v. Canyon OR N cars OR X cars OR 9-7X, T-blazer, Ranier, Bravada, Envoy--I mean, that list alone is COMIC!

Keep on sipping the Kool-Aid boys---I'll be sure to keep the lights on for ya!

Thanks to DF above---You gotta admit there's a problem before you can fix things---here's hoping there's a few more 'pessimists' on staff to help GM right the ship.

the whole point of this thread is that you'd buy a lambda over any of the envoys, uplanders, AND q7's, mdx's, toaregs, ugly ass pilots (saw one yesterday holy &#036;h&#33; its brutal), terrible highlanders, etc.

we're fully aware GM's product cycles are too long on a lot of those CSV's and trailblazers etc. that is rippable. but cmon, the lambdas are the front line products to phase all those other ones out.

[regfootball]

They are obese, but GM's big CUVs and SUVs aren't exact lightweights either..

if you check the curb weights in that segment.....none of them are lightweights.

pilot, highlander, odyssey, dodge vans, cx-9 etc. not all that far apart. you also need to consider if the weighed examples have the huge BAMR's or not. that alone can add many pounds of curb weight for an optional item. The lambdas are not much more and their fuel economy is basically the same in ratings and real world.

the taurus X was a notable exception when it was the freestyle. it wasn't much over 4 dollars in FWD form but it added some poundage when it turned into the Flex.

point being that the German SUV's are considerably heavier for their size and utility benefit than they should be.

To address it even further....many cute utes that are the rage are quite heavy and don't get very good real world mileage. Mazda5's, elements, CRV's etc dont return very good real world numbers. Often times not much more than 20 or the low 20's. I laugh because my 500 right now is getting 22.5 mpg consistently this summer in all stop and go driving. And i can haul some really shapely women in my car to lunch, 3 of em fit in the back no problem. That's why i laugh when some people try to beat the system by buying &#036;h&#33;ty little CRV's. they lack space and dont get decent mileage anyways. Which leads me to my point on the Lambdas and why they are superior, you get fully spacious 3 row seating WITH a usuable cargo area behind it and STILL get mileage that is great for its class and not really that far off that &#036;h&#33;ty little cute utes. The outlander and element are about the only cute utes that have cargo setups that are worth the tradeoff. I guess the escape and equinox have good passenger and cargo accomodations as well. think about that next time you look at those crappy little worthless sportages. The RAV4 i do give credit for having a spacious back seat.

[regfootball]

Except you forget one thing: when Chrysler royally f**ks up, I don't defend it and blame everyone else for the problem. Want examples? (since you obviously never pay attention to any posts I make criticizing them)? The Compass is junk...cheap interior and it looks like @$$. The Sebring is ugly, cheap, and unrefined, the fact that they still haven't found the intelligence to spin off a sedan off of the Caliber platform so they have a small sedan again baffles me, and then there's the cheap interiors throughout the lineup. Then there's the range of powewrtrains that are outdated and outclassed and/or unrefined besides the 4.7 and Hemi V8s...which don't do much good in this era of high gas prices. Basically, with the exception of the LX cars, the new Ram, and the Wrangler, the entire lineup is in sad shape, and the 30% drop in sales reflect that.

Of course I'm a Chrysler fan, but unlike some people I'm willing to admit their screw ups, I just don't like pointless, stupid, bashing.

Try again.

just ot let you know, Chrysler has the most rippable product line of ANYONE out there today. At least GM has award winning products and some very top tier entries as well (ZR1, CTSv, lambdas, g8, malibu).

You really cannot point to any one product in chrysler's portfolio at all and not want to go drink in deep deep sorrow. The journey is about the best and it came in last in C/D's recent comparo.

I like the LX's myself, just so you know.

GM is like gold compared to chrysler right now.

[regfootball]

Of all coincidences, our district manager dropped by today. We had a wee pow-wow about the bankruptcy situation, the bad news on the media, etc. Wow, if you think I am touchy on the issue, he makes me look like an import humper!

In his learned opinion, GM needs to take off the gloves and start attacking the media. GM is doing more things right than at any time in its history, yet it is still taking it up the #ss for perceived injustices of the past. He feels GM needs an entire war department to go after the media outlets that keep bringing up the negative bulls#%t that is threatening to swamp the boat.

As a side bar, I want to go on record as saying it isn't just about GM that I am sick of the media. I am just sick of the media in general. Whether it is a politician innocently calling Asians 'Orientals' (as happened recently in Toronto), or some drunk driver that accidentally kills a pedestrian, the media harps and harps on issues until they are beaten to death.

I can barely watch the news any more because every station or paper is trying to come up with a new slant on how to beat a 'hot' subject to death. Everyone is reaching for that Pullitzer and they don't care whose lives they destroy in the process. In the 40 odd years that I have been paying attention to 'current events,' I gotta say that the freedom of the press has gotten out of hand. Maybe there is too much competition between the various outlets, or maybe liberal arts degrees aren't worth the paper they are printed on, but from innocent slanting of an article to outright fabrications, I venture to say that fully HALF of what we read in print or see on TV is pure, unadulterated crap.

It shames me to think of how this freedom of the press is being abused. I can hardly blame the Chinese government for wanting to clamp down on the press in their country. Our press has become a wasteland of the disenfranchised, jaded and lazy.

This is not merely about blaming the press for GM's failures. This is about the entire downfall of our civilization unless we start demanding more from the press.

agree 100%. as an aside, read auto extremists rant for this week (similar sentiment and spot on).

[enzl]

the whole point of this thread is that you'd buy a lambda over any of the envoys, uplanders, AND q7's, mdx's, toaregs, ugly ass pilots (saw one yesterday holy &#036;h&#33; its brutal), terrible highlanders, etc.

we're fully aware GM's product cycles are too long on a lot of those CSV's and trailblazers etc. that is rippable. but cmon, the lambdas are the front line products to phase all those other ones out.

For clarity, I think our arguments sidetracked the thread...I've got no beef with the Lambdas as product. They are the 7/8 passenger CUV I would happily recommend to a friend. They are arguably best in segment--although their sheer size makes it hard to state exactly what segment that is exactly....

My exclusive issue with the Lambdas is the proliferation to 4 makes. I believe the Traverse makes sense--and the Enclave is the best Buick in 20 years. It's the Acadia and Outlook that trouble me---especially the Saturn, as I don't believe the market is ready for 40K Saturns---and the sales figures seem to support that statement.

To me, I'd sooner see Outlook's marketing $ go towards the 4 cylinder Aura and Astra--the development money saved could have shaved a few pounds off the Vue while they were at it...

...which is central to the issue of too many divisions..blah, blah, blah....It's all interelated, unfortunately.

[Intrepidation]

Back to the Traverse, I do really like it. I think the styling has warmed up to the point that it's more dynamic than the Outlook or Acadia. It looks very sharp in the awesome deep red Chevy has been using lately. The interior also looks nice, but I hope the production version rectifies the concerns all of the reviewers have had about the actual quality.

[CARBIZ]

Let's hope GM kills the TB and Envoy QUICK. Now that Chevy is about to get a Lambda, there is no excuse for the TB any more.

[regfootball]

For clarity, I think our arguments sidetracked the thread...I've got no beef with the Lambdas as product. They are the 7/8 passenger CUV I would happily recommend to a friend. They are arguably best in segment--although their sheer size makes it hard to state exactly what segment that is exactly....

My exclusive issue with the Lambdas is the proliferation to 4 makes. I believe the Traverse makes sense--and the Enclave is the best Buick in 20 years. It's the Acadia and Outlook that trouble me---especially the Saturn, as I don't believe the market is ready for 40K Saturns---and the sales figures seem to support that statement.

To me, I'd sooner see Outlook's marketing $ go towards the 4 cylinder Aura and Astra--the development money saved could have shaved a few pounds off the Vue while they were at it...

...which is central to the issue of too many divisions..blah, blah, blah....It's all interelated, unfortunately.

i still think the outlook was or is a bridge product. stuff a large crossover in saturn's showroom to makeover their model line, while the Ion and old Vue were in demise. I don't think they expected it to be a central point of the lineup or more than 15% of their needed volume, but they needed it to fill in with aura, sky, and the lower volume astra. then, when the chevy comes out, which turns out to be 2 years later, replace the outlook with a new one that is different, maybe smaller, etc. At the time the lambdas came out chevy still had their hat in the 7 passenger trailblazer and likely did not foresee large 3 row CUV volumes. Now they do.

My own feeling is Lambdas could be GMC and chevy and optional saturn redone as a euro (give it a fastback like the CX-9 and opelize the interior). I think the buick should be packaged more like the RX or veracruz....or old rendezvoux. The escalade now i can see moving to lambda for mileage reasons, as long as they can really differentiate it.

I am most curious as to how the new SRX turns out, actually. I doubt it will drive as well as the current one, but the package will look much better and be more female friendly.

outlook = think odyssey in reverse. honda brought over a small odyssey to fit the placeholder in their lineup and then the next generation got it ideal (although they upsized it). i think the outlook is the same thing, the current one is just a placeholder, but something more appropriately sized and flavored will arrive just as the traverse ramps up. that will end up being 3-4 years. which if you think about it is at least 100k sales they took in. i dont have a problem with that.

the current astra is a just a placeholder too.

Edited July 3, 2008 by regfootball