VenSeattle

WHY give Buick the Enclave and GMC the Acadia... and then turn around and rebadge a Saturn for Chevrolet???? WHY?! I know I've said this before but quit making half baked mistakes and just fold Pontiac & GMC into Buick and give Chevrolet the Acadia: Buick cars: Compact RWD Sedan & Coupe - (former G5/G6 replacement) Midsize RWD Sedan - (former Grand Prix replacement) Epsilon II FWD/AWD (Lacrosse replacement to go aqainst ES350) Large RWD sedan (Lucerne/Royaum replacement Riviera coupe convertible (Former GTO replacement) Wildcat roadster (Kappa II - Solstice replacement or current Solstice reskin) Rendezvous (compact/midsize CUV - Torrent Theta replacmeent) Enclave (Large CUV - Lambda) GMC Truck names will transfer easily: Yukon (XL; Denali) by Buick Envoy (Denali) by Buick Canyon - by Buick Sierra (Denali) by Buick Savana (Lambda minivan/fullsize van?) by Buick All sold though one sales channel - under one brand - with a 4yr/50k warranty Buick Grade: Premium - Powerful - Professional ---------------------------------------------------------- Bash this idea all you want... but it beats reinventing three brands and making stupid last minute desperate changes. GM should have designed 4 unique Lamda SUVs if they intended to do this. I hate logging into C&G to find out stupid GM decisions like this one. "We build Confusion" is correct.

Congrats! Looks like you two had a lot of fun. How many times did you restyle your facial hair on the trip? Just teasing!

Thanks PurdueGuy!

Don't toss three years away over this. Yes, what he did was disrespectful... but he was paying for his own lunch and he didn't want to go there. I'd recommend to get your "Chili's fix" earlier in the week and not suggest it to the "lunch group" again. If Ryan is a good guy, he'll eventually suggest it to the group on his own. If he doesn't, you'll still get to go to Chilli's anyways while keeping a friend.

I saw it... was disappointed with how it ended. I didn't stay for the part after the credits. What happened? (or maybe I did and don't remember it...was it the part with Magneto playing chess?)

Evok... all I can say is 'Thank You.' Your last two posts make perfect sense and helped explain the underlying reasoning behind your original posts. I especially enjoyed your reply to ehaase's question.

Dallas isn't bad... neither is Ft Worth. I've attended events at Will Rogers & Ft Worth Convention centers, Kimbell Art Museum, & Bass Hall. They're all very nice venues. As for Dallas... American Airlines Center & Nasher Sculpture Center both opened since I've moved so I haven't checked them out yet. I'm looking forward to Dallas completing their Arts District renovations (Dallas Center) which will include a new Opera House and Theatre. The Meyerson will be incorporated into "Dallas Center." I don't know how much has changed since this article... but there are a couple of artist drawings here in this article: http://www.dallasperformingarts.org/images...CPA_DCPAF_1.jpg http://www.dallasperformingarts.org/images...istrict_alt.jpg My friends and family in Dallas try to keep me up to date as much as possible. Believe it or not, but I still take 'D Magazine' & 'Texas Monthly.' Home grown roots die hard.

Josh... Look at the spacing between the front door & front fender... I don't think they're on the same platform:

Looks good. The LWB+LHD Chevrolet looks good. It'll make a great Impala. I actually like the stance of the LWB for a Buick. Looking forward to seeing more.

I like it. It looks like the 2008 Malibu will be a genuine replacement for the current Malibu & W-platform Impala. Perhaps Chevrolet won't need a FWD Caprice afterall to fill the void left by the Impala going RWD? Between these spy photos and the image Evok provided, I think the next Malbu has a strong chance to pull in more retail sales than the current duo.

Bellevue, WA... Yes, I like where I live. I could see moving to Vancouver or Portland though. Even though I love Dallas, I haven't convinced myself to consider moving back anytime soon. Visiting every year is sufficient.

If you believe buyers are avoiding GM because of probable bankruptcy (yet would remain in business), do you believe buyers will risk purchasing a competitive crossover knowing there could be no dealerships left to service them (along with no resale value) if Mitsubishi backs out of the US? I think the public will play it safe and buy a Toyota RAV4 or Saturn VUE (or the upcoming 2008/9 VUE). Anyways, correct me if I’m wrong, but won’t the new Outlander only have 220hp? And its so-called 'third row' looks very cheap… especially with those goofy headrests:

But... Mitsubishi has 'Japanese Quality' and 'Japanese Reliability' along with no Legacy costs like GM!! How could this happen!?!? Good riddance.

GM's marketshare is inconsequential. It does not determine GM's success. Toyota can overtake GM and that would just place GM as #2. GM won't magically disappear or die if it drops from #1. However, dropping to #2, #3, or lower won't guarantee GM’s profitability either.

Different approach... So I don’t know what I’m talking about and I’m wordy. That’s fine. I honestly would like you to help me understand. I’ll illustrate the inferred solution by your original illustration... a Perfect Case Scenario: 1) Fairfax, Oshawa 1, Oshawa 2, & Orion all manufacture Impalas 2) Chevrolet continues to sell the same volume of midsize sedans as GM does today: 64,000 monthly sales volume. Do you believe this would actually solve GM's problems? Would GM be profitable if the above was true? I honestly don't believe so, which is why I find your illustration flawed. All it says to me is that the Chevrolet Impala was able to beat Toyota Camry in sales. It doesn't guarantee GM would be profitable doing so. The Impala already outsells Ford, DCX, Hyundai, Subaru, Mitsubishi, VW, and Nissan midsize rivals on an individual basis. Why would going from #3 to #1 make that much of a difference in GM's current condition? Yes, you mention a decrease in development, engineering, and sales channels costs but I feel there are far more underlying expenses crippling GM than a single 'volume leader' or 'Home Run' would fix... nor the elimination/consolidation of 6 midsize sedans would be able to resolve. Overall, I don't think it is so much as GM's strategy that's broken, but GM's structure behind it. Maybe you had something else in mind. Are you implying GM should drop 5 midsize offering, shutter two plants, and dissolve three brands? That still wouldn’t guarantee GM a single ‘home-run’ midsize sedan. Or… are you just questioning (out loud) the market health of GM’s 64,000 monthly sales?

Evok, HHR & Cobalt are very similar to the development of the Corolla/Matrix. Same platform, two vehicles, attacking two different parts of the compact market. The HHR is as much Cobalt as the Matrix is Corolla. There's no difference. HHR is a GM's unique answer to the Matrix. Yes, GM is less efficient than Toyota and Honda, but GM still sells 64,000 midsize vehicles a month on two platforms(include the upcoming est 9k-10k for the Aura... and you have 74,000.) Toyota sold 43,000 using one variant on one platform. Honda used three variants on one platform (TL, TSX, Accord) and sold barely more than Toyota... 46,464. Honda even sucks and is inferior when compared in the similar fashion as you have with 'GM & Toyota.' Your point about Subaru, Hyundai, etc is invalid because they follow a marketing "structure" like you want GM to follow. They should be able to compete against Toyota one-on-one... just like you're expecting GM to do. The fact is they don't. They don't even compete against several single variants off GM's two platforms. One would think their position would be far more vulnerable/volatile than GM's because of their lack of diversity and flexibility of multiple brand images. If they become a “damaged brand” they’re dead. See Mitsubishi. Your comparison is strictly relative and only produces the results you want when using Toyota & GM. It's a flawed comparison to illustrate success. A single product volume is not necessarily the key to its own success or a defining factor to the success of a company as a whole. The loathed Pontiac G6: 11,534 Highly regarded Subaru Legacy: 7,197 Snubbed Chevrolet Impala: 23,702 Elevated Hyundai Sonata: 17,035 Old-School Premium Buick LaCrosse: 4,990 Renowned VW Passat: 4,545 This paints a different picture. These smaller companies can’t match GM’s single variants (that benefit from lower engineering costs due to platform sharing) yet you want to focus on and condemn GM for not matching one of Toyota’s. I think those smaller manufacturers need to be worried about GM if GM is able to hold on and bring to market the new RWD & Espilon II vehicles. If they can't match/beat GM when GM's products are as weak (or as average) as they are now, how will they compete in 3-4 years?

My comment was to point out the focus by Nissan & Toyota in pushing into this market full force while its future is uncertain, at best. Yes, GM & Ford have several plants that produce trucks/SUVs but that came from organic growth over the years as the market increased. Toyota & Nissan don't currently have the market share in trucks/SUVs to justify plants dedicated to the output of several 100,000. It's all built on hope. Toyota & Nissan may have money to burn, but their investing in the Truck/SUV market appears to be far riskier, less researched, and simply blind when compared to GM's and Ford's. Timing is everything, and they're both far guiltier of bad timing than GM & Ford.

If GM & Ford see that much of a hit, how are Toyota and Nissan going to justify their new Titan & Tundra plants? or the Heavy duty versions? Will the Sequoia, Armada, & QX56 survive? They barely have markets. At least GM & Ford have a certain about of brand loyalty built up to sustain some market share. I have a feeling if you propose happens, Canton will be building a lot more Altimas and San Antonio will be producing something else entirely.

1 2 9

When excluding fleet sales, GM is still bigger than Ford or Toyota... nationally and internationally. The cuts to reduce Fleet sales help to reduce fleet sale reliance and also helps to increase resale value. Legacy costs, Delphi, Pensions, etc are all one issue. 'Average' interior quality is not 'poor' interior quality. Once GM has caught of to Toyota and Honda in those categories, Toyota and Honda won't have anything left over GM.

Something like Southwest Airline's 'Airline' Reality show? That might be a good idea... but I think it would probably be more on a 'GM dealership' level focusing on daily sales&service experiences. Maybe 'Buick-Pontiac-GMC' dealerships could do this to help promote a new "Professional Grade" ownership experience package.

I haven't read the replies, but I was actually a big fan of Oasis. Cool to hear.

First off... I'm not arguing with you. I just looked at your post again and realized it appears slanted... I think you could have painted the picture far differently. I'm going to look at GM's numbers from a different perspective... ------------------ Compact cars -------------- None of the vehicles listed above compete with the 1 Corolla (Corolla/Matrix). You would have reached your 'total' much quicker had you used them. Delta variants are GM's competitors to the compact market... and GM's Cobalt+HHR are direct competitors to Corolla+Matrix Corolla (Corolla+Matrix) was 41,550. Cobalt: 21,247 HHR: 7,827 ---------------- Total: 29,074 Not to be funny, but almost 30,000 isn't something for Chevrolet to be ashamed of. And it was reached as efficiently as Toyota achieved Corolla's total... However, if you want to compare "GM's" to Corolla, then you'd also include the Delta-based Ion & Corolla-based Vibe. Cobalt: 21,247 HHR: 7,827 ION: 7,782 Vibe: 4,197 -------------- Total: 41,053 Pretty much, Delta variant sales are very close to Corolla (even excluding the Corolla-based Vibe) --------------- Midsize cars --------------- Similar issue happens with the 1 Camry (Camry/Solara) comparison... but less efficiently done... W-platform variant sales come very close to Camry/Solara (43,112): Impala: 23,702 Grand Prix: 6,878 LaCrosse: 4,990 Monte-Carlo: 2,112 ---------------------- Total: 37,682 The 37,682 total does not include the Epsilon-based triplets: Malibu: 12,881 G6: 11,534 9-3: 1,986 ------------- Total: 26,401 Total midsize GM sales for May: 64,083 (using two platforms and several variants) Yes, Toyota achieves its sales more efficiently, but GM still sells more midsize mainstream vehicles, even if you factor out GM's est. 30% to fleets and Toyota's est. 10% to fleets. (You could try and include the 9,554 ES350s into this, but none of GM's FWD midsize sedans compete in that class/market. The ES350 is also engineered, built, and imported completely separate from the Camry. Regardless, Toyota's sales total still doesn't exceed GM's 64,083 when the ES is included. Avalon is separate because GM's G-Platform vehicles compete with the Avalon. G-Platform sales are higher than Avalon so it doesn't work in Toyota's favor. It would probably be best to include the ES350 into an 'ES350+Avalon' group comparison verses the G-Platform twins... just to distinguish between competing classes/markets.) ------------------------------------------------------- Should GM be able to sell more considering how many versions it offers? Yes. But how many 'Chrysler Group' vehicles equal 1 Camry or 1 Corolla? How many Nissans? How many Fords? How many Hyundais? How many years of Mitsubishi, Suzuki, VW, or Subaru sales equal 1 Camry or 1 Corolla? Is it really a viable comparison to the point of preaching doom about GM? Honda is the only one who competes in similar single nameplate volume, but really, what else does Honda offer? Civic & Accord are Honda's entire sedan line-up. Acura could be included, but let's not embarrass Honda. My point is that your comparison is negative regardless of who you choose... Even to Honda. And just because no other manufacturer is as efficient at Toyota, doesn't mean they're all failing or will disappear. Most (if not all) compete far worse to Toyota in terms of volume than GM. Chevrolet was able to sell 29,000 compacts during a time when Corolla had best ever monthly sales. That's a good performance considering how tough the current compact market is. With Impala, Malibu, & Monte Carlo... Chevrolet was able to sell 38,695 midsize vehicles while Camry had its best ever performance numbers. You can paint several different pictures depending on how you want to tally the numbers, but on the car side Chevrolet was competitive to Toyota during May... just not as efficient. As for trucks/SUVs... well, still no comparison. Epsilon II will hopefully consolidate the Epsilon/W-Platform strategy and possibly provide a larger volume Chevrolet sedan that more clearly competes with Camry. In the mean time, the Aura will just increase GM's 64,000 monthly volume of mid-size sedan sales.

Damn... well I hope it improves, at least somewhat moderately, by year's end. I just can't picture the bulk of 2006 retail Impalas or even fleets being base/stripped models.

Well, I hope that this strategy works and increases the average transaction price per Impala. Let's see if it works out by the end of the year. Do you know if the Impala's average transaction price has increased any for the first 5 months?