VenSeattle

I haven't proved any point that you've made. I have answered some of your questions though... The losses are still from the SAAB division. Neglect does not make the red ink disappear. If that was the case, then Oldsmobile & Saturn's losses would be completely excused as well. No one here is denying neglect or mismanagement... you just couldn't accept that SAAB is costing GM money.

GM has been very open about SAAB being unprofitable... that's common knowledge. I believe SAAB has been unprofitable 13 years out of the past 15 years. Someone has to pay for being in the "red" and that's been GM. Tack on the investment amount of 50% back in 1989/1990 ($600 million) & the final 50% in 2000 ($125 million) and you've got even more "red" to add to the bottom line. So, if you want to "take exception" to my post, then at least have justification. Here's one article I found that helps in answering your questions... The cost is at least in the Billions so far, because GM's been paying every penny since 2000. GM hasn't broken even on the investments to develop the new 9-3, refreshed 9-5, rebadged 9-7x or 9-2x. Oh... and not to mention the costs to maintain "SAAB specific" facilities and the annual salaries of all the "SAAB specific" employees in Sweden (between 5,500-6,000 employees)

The exact figures would be good to know. Maybe you should find out before taking exception to it... Looks like you have some research ahead of you. Most of GM's NA divisions have been profitable over the past several years... only SAAB, Saturn, & Oldsmobile haven't been. Although GM bought 100% of SAAB in 2000, GM has owned 50% of SAAB since 1990.

Eh... I'm torn by his advice. I can see justification in cutting the dividend. GM is losing money. Stockholders need to look at long-term benefit also. I'd give up 50% of the dividend if it will eventually lead to GM's stock price increasing (back up) to $40-$60 a share. SAAB... SAAB has burned through a lot of GM dollars. SAAB loyalists don't even want GM owning SAAB. It would be a win/win if GM would just sell (or even give) SAAB away to someone. Even if SAAB is profitable this year or next, GM will probably never recover the costs that it took to get SAAB back in the black. Subaru would be the best pairing up IMO. HUMMER... yes, right now it seems NUTS to sell HUMMER but where will it go from here? A Wrangler competitor and then what? If GM wants to sell HUMMER, then this is the time to do it. Not after it becomes dated and ideas run dry. HUMMER's appeal can disappear in a heartbeat if GM lets it languish at any point. I'm sure DCX would be there to buy HUMMER at a premium if GM would sell it. GM could give the Wrangler competitor (and a spin-off for an FJ Cruiser competitor) to GMC and call it a day. Don't know... I'm still torn.

Go to Buick.com and click on the Enclave info towards the bottom right. It has an event schedule. Unfortunately, I don't see Philly. Next stop is Washington DC and then Chicago.

Why do you think they're trying to fool anyone? Invoice prices aren't what control the big rebates... it's the inflated MSRPs that do. The MSRPs are now much closer to actual transaction prices and lower than many competitors. Yes, less is coming off the MSRPs to reach the same sale price, but the point is to offer a good price right from the start. When someone performs comparative research on a car website and sees the GM vehicle at a similar price or even thousands below that of competitors it will eventually give the impression of a good value. This also (as recently mentioned) helps GM vehicles to maintain a higher resale value since the MSRPs are no longer inflated.

Facelifted 2006 Malibus are very inexpensive now: 2006 Chevrolet Malibu LS: $16,365 2006 Hyundai Sonata GL: $17,895 2006 Malibu SS w/240hp is only $22,865 2006 Toyota Camry SE V6 is $24,025 2006 Honda Accord LX V6 is $25,100 2006 Mits Galant LS 230hp V6 is $22,999

Well, I wouldn't imagine invoices dropping much, if any, because it's not costing GM any less to build these vehicles. The good that's come from this is that the Lucerne is now even more competitive to the Avalon and the price difference between the Limited & CXS is pretty much gone($450 difference): Avalon XL: $26,625* Avalon XLS: $31,075* Avalon Limited: $33,815* Lucerne CX: $25,265* Lucerne CXL V6: $27,265* Lucerne CXL V8: $29,265* Lucerne CXS: $34,265* (*Shipping/destination charges not included)

Is GMC still expected to get the 2nd Lambda minivan instead of Saturn?

I'm sure it is only a matter of time before they adjust their requirements because... Target identified.

Let's go ahead and continue the discussion here since the official pics are out: http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...?showtopic=4824

Hmmm... which one do you think most buyers will want to drive? 2007 Chrysler Aspen: 2007 GMC Yukon: And people want to bash GM's "cheap looking" column shifters...

Instrumentaion graphics were changed, wood-toned steering wheel added, and the (new for 2002) center console had wood-tones added. Then there are the exterior changes: portholes, chrome tip exhaust, chrome wheels, and new grille. All of the updates were minor but incredibly successful in breathing new life into the Park Avenue for a few more years.

By real do you mean functional? The 2003-2005 Park Avenue Portholes are factory installed and go through the sheetmetal. They aren't glued on/stamped on like the ones available aftermarket. The believe the new Lucerne's portholes penetrate the sheetmetal too.

If I recall correctly, CTS will be replaced in 2007 as a 2008 model. The compact Cadillac BRX cuv should be here in 2008 or so. The SRX refresh was postponed but could have been cancelled entirely since the 2nd gen will be out before decade end. No news on the ULS, but if the GMTs are a hit, I'm sure we'll hear or see something about the ULS before decade end. Also, the Europe only BLS will have a short run with the next gen BLS expected to be sold in the US, Europe, and (more than likely) Asia. No neglect here.

They became standard on Park Avenue Ultras in 2003 when it received a minor facelift and interior update. :)

I'm really liking this.

I'm somewhere between :rotflmao: and I can't believe that made it to production.

Another thing I like about the Enclave... This vehicle would not fit in Chevrolet or Cadillac. GM has a special need for vehicles like this. Buick has a purpose. As for my previous RX comment, I don't foresee the next Toyota Highlander coming close to the Enclave either. Buick is positioning itself more inline with the premium brands. That's undeniably evident.

It looks like Buick may get its $3 Billion investment after all. Forget comparing the Enclave to Chrysler & Mercury... This looks better than the Lexus RX with out being a Lexus clone. This looks like a Buick. I'm very pleased.

GM is going to sell sooo many GMT 900s... This is the home run GM needed.

ES330 2005 sales were actually 67,577. Toyota Press Release for 2005 sales

Over 10 years later and it still looks like a concept car brought to life. I don't think the 1st Gen Aurora will ever look dated.

Here's another article in Forbes regarding Buick/GM performance in China... YES! Global Buick sales are over 500,000! Now if only Buick's reputation would carry over to Europe!

Actual press release with complete sales info Buick Terraza: 20,288 Saturn Relay total: 15,758 Pontiac Montana SV6: 23,439 Chevrolet Uplander: 72,980 Chevrolet Venture: 7,029 Pontiac Montana: 3,732 BPG dealers moved 47,459 minivans in 2005. Chevrolet dealers moved 80,009 minivans in 2005. Saturn dealers only moved 15,758 minivans in 2005. Don't be too disheartened about Buick's decrease in sales. The short production run for LeSabre impacted Buick a lot. The good thing about this is that Buick should definitely post a sales increase in 2006 with full year LaCrosse & Lucerne sales combined. (fixed the link)