CARBIZ

For the most part, SUVs, whether big or small, just massage people's egos. There really is no reason for these vehicles to exist, other than someone in Detroit realized 25 years ago that people would be stupid enough to pay a lot more money to be stuffed into a big, heavy gas guzzling STATION WAGON. Even up here in the hinterland we just don't get enough snow to justify the extra cost/expense of the 4WD. And has anyone considered that if YOU are higher up and can SEE better, that perhaps YOU are BLOCKING everyone else's vision????? I love seeing these huge Sequoias, Tahoes, etc. on the expressway with one tiny person sitting behind the wheel. Smart, real smart. So some fool (usually a woman, in this case) convinces themselves that by buying a 4 cylinder version of the SUV that they are somehow helping the environment. I should be up for an Academy Award for acting when I go through the motions of showing an Equinox or Trailblazer (not that we sell many of those any more) to prospects because they will feel "safer" and they will be "higher up." How about a $1,000 per year plate fee for an SUV, unless you can produce a trailer license of sufficient weight to require an SUV (or pickup) to tow it? [Get's off soap box and hides]

The fact that I am on the computer now and NOT at my buddy's cottage should tell you all you need to know. Rain, rain, rain. This is the worst Labor Day weekend that I can remember. It is 12 degrees (58 on the old scale) outside - and I live downtown where it is supposed to be warmer! We opened yesterday at the dealership - the first Labor Day Saturday we've been open in years. Then I was glad it was raining - if it had been sunny and 8 of us were staring at each other there would have been a lotta bitching! Okay, there was a lot of bitching anyway, but it woulda been worse, let me tell ya! My sister is in a tent trailer with 4 screaming brats ( 4 boys, ages 6-13 and they're all hers!) She dropped by Thursday and asked me if I wanted to join them. I asked her if she thought I was high, or stupid. I wonder if the kids are still alive. Or if she is in jail right now! LOL

It's just good to see GM and Ford with a couple of offerings that the critics almost seem to like. For a change.

I just don't understand why Honda trucks are so universally ugly. They build some very attractive cars (the TL's, for example), but their trucks....UGH! Those plastic noses look tacked on. Toyota has far better offerings in the truck department. It's funny, but when GM "dumbs down" its vehicles, the critics are all over it like a bad hair piece - here, its all just excuses and spin. I'd take a Liberty long before I'd drive a CR-V.

I like how the fleet numbers inevitably get dragged into this argument. A sale is a sale. The real debate should be, in the context of diminishing market share, does having 2 or 3 cars fighting in the same market make any sense? This is the real challenge. True, if you walk into a Honda store and don't like the Accord, then Honda is up the creek. If you walk into a Chevy store and don't like the Impala, then they can still show you the Malibu, even (gasp) the Epica OR you could go up the street and see the G6, Grand Prix or even the Allure (or whatever you guys call is down south.) Efficiencies of scale aside, I wonder how many potential customers GM loses because of customer confusion (what, you don't sell the Impala, screw it, I"m going to look at a Ford!). We have had this debate many times here before, but I wonder if anyone has looked at the argument from the customer's point of view? I have seen the look of annoyance flash across a customer's face when they realize they have to get back into their car and drive another mile or so to a Pontiac store to look at the G6 because we don't have it.

He loses all credibility when there are FACTUAL errors in his report. The rest is more just "piling on" BS. You guys need to work a day in a dealership and see the pain a client goes through to afford a new vehicle. Not everybody has $30k-35k (in this market) to drop on a new, family sized vehicle. GM needs to leave the Impala/Malibu as the price leaders and let Buick and Pontiac become the cars for the BMW-wannabees. It is clear that self-appointed enthusiasts don't like the Impala because of the over hangs (like anybody gives a s**t about that!), push rod engine, etc., but AGAIN lost in the shuffle is the 2-3k price differential with respect to the 4 CYLINDER Accord or Camry and SEVERAL thousand dollar difference against the V-6 models. Since when was the Impala EVER the class leader anyway? Even when it sold nearly a million units a year, I don't think the Impala was class leading. Good value, sure. Decent looking and handling, of course. It is important that the Impala does EXACTlY what it does do: decent value, decent packaging, decent ride, decent handling and decent looks. If it can do that AND be cheaper than the competition, then it is a winner. But it is the constant whining and gnashing of teeth from the usual suspects that gnaws away at GM's market share because nothing GM builds is EVER good enough for them. The sheeple who actually read CR, MT (and this guy, Frank) may even think this is factual and buy an Accord or Camry because they are being told they are better cars. What if the new Malibu is $3,000 more expensive than the current one because GM gets it "spot on" for guys like Frank. And what if the new Impala is also "market leading," but $5,000 more? Well, then everyone can bitch about the price and in turn this paves the way for Hyundai to make further incursions into the market. Some people will never be happy until GM and Ford are gone, then they can all pat themselves on the back and say, "See, I was right."

.... or, you could put lipstick and a dress on a donkey (Toyota), turn down the lights and put ecstacy in the punch bowl (media koolaid)....then everyone would get a ride home by 3 a.m.!

I understand that marketing 101 tells you not to bastardize your product by giving it away, but in this competitive market it is unavoidable. There is a far cry difference between dropping prices to maintain market share versus trying to clear out last year's models. Every company on Earth must drop prices on older styles when the new ones come out. I wish this weren't true but it is. GM/Ford, etc. have always had clearance sales. The only thing that has changed is that with so much information out there customers can comparison shop more easily and, thus, realize they could've/should've bought last week. Eaton's was once Canada's biggest department store chain. Over 100 years in business. They tried "lowest prices every day" a few years back and did away with weekly/monthly discounts. Guess what? They went bankrupt and Sears bought them out. I wish consumers were more sophisticated, but most aren't. It embarasses me that free hot dogs and clowns still bring customers in (not that we ever do that, but I know dealerships that do!) There are stores out there that are trying to sell at a "one price" and are failing. People want to feel like they have gotten a "deal," something special that no one else gets. You know, the proverbial free oil changes, etc. I hate the games but they work.

This guy is an assclown, plain and simple. Frank, come down to my dealership and I will show you 10 Impala LS WITH the f'ing console you so adore. As I said earlier: you can get ANY of the Impala models (except the SS) with either the 6 passenger (column shift and fold down armrest) or floor console with console shifter. YOU NEED TO DO MORE RESEARCH AND STOP WHINING ABOUT THINGS THAT CLEARLY ARE NOT IMPORTANT.

I can't comment on what U.S. dealers did, but with the employee pricing up here we were definitely averaging more than $1,000 per vehicle with the rebates GM was giving us. I do not know of any GM dealers up here that sell for less than $1,000 over invoice - even on an Aveo! I know invoice pricing is a bigger deal down south, but up here there are no free or easy ways of getting Canadian invoice pricing so the consumer doesn't have access to that info anyway. I have to say that last August when Employee Pricing was in full swing up here (we started it a month later in Canada) I had my best month in the business, both money wise and volume wise. We do not give away our Chevrolets, yet we have all the major brands within a mile drive of us. And it is true that over at our Toyota store their average transaction price is below what we charge; however, they do soak the customers on used. They average more than $2,500 per used vehicle. So, isn't it interesting that Toyota keeps the selling price of their new vehicles artificially low and their selling price of used very high, thus perpetuating the myth that Toyota builds high demand, high resale value vehicles.

I am a little puzzled as to why they would redesign the sedan, but not the 5 door this year. We sell a lot more of the 5 doors than we do the sedans. The redesign is a big improvement. The interior definitely looks more upscale. I see a big future for GM's marriage with the old Daewoo. The timing couldn't have been better.

Hey, I like Pink...she's got attitude. And I resemble that comment about being a fairy.............!

My brother-in-law had a '86 Camaro with a T-top and it leaked, but that was the '80s. The seals have improved over the years, especially their ability to resist the UV rays that dry them out. Newer ones will last for decades, but they must be MAINTAINED. Clean out the drain holes and the trough around it and treat the gaskets a couple times a year, especially in the north where the winters are harsh. I've sold hundreds of vehicles with sun roofs and other than the odd mechanical failure, my customers have been very happy with them.

It takes no talent to give a car away. I am shocked that nobody has picked up on the REAL part of this story: $500 over invoice? GASP!!! COULD TOYOTA BE DUMPING CARS ON THE AMERICAN MARKET??? NAY! THE SHAME! (Oh, wait - that's just what Toshiba, Hitachi did 35 years ago.) If the Camry is so great, why can they only get $500 over invoice? I would get fired for selling an Impala $500 over invoice. Oh, wait - I guess Toyota would rather pay MT, CR, etc. to give good reviews, rather than let their dealers make any money.

There is usually a lot of dead air in October. If you can't wait, I'd jump now. I don't see 60 months at zero on the HHR - not this year, anyway. The programs haven't been that aggressive since it came out, so I assume from that it is selling well without them. In fact, a base Uplander (ABS, 17" wheels, OnStar, V-6, etc.) is far cheaper than a similar HHR so we've converted a lot of would-be HHR buyers (budget) to the Uplander.

Dealer inventories are at an all time low. We are completely sold out of Optras, Aveos, Malibus (except two Maxx), base Uplanders. The only vehicles we have in quantity are the Cobalt (although all wierd packages and colors, mostly) and the HHR. What GM does is largely based on how many cars are left on ground. I wouldn't expect deals to get any better. We were told at a meeting last week that what we see is what we get. A lot of '07s are already on ground, so I wouldn't expect a long, drawn out clearance sale like last year or the year before. If you can't find anything you like, your best best might be to factory order in mid-October to time its arrival for mid-December when the Boxing Week (month) sales start - your next best opportunity.

I hate beating this subject to death, but a Malibu LS is $18,500 in this market and the Accord is $25,000. For $6,500, I'm sorry, but the Accord is a POS. Consumers are being led by their noses and being told what to like. AWD is completely stupid unless you live in the Himalayas. I had a 4WD Blazer, once upon a time, and I got stuck in a blizzard because it had silly "all-season" tires. There is absolutely nothing wrong with what GM is building today (except possibly the Uplander, but then for $10,000 less than a Sienna I would say it is a helluva buy!) but the snotty, bug up their asses media carp about 18 speed transmissions and electric steering. I am currently driving a 4 cylinder, 4 spd automatic Malibu and, quite frankly, I don't see why anybody NEEDS or REQUIRES more car. It gets 40 (real) mpg, rides well, has lots of pep, has all the power toys - really, why would anyone deliberately spend $6,500 MORE for an Accord? ABS? The "H" on the hood? While on this rant, I watched the clowns on that stupid BBC road show (sorry, I've forgotten the name - I had WAY too much to drink last night) and they loved the Element and only lamented that it currently isn't available in the UK. Lucky them, I say.

Allrighty then, step away from the bottle................................... I'll be the first to admit that we (North) Americans have gotten fat and lazy over the past 50 years. We've had it very easy. Europe was bombed into the Dark Ages twices in the past century - and, yes, we helped to rebuild them. Washington (and Ottawa) certainly seem to have their priorities a little confused. While we Western nations bicker over Kyoto, NAFTA and other issues that only seem important to a select few people, the real business of getting on with business is happening over in Tokyo and Bejing. There is no question in my mind that the potential for us being over run is there. However, there is a big HOWEVER. North America is rich. Very rich. Alberta has more oil than Saudi Arabia. The mid-west could feed the world with its grain. The steel mills (what's left of them, anyway) and coal fields of Pennsylvania, etc. can last us for 500 years. The ingenuity of us North Americans is legendary. All we have to do is tap into that and band together. And stop buying imported goods. That's it for now. I am into my second vodka...

Adolf Hitler's art teacher.

I would go with the 3.5 and try to get a 2001 or 2002 with the Stabilitrak. GM tried to forge the high road by offering that amazing feature on a sub $30k car and it flopped, but it is a good feature to have. As a used car, they are an incredible deal and there should be lots of them coming off 4 year leases now.

For the HHR, the Canadian 2007 price is $260, including 3 months free service. You may be required to upgrade the stereo, however, depending on the model. On the LS, for example, you need to pay for US8 ($325) which upgrades to MP3 compatible, more features on the unit, etc. Some packages (such as on Equinox LT) are now including XM. FYI, I am being billed $45 every 3 months for my service, but that is going up September 1. You can lock into a 1 or 2 year plan for $11 something a month, but you need to do it fast.

We can agree to disagree about the points made, those are their opinions and they are certainly entitled to them. I have no problems with that. However, what I do have a problem with - and what is my major beef with the media in general - is the opening of the article. Having the derisive tone of the supposed passers-by demeaning the Aura setting the theme of the article is just, well, $h!ty. It is down-hill from there. Although perfectly valid to do (if, in fact, they didn't just make up the encounter), why is it necessary to have two snotty passers-by make derogatory remarks about the car? Is it to justify or back up the rest of the article's nit picking? Or does two stranger's opinions somehow make the author feel vindicated in their own opinion? Is the Detroit News upset because the Aura doesn't look like the show car? What is their real reason for slamming this car?

Well, Enzl, you act surprised. Of course this site loves GM's good press. Golly. Go figure: a GM fansite that loves good GM press. C'mon. All the debates are lively on this site. Personally, I love seeing the gnashing of teeth when a rice humper tangles with a GM apologist. It makes for good entertaiment, for sure. But in coverage of the Camaro announcement, the National Post went on and on about how the Camaro is a gas guzzler and how the Ontario Liberal government is encouraging corporate welfare and how the government is being two-faced about Kyoto, etc. when they subsidize (hand outs) GM's building of a "two seater" gas guzzler. Okay, so I know the Post is a Tory (conservative) paper and I know they are taking a few jabs at the ruling Liberal Provincial government, but why slap GM for doing what Toyota has already done in Woodstock and Texas? It is the fault of the state and provincial governments for playing the game with the auto companies in the first place. If Ontario didn't offer hand outs, GM would have threatened to go elsewhere. And the slant of the article is that GM builds gas guzzlers. Again, the double standard. The so-called enthusiasts bitch and whine that Ford and Chrysler both have RWD and GM is late to the party, then when GM does decided to build the car the other half of the media whines that GM is building more gas guzzlers. I emailed Coynes at the Post and told him that I expected this behavior from the Toronto Star, but not the Post.

Well, traffic is down, business is down and our show room could be converted into a bowling alley - GM isn't doing much up here in the hinterland. We have zero percent for 48 months (big deal) on most vehicles and some "under the radar" money, like $1,000 loyalty bucks for owners of Cavaliers/Sunfires. GM has told us to suck it up and dig in. That's what everyone is doing. We are carrying half the inventory that we normally do. Our sister Toyota store sells more on a Saturday than we do in a month. Don't know what the solution is, but it is a fight for every customer.

The enormity of this issue, and the total apathy on the part of those who are in a position to do something about leveling the playing field, is astounding. When Japan Inc stamps out GM and Ford, I wonder which industry will be next? When the next President has to go begging to the Prime Minister of Japan to build the Army a few tanks I wonder if anyone in Washington will finally realize that maybe there WAS something to this conspiracy idea with MITI. Just ask RCA. Or Electrohome. Or Admiral.