Shinkaze

This is interesting. Today you buy a Mini-Cooper at a BMW dealership despite the fact it's its own brand. The idea here is the do the same, by removing a lot of the redundancy in the Poantiac/Buick/GMC lines, focusing models down to 3 or 4 then sell them in a combined shop.

Story here: http://blogs.businessweek.com/the_th..._were_won.html

Shinkaze

Also here
GM plans to pare down its production San Francisco Chronicle
GM to cut back on variety of vehicles -NYT MarketWatch
Pontiac, Buick and GMC will be sold at single dealerships to ... DetNews.com

ActionJack

IMO it is a good plan and some dealerships are already set up like that.

Diolar Magnum

well they are heading in the right direction at least.

Brad

demonspeed

iTrader: (7)

It's about time.

maddboost

iTrader: (11)

Sounds like GM is finally starting to make some really smart decisions. But with them stating they are going to get rid of redundant products its most likely the death of the Firebird/Trans Am.

Shinkaze

That's a given.

For the longest time I've wanted to see GM come out with a 4-door RWD sporty car about the size of a 5-series BMW or Lincoln LS. The 4-Door version could be the Grand Prix, the 2-door could be the Firebird. Top of the line versions could be the GTP and GTO respectivly. This would combine the Grand Prix, GTO, Firebird Niche into one line. That said they would need to price it on par with the G35 but higher performance if that's what they want to sell. Obviously the Cattera tried this and failed, the CTS tried it a second time and succeeded. If the car I describe is a redundancy to the CTS then they should consider a more aggresive price point as Chrysler did with the 300C.

Anyhow just my two cents.

That said the car Pontiac won't kill off is the Grand Am/G6 line, it's been way too popular and way too bread and butter, so I think my ideals of RWD Pontiacs are wasted as GM sees the FWD Pontiacs sell and the RWD Pontiacs suffer.

sb427f-car

Don't know if I care for that...if I'm buying a Firebird, I don't want it to be totaly associated with a run of the mile sports sedan. Definately has to have way different styling lines, but in theory, it could share the same architecture.

And not even the FWD Pontiacs are selling that well.

Shinkaze

Much of the Success of the Mustang has been atributed to the fact it was a more proper Sport Coupe making it more practical and thus an easier sell to the bread and butter V6 types. A more upright seating position does give the Engineers the ability to make a more compact taller design, freeing up both back seat passenger leg room, trunk space (added height) and shorter overhangs (Drivers legs do not stick out as far so the firewall can be moved closer for better handling and shorter oveall length).

the drawbacks are less stability from a shorter wheelbase and a taller center of gravity.

ActionJack

GM to save Buick/Pontiac/GMC by combining them


Somrething just crossed my mind and maybe it sounds sensible and maybe not, or maybe it has already been discussed?

But, I wonder if GM will combine these three and cater to the North American market with them? After all Chevrolet appears to be a global decision and the North American market seems to be less and less a major decision in design.

black_z

iTrader: (4)

I really dont understand the GMC line. I think if they axed that, it would help them out. Build the chevys (tahoe, suburban, and trucks) with the same materials as the GMC's used. Does that make sense to anyone else?

JBsZ06

The gmc line really serves the purpose of allowing image consciencous (sp) people (my wife for example) who most probably wouldn't buy a trailblazer but an Envoy she would..

Don't ask me as I don't get it..but if it keeps her from buying a foriegn car....

its working...

Shinkaze

Well, once GMC served the purposed as the Fleet-Sales for working trucks. It makes sense as rental-fleets, government vehicle fleets, etc etc, is very low margin sales (but builds allmighty volume, the litmus test by which the street judges the big three). Overall fleet sales cheapen a brand, drive down percieved quality and resale value. However for GMC, Fleet sales worked to it's advantage as it gave it "street-cred" as a working truck. But now with the Seperating of GM trucks into (4) channels, one has to wonder where GMC needs to be..

Chevrolet: Low end Truck Sales
GMC: Mid market Trucks
Caddy: Luxury Sales
Hummer: GM's Land Rover


Again this seams like too much overlap for me, and with platforms being shared across all lines, it hurts overall sales and brand image.

black_z

iTrader: (4)

GMC should be dropped. Caddy, Hummer, and Chevy have enough distinction.

HPP

Caddy has no buisness making trucks. Olds and Pontiac had no buisness making minivans.

This is part of the crap that has caused the problem.

y2k_ta

iTrader: (80)

That's a smart move in my mind. Several dealerships around here are Pontiac-Buick_GMC dealerships. But then that just puts all the "look-alike" cars on the same lot

I totally agree. Look at the current mid-size SUV line....Chevy, GMC, Oldsmobile, Saab, and Isuzu all have "look-alike" SUV's built off the same platform. We're not that stupid....we can tell they all look the same. Oh ok, the Saab has a different nose

TriShield

Dumb. None of the brands mentioned do anything better than Chevrolet does or could do itself. I guess you have to keep the dealers somewhat happy somehow.

Shinkaze

Compared to Toyota, Chevrolet is not doing very well actually. It could be that "Chevrolet" itself is a weak brand. What does "Chevrolet" really mean? It's a large or small, car or truck that is very Cheap and Expensive that is usefull on the Farm, City, School PTA meetings and on the track.

When a Brand doesn't mean anything, it looses value and cache with the person evaluating the brand. If I want a "sports Car" Porsche and Ferrari come to mind. If I want Safety for my Family I think Volvo. If I want driving pleasure I buy a BMW.

The last 30 years has shown people are becoming more and more "botique-ish" in their buying. This may show why Porsche is the #1 most profitable (margins on revenue) of any car maker out there.

GM's strategy of feeding Chevrolet has been a detriment to the other GM brands. That is they make a great car for Pontiac, but then make a cheaper version for Chevrolet to sell as well since Chevy has more success and pushes more volume. What does that do? Well the Pontiac version looses it's cache, and the Chevy version sells because it's cheaper. This sales strategy of the last 20-30 years has both eroded GM's market share and destroyed their brand image.

-Adam

technical

Normally I'd agree with that statement, but Escalades have been selling well. I don't understand how people will fork over $15-20k more for an Escalade because it has "better" leather and wood grain interiors than the Tahoe. Maybe $5-8k, but not what GM is asking.

I guess GM should not focus on what makes sense and just build whatever people will buy en masse.

TriShield

GM as a whole compared to Toyota isn't doing very well.

GM is choked with maintaining too many weak brands, chiefly the ones in this thread title. Chevrolet is a very broad brand, just like Honda or Toyota. They should be offering everything from economy, to cushy near luxury cars, to trucks and SUVs like the two mainstream Japanese brands in this country.

Like you said, it is to their detriment to maintain a heirarchy of many brands when two or three would work better and be easier on the company. This plan they have sounds like more of the status-quo to me, and something to keep the dealers a little happier. It's probably not the best long-term course of action.