enzl

Ironically, the height of the Camry as 'class leading' was the early 90's LS400-lite. Toyota has dumbed down the Camry and went for production-broke...and succeeded, if sales are the ultimate objective. The Camry is relentlessly average now, but its a strong default 'no-brainer' choice. An absolute masterstroke of reliability, reputation and kick-ass Marketing 101. Just like the D3 once did. You can hate the cars, but you've gotta admire the shear tenacity Toyota has demonstrated.

Because customers coming back to the dealer for services is bad, 'boi? You're aware of the economics of a dealership and service 'coverage' for expenses, no? Gotta tell ya, you guys just like to pick idiotic nits. How is customer service, a pleasant environment or a couple of free trinkets a bad idea? No wonder you're constantly defending the indefensible.

Excuses are like a$$holes, man. Everyone's got one, most of 'em stink.

First, I work...I'm not hanging out waiting for your next brilliant counterpoint, so that's the silence that you hear. WTF is ConsumersGuide? And how are they any different from CR or any other reputable source that I'm certain will support the obvious fact that an Accord runs circles around the Lumina! (I mean, is this where we're headed? The Lumina, for Christ's sake?) I stated explicitly in my posts that there is a minute quality difference now...and that there's a perception problem. How about Reading Comprehension 101 before trying to be witty? And of course, all neutral info gathered at a GM meeting MUST be right, right? C'mon, man. The Lumina was good? GM info is somehow more reliable than neutral sources? Please. You're insulting the stupid with that stupidity. Biz---do me a favor. When you've got real info to dispute things, go ahead. Until then, ignore my posts--you completely and totally mislead other, less informed posters with your utter nonsense. http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...da-accord-6.htm Accord Review http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...olet-lumina.htm Lumina NOW CLEARLY, these reviews are the be all, end all authority on the topic---Consumer Guide doesn't even have their own site---its a sub-site of 'how stuff works'. I posted these so everyone can see the "source" of your information. If these guys are OK, than I assume you're accepting CR, C&D, MT & all other legitimate auto rags as sources as well. This is the depths we need to explore to find positive info? I really feel sorry for anyone quoting these findings...

Firstly, anyone that can argue with a straight face that the Lumina was even in the same ballpark as that era's Camcord just isn't seeing things as they are. I'll leave that argument at that. Now, GM's current predicament is all about inferior image and product that's just beginning to equal or surpass the competition in the car sector. Again, for those needing a remedial lesson: the Aveo cannot run with the Fit. An Impala is a dinosaur. Buick sedans are a joke. The DTS is a relic of the bad old days. The Cobalt/G5 are segment bottom feeders. Reliable, boring, gov't issue snooze---is this what GM stands for? Who's trading in their Accord for that?---It can't even be argued that all of their product is near class competitive--we're still talking 50/50, at best. You can put your heads in the sand, try to sell a 'deal' or argue til blue in the face. The enthusiasts & the sheeple have spoken. Check out May 08's numbers...it's in black & white. If I hear 'wait until XXX comes out' one more time, I'm going to puke. GM has fallen into a hole of its own making--now the question is when or if (unfortunately) they're going to get out of it. It will be one generation of buyers before GM gets back on many shoppers lists. That requires SUPERIOR, not 'as good as' product. The Malibu & CTS prove the slide can be stopped. It'll take much longer to actually make any gains. The question is whether GM has the time or talent to do so.

The problem with selling either Saab or Hummer is finding a buyer that will pay something significant--either in the form of cash or absorbing future obligations. IMO, GM could only give away these brands with a dowry---money they simply don't have right now. I know that if my dealer group had spent $millions putting up a Hummer franchise, the lawyers would already be filing a case against GM--they've managed to alienate another faction of the dealer body--most of whom also have a Caddy or Saab franchise to try and salvage from this mess.

More blaming perception rather than reality. GM's 90's stuff was perceived as Sh!t because it, mostly, was sh!t. That any rational human could state that a Lumina is the equal to an Accord of that era needs a drug test, stat! The Japanese made their real inroads during that time. Today, the differences betrween worst and best are so much narrower as to make any choice defensible. But the battle was lost then---it got papered over in the SUV craze, but the battle was lost then, rest assured. And, gee, FOG, you'd think that any company would like to market to the people that could afford their product? C'mon, man--another attempt to make a class-argument out of simple logic--smarter people (mostly) make smarter choices (mostly). The more educated make more money. These aren't slights or slurs, just facts, man. What part of your brain can't understand that?

100% right. I was just saying that's how they replaced it. And it appears to be selling pretty well without incentives--something that can't be said about the rest of Chrysler's line-up (Challenger excluded, of course.)

They do. It's called a Dodge Journey...and the Avg. Transaction Price is probably $1,000s more than the SWB minivans were getting. The mini-minivans (5, Rondo) are still a small (albeit growing) part of the market...

Lease, don't buy. Make sure your local Audi dealer is a good one, regardless.

In essence, they're rescuing another supplier.

Thank you. I know I have discussed concerns, I can't speak for OC. The problem is that GM is top-down, rather than bottom-up for info that sticks. Common oldschool biz 101.

Constructive criticism & valid opinions should be welcome, regardless of who we are or what we do. Again, I'm not going to bust out my CV---so I'll leave you with this nugget: OC is right. I'm right. Our prognostications & warnings about what was really going on & what might happen came true, no? And the marketplace is merely reflecting that fact. GM has a PR department & a marketing department, last I heard. Let them worry about the stuff you're carping about. I find it interesting that GM doesn't have a presence on this site, at all. I feel I've been positive about what one can be positive about...I've started posts, many positive. I've contradicted people only when they were really factually inaccurate or incredibly offensive (I'd say wishing physical harm on someone because of their purchase decision qualifies.) If you need me to be the boogeyman, so be it.

Big trucks aren't going away, but some choice will be sacrificed as fewer plants produce high profit items in a more efficient manner. To me, the BOF truck is just a modern update of the big American, 50's sedan. This market will always be there--and with Nissan's withdrawal from the market & Toyota's likely low % penetration--the object for GM is to right-size their capacity. The bigger question is what to do with the capacity--I heard VW, Fiat & others are looking to produce here. How about selling some of that factory space? It's nice to see that GM has finally acknowledged what needed to be said. I'm hoping this means some options are being explored that hadn't reached the light of day down at the tubes.

Ick. I thought one of the reasons They're buying VW was to avoid having a CO2 issue?

If we're dependant upon the Big 2.8 for new tech, we're screwed, regardless. My guess is that tech co.'s like Apple or some other Silicon Valley or Pharma or somebody else will play a large role in the future. The Automobile isn't a particularly sophisticated device, when compared to bio-engineered substances or robotics or A.I., so I'm not sure that we'll be calling Toyota when the next war breaks out. That being said, we can do nothing about population growth in other countries, nor do we in the West have the moral high ground to demand others not to live a better, more consumptive existence--in fact, we market that way of life via all Big Corporations--Including the Auto Industry. There's an interesting article in CAR (UK) regarding the Tata Nano & how it, not gas-guzzlers, is an environmental threat by placed cars in the hands of millions who can't have one now. History teaches that nothing is more constant than change. If the Earth is all humans have, there's going to be a limit as to how we can live here together--or somebody will invent things to avoid catastrophe--who knows? I think this is a philisophical issue as much as a practical one. I guess we'll see how it goes. I'm actually optimistic that humans can and will figure it out....just don't let GM execs get involved And Reg, there's many people in this country that DO care---and they're working on the issues as we speak, I'm sure. And they say I'm the negative one.

Or perhaps he's just reflecting the reality of the marketplace? The STS is currently in limbo, as we all know a STS/DTS replacement is needed yesterday. The fact that the Chinese STS interior is available, fully developed & flat out looks better is kinda embarassing, no? I hope that a 16 influenced replacement can bring Caddy into competition with the other Lux-brands in this sector.

IIRC, US Law prevents foreign ownership of military manufacturers....that's how AM General became an independent co. when Renault bought AMC. And since I don't think they'll be pressing Cobalts into military service, I'm not sure if that's something to worry about. If WWII is the blueprint for current Western military planning, well, than the Gov't is in worse shape than all of us feared...certain manufacturing will always be done here. Rewards for tech development is way too lucrative for it to stop. The 'fears' you're trying to explain are simply not entirely valid...and, quite frankly, the rise from 3rd World status of China or India may increase the odds of peace in our time, as it makes the stakes in a conflict higher for those who are now leaping into 20th Century living standards. The competition for resources is a concern for all, but there's a strong social justice POV that would take the view that our consumptive Western societies are impinging upon the 3rd World's human rights, rather than their growth risking our way of life. Just an alternate POV rather than a statement of politics, it does bear consideration as we deign to try and control the destiny of 4++Billion human beings seeking a way of life we treasure and export daily.

So, 2 wrongs make a right, huh? Many people have advantages or things they haven't 'earned'...others are victims of circumstances beyond their control and suffer unfairly. Lemme tell you something...everyone living in THIS country has won the lottery, my friend. Go to the Sudan, or Indonesia or China and tell me how the 'average' person lives---generally, we treat our dogs better than these people live. I, personally, work at treating all with respect-- but this thread is just an attempt to justify ignorant behavior and thought. Perhaps that why some of you haven't 'made' it? Or has that thought not occurred to some of you?

My thoughts exactly. And who has the right to judge what somebody is by how much they make? If one was to substitute sexual orientation or race instead of earnings, lots of people would be up in arms. I always figured some of the resentment expresed here was a result of class-ism, but I've never seen it more profoundly (and mistakenly) expressed than in this thread. I can't speak about anyone else's experience, but I know I've been working since HS to get to where I'm at. 20+ years straight. Bottom line is this: People choose Toyandissans because the choice is logical. There's no risk involved. These companies recent history indicates the choice may not be the BEST one, but it probably won't lead to regret either. Never forget that GM, Ford & Chrysler have willfully placed themselves into the position they are in. Poor decisionmaking at all levels of these companies have brought them to the brink. It is their tenuous condition that is exploited by the price of gas or the economy--but they wouldn't have been there in the first place if they had WORKED HARD AT DOING IT RIGHT. Just like a bunch of wealthy people I know.

Is there any reason to select the STS over the CTS in the same showroom? That's what kills the STS, not comparisons to BMW interiors (which have been cheapened & aren't the reason to buy a BMW in the first place.)

I guess I've hit the big time---got my own thread.. This is certainly not the way I wanted to be proven right. It's depressing---and some of the bad news has actually been knocked off the front pages (BAS battery failures, 900 Hybrid sales)---and not something I was looking forward to.... What blows my mind is the meek response by GM management---there's not a reputable business journal that has said anything positive about this management team in months, if not years. I wish GM the best. But I fear the worst. Anyone wanna start an RW dead pool? My bet is he doesn't see 2009 as their CEO. I'm going to do my best to keep my posts as positive as possible. They've made it extraordinarily difficult to do so, but I'm going to try.

Like Cancer, maybe? I won't pile on....the news is self-explanatory. The news of the G3 was the harbinger of doom yesterday.

This is great news...perhaps the rumored pull-ahead of Delta...or a running change of plan to put export product together here while the $ is in the toilet? No complaints, this is exactly what GM has to do to survive.

QFT. But the only way to change the image is for the product to support an alternate, more positive story. It's a vicious circle.