turbo200

sheer stupidity yet again on the time it's coming here. i feel like a broken record with the ignorant GM line. on the issue of who it competes with, GM still has the time to option this one correctly, with the right trim, right engine lineup, etc. as a buick this should only work if it has the right premium design. though i think the insignia is a very well designed car and i loved it as a middle of the road Saturn, i think the premium division needs something more special to be more...premium.

import owners may be hard-coded or 'single-mindedly' in love with thier imports.....but as i've been saying all along the way to anyone's heart is through irresistable design. no one can resist a figure like heidi klum's regardless what color she comes in.

loyalty is different from blind ignorance....but i digress for my next car I want a Chevrolet Camaro, or an Audi A1, or a 3-series coupe, or a Mini Cooper S, or my last baby Acura RSX Type-S If I weren't loyal to GM and believe in thier cause, I wouldn't spend so much of my free time giving them free advice.

apparently you didn't read my post. i complimented the CTS' stylized interior. i dissed them on quality and focus, and emphasis on the little parts where excellence really shows its face or lack thereof.

you're not among those he was referring to. you belong to a less partisan group that looks at cars for what they are, without affectation to one particular brand or company.

I can't speak for others here, but i personally spend a lot less time thinking this over than you think. i don't let myself come up with assumptions about anyone, but i do let them show me who they are. i can't say that doesn't often end up in me being able to typify some aspect of thier lives in a common set, but that is humanity, we are all alike in one way or another. let me also say something about stereotypes and perception: at some level down to the fundamental piece of a stereotype, there is at least a kernel of truth to it. they are based in reality. the perception is out there that GM builds crap cars. a lot of people tend to agree on this without anyone telling them the truth. tell me did GM revolutionize interiors and engine efficiency to stem the tide of this perception? I could spend more time giving you examples but if this one doesn't jump out at you, then right now i don't care to spend the time. also, you may have to take your GM blinders. no, improved efficiency on the gas guzzling v8s doesn't count, as that is not an efficient market or engine in the first place. in order to be perceived as efficient you have to be in the efficient category, not the one most rightfully perceive to be gas inefficient. on the other hand people out there have a perception that honda builds incredibly durable product that never breaks down. have they built lemon after lemon models in order to go against this accepted form of common wisdom? did they support the theory by building doors that shut right with a solid feel, spend money on simple things like the window glass shutting to keep all air inside [this is a honda method keeps the cabin airtight like a plane, keeps my car less cold inside than others i know of], do they spend money where it counts updating platform and engine components consistently? Britney Spears spent a lot of time acting trashy, so people thought that about her. now she is much more guarded and living a life less in the public eye, so the perception has changed and people have accepted her more for the positive things she seeks to portray, on top of that the negative talk has quieted. how the people perceive is ultimately most in the control of the subject.

cnbc

i think we ought to give GM a chance to show what it can come up with. I'd like to see thier vision for what a new Buick premium compact, Astra, would look like. I know a premium Delta compact is already in the works for Buick China though, so how does that really make sense to have yet again overlapping product plans for the same basic product and going after the same basic market segment? I beleive Buick will make fine use of Opel's upcoming design language. But I hope it only really applies to already developed cars like the Insignia. The rest can have a more Buick forward fashion look to them. I really liked the Riviera concept; I think it's precisely the bold thinking that should become Buick in order for them to make a splash. But I don't think that exact car really fits Buick's persona, both of the past, present, and where I think it should be headed in the future given its heritage. This is the important point. I believe compact cars with a sporting character are much more applicable at Pontiac. this is why I wish Corsa and Astra with engaging styling will cement a new Pontiac premium sports car division. astra at the saturn division is really a good model of what a pontiac should look like. it has a basic model that is still premium in looks and feel, while maintaining an aggressive feel. i beleive astra in order to be a pontiac should have a more premium interior, the materials are already top notch, but the style needs to have more pizazz for what i think pontiac should be. the exterior also should have slightly more aggressive overtones, with no plastic wheeels/wheel covers. i honestly think the astra served as a pontiac could be selling over 100k units......perhaps up to 160-180k. but of everything the most important thing going forward is that GM start to really develop a coherent design theme for these brands that is fitting with the past, that gets to the core of the history these makes have. more important than jumping the gun and importing the corsa here is making sure we get the right looking corsa, or whatever to make a splash at pontiac.

this despite the fact that everytime GM issues one of these apologies, a consensus seems to build that this is right thing to do and GM's marketing is addressing failures. then within a month everything goes back, "GM has never done a bad thing ever. it's the media. it's all one big black hole conspiracy. everyone's out to get GM. they are this decade's AREA 51. i mean could anyone fathom having more important things to do than bring down GM. impossible [spanish accent]!~!!"

to yet again defend my position as if i'm some boogeyman out to get GM as a whole, CTS has controls on the center stack in particular that feel dated and cheaper than the standards, BMW Audi MB...they are stylized as a whole on a level not yet seen within GM, which is a great thing. but there are still some tolerance levels and complacency within the CTS interior, last I checked. I'll assume nothing has changed. the controls on the center stack, the door panels, the dash panel quality all were not as good as an Audi, and now the new C-class. I thought they were good enough to be in a luxury class. honestly, just barely good enough when compared with how far the competition sets the bar. the problem is the competition keeps setting the tone, and I have a great memory. other less discerning consumers, the average buyers Cadillac goes after anyways, won't care or know any better.

it's sad and amazing and at once laughable that thier problems could be summed up so equivocally and concisely, but there it is. fundamentally none of these were bad vehicles, but they had terrible styling, inside and out, poor attention to the function of styling inside and out through the use of good quality materials on the interior and forward thinking designs on the outside. great vehicles with awful styling.

there isn't some kind of anti vendetta thing going on when it comes to GM. it's simply admitting responsibility and claiming the flag to move forward. people out in the country who have dealt with gM know they generally make reliable vehicles, otherwise they'd be in a much worse position. GM has a good loyalty rate, if not for the fact that the cars run well this would not happen. by admitting quality has had hiccups [read the line it says this in other words] and that design has been a big drawback, then they are taking responsiblity, and by doing this could incur good will. plus if they're willing to acknowledge a problem, that means hopefully showing they understand the depth of thier situation and how to get out of it. i do believe it's fair for people to judge GM to not be the best automaker out there. i also beleive it's fair for GM to admit they should have always been the best, and have not been.

something everybody's missed is that we're pretty much already there. not too long ago, before the current gen civic was released or right around that time, honda quietly announced it'd be increasing the prices on all its redesigned models, set to go for a more premium image. the deal was definitely felt with civic, that car moved up to a $17k-23k range [top for the hybrid model, base civic DX doesn't count since it doesn't come with AC, CD, more than 2 speakers or power windows/locks]. civic hybrid at $23k sells more than 30k/units this year, more in a good year. civic has a premium feel thanks to good, progressive design and incredible for the price engineering. however material richness and design could stand to be more attractive....this is where room exists for someone else to steal the thunder. of course honda has tons of built in equity thanks to a legendary image of practicality, quality, efficiency, and durability. someone else to rock this market would need to come in at a lower price with a better product, something revolutionary with a fantastic design. my point is, looking at pricing for Jetta, Corolla, Civic especially we are already there in the premium compact market. with room for change as well

don't forget we were previewed a version of an insignia coupe, already bearing more than a resemblance to G6....

historical presedence just doesn't work in this case. the quality product that opel is producing today has yet to be funneled through a proven distribution system. saturn is not a testbed for opel's success. i would love to see a new astra with some pontiac specific sheetmetal. that being said, given pontiac's current circumstances, simply rebadging the current opel astra opc would be a huge improvement.

both amg c63 and the regular c has one of the best sedan designs inside and out, for me. i love it. inspected a mid or low level interior closely, the materials were first rate, sadly much better than CTS, everything had a strong substantial immovable feeling, more than can be said for some of the materials inside CTS. i like both, but I think the C is the most well rounded small sedan in looks alone.

I think you must be saying the XF shares platforms with those cars, but it has nothing in common with them. it rides on the XJ alluminum platform, 95% sure. definitely not a FWD based platform though, check those dash to axle proportions.

aside from XFE, are these cars mass marketed enough for people to actually buy them in droves? malibu barely has an incremental gas mileage increase, and isn't available in any good volumes. E85 is not available everywhere, does not seem to be the solution. XFE is a boring car, not progressive or sophisticated in design for today's consumer. this is all for show, and frankly, it's to manipulate the people. it's a show and there's a lot of hipocracy involved. i'm glad the people ain't buying it. where was GM building the most fuel efficient high quality cars years ago. how about fashioning some good looking cars outside of CTS [G8 and malibu]. how about some quality we can all be proud of, to impress ourselves and our friends. i'm sorry for expecting the best out of one of the biggest companies in the world. prius sells to over 180k people a year civic hybrid sells to over 30k people civic with 35mpg sells 340k units a year

right, the whole point in making a plan is making one viable. if they made the decision to keep pontiac and utilize resources to keep it around, then they should max out the potential, and not just be silly about it. "performance cars" aren't all 400 hp beasts. the miata is one of the best handling cars out there. altima is considered a sporty sedan with great handling. the old 240sx had barely 140hp, but was an amazing drive. performance cars are about fun to drive characteristics, good power is just one of those characteristics, and is one that is defined differently. fuel efficiency and performance cars are not mutually exclusive. i won't get my panties wound up over one person's comments about what Pontiac will remain or won't be. however, it would be tantamount to traitorism if GM took the money out of our pockets and then stupidly changed course on a plan or did not make the most of what is left of itself.

the A1 sportback concept points to the future production A1 set to arrive here possibly next year [though it doesn't seem set in stone it will come here.] we can only guess as to how closely Audi will follow it, but the whole things looks entirely doable. certainly i can point to it and say Pontiac should be producing a car like this. this leads in to my overall point that GM doens't understand the market or reaching the poeple in thier individual intrests in cars. I don't think anyone can or does lessen the overall idea that GM has had a mixture of issues leading to its collaps, chief among them poor product, poor decision-making, and some bad luck. however, i've pointed to a few immediate failures that have been talked about extensively here over the last decade. the point behind my first post is to say rebates and decision-making like the thought behind the rebates have helped lead the company to its current demise. that is what i've felt has not been communicated effectively enough on certain media sources.

get a grip. the 'malicious lies' he's spreading are his opinion and can be interpreted that way by anyone with a working 14 year old literary understanding. an opinion is not a fact, and is limited in its reach, because others have differing opinions and viewpoints. he is clearly mad. there are many other opinions out there, more fully based in fact. the only thing he says that is of any relevance is he thinks GM will be bought out by a hedge fund, and even that is just opinion based in his version of the facts. Porsche is a business. GM is a business. you have no affiliation to either. you are simply affectionately tied to one. the one that's not making profit. you hate the other, the one that does make the profit, seemingly, out of blind hatred and jealousy, because they are successful, at making a profit. the media will move on from this, this quote will not get spread around like religion, virtually no one cares what the head of Porsche thinks outside of the performance of his own company since he is closely aligned and familiar with his company's situation. the media will move on from this faster than you can say 'Dec.2 is the day automakers return to the Hill to provide thier plans for prosperity, and make one last bid to convince the lameduck Congress to give them aid.'

GM needed an effective leader to effectively communicate to Congress, to the Union, that selling cars in America was a losing proposition because of the cost inherently in supporting legions of workers, versus more cost effective import carmakers. Period. this needed to happen a decade ago, as long as I can recall business analysts complaining GM's business model wasn't built for utmost success. GM needed to get the cost disparity evaporated. Instead they sacrificed quality and pushed product through rebates over the last decade. first they sold a car that was more costly to make because of outstanding liabilities, on top of that they further eroded profit by pushing discounts because people didn't want to spend the money on cars that didn't live up to the quality the competition had. So it all goes back to problem one: quality. The thing I've been railing on for the better part of this decade on this site. the other thing, great design, desirable design, also a big problem with their cars. so thier obviously shortsighted answer is to try their hardest to keep the plants running, to make the money they needed for retirees, current workers, all the while winding down until the last day the camel could hold the load. instead of fighting this issue out, looking for government assistance, hiring an outside arbitrator to create the business and PR case....they tried thier damndest to keep the clock running. God knows they have tried. Acadia, Tahoe, Escalade, Malibu, CTS, G8, Solstice/SKY all have some of the best execution of any GM product, ever. Look at that line of product though, the only mass market car is the Malibu, the only one marketed as such. the others are non-primary cars. in another decade this would have been enough of a dramatic shift in the lineup. this decade it has proven too little too late. my problem with the execution of the line is the shortsightedness of some decision-making and the tardiness of the most important product. Zeta has been out for over a year, and Camaro, a 100k vehicle and image-building dream is still 4 months away. Traverse, the 4th Lambda will flounder, and Cobalt could have used the money spent on marketing and redoing that line on a serious MCE; after all small cars account for over 300k annual sales at Honda and Toyota. Tiger Woods was making more than 10 million a year, barely let go at an irrevelant brand that shouldn't see another dime outside Enclave until thier product mess is cleaned. small cars have been ignored. medium cars have been perpetually lagging in design and quality, when the fundamentals are actually really good. large cars have been seriously outdated for some time. engines and transmissions are finally something that have been changed over to quality and refined designs, after years of being behind the competition.

if this were any other business, they would have failed or management would have been fired long ago. i believe GM is finally going in the right direction, but how many times has that been said and the results, the actual luster to the product, the thing I want to aspire to own, has failed to live up to expectations. as fans, all we can ask is that our cars be properly executed and that the marketing live up to what we expect for these storied models. GM has failed so badly on those two points in the last decade, they deserve to completely be wiped off the table. however, being a fan of cars in general it would be a sad day to see some of these models and makes not live up to thier potential and given their day to shine. i have been with gm egging them on to succeed and trying to refocus them on the core issue every buyers looks at in thier everyday lives. it has been thier fault for failing to understand what motivates US. any other business would have been catapulted already. I feel management needs to completely step aside, perhaps if CPF has not been with the business too long, he can be promoted to CEO, but they need outsiders to turn this ship around. I am growing more disappointed and disallusioned with not seeing that promised product renaissance by the second, i am tired of being patient.

it's true that some market analysts have taken a strong stance against the bailout. some are in favor, but mostly it is government officials, democrats and barack obama, leading the charge that governmental loans along with some kind of restructuring and a solid plan going forward for market prosperity are the way forward for automakers. for any kind of positive drumbeat going for the automakers getting any money, we have the democrats to thank really. most free market analysts look at GM as a loss. why? here's one topic that has been touched on but not been scrutinized enough. product acceptance, perception, and the problems GM and Ford have with selling thier cars in America. this all goes back to 2001. After September 11, GM launches the "Keep America Rolling" plan, launches 0% financing, and freely gives away cars, deeply discounting models IN ADDITION to cheap, easyily acceisble financing. those rebates and financing continued throughout the years. everytime it seemed GM was losing ground in terms of volume, it seemed as though executives were not confident enough to cede the market share projection for the year and turned another 0% plus phenom for the sofa and potato chips crowd. Since GM is the Goliath, Ford and Chrysler always inevitably matched. REBATES. Product perception. Product quality. Fundamental issues in how we should look at the GM quandry today. why was product quality sacrificed in the first place? why did GM try to sell an inferior product that felt and looked inferior, and still does to this day in the form of cheaper quality materials in some models, in the form of unfashionable and long in the tooth design, in the form of cheap engines and cheaper still suspensions. cheap cheap cheap was a word easily associated with all things GM. so you mean to say on top of the fundamental market forces pushing buyers to imports, better resale value, higher quality perception, higher reliability and longevity ratings, even with all that, GM sold products that felt cheaper too. And still do. they used rebates that stole all thier profits to prop up the product. instead of refocusing, they went discount crazy and didn't solve the actual problem, again. after decades of not getting the actual problem, not solving the bigger issues, GM still looked at the short term solution. keep the factories running at full steam, keep the pension and health care issues, worker wages under your belt, don't solve that issue the correct way. keep going with a non-functioning business model, one that couldn't weather a storm, one that was one snap away from completely breaking. Should we consider it blind faith or business malpractice?

did you listen to anything he said or did you just hit the automatic respond, mode:dumbass button? clearly he thinks Ford and GM have a lot of clout in our country, and from his perspective the American market seems to be of big consequential importance; those are both good things in my book. i don't know what he means to say with the comment about bringing the industry to the brink of ruin or turning everything into turmoil...BUT it sounds like anger and bruised retaliation more than outright evil. what is not surprising but simply dumbfounding to me is why you let something like what he says bother you. who cares? you should be applauding how he defends the little guy, the one no one pays attention to, yet the whole system relies on, and he goes after the big guy for cornering the market and govt into what many percieve to be a sour deal.