Looks like GM and Chrysler are toast

[cgarison]

It is official! Pontiac to join Oldsmobile, LeSalle, and Oakland in GM brand heaven.

Saturn, Saab, and Hummer to have their fates decided later.

No more Pontiac Excitement with European inspired handling.

[Greg Goodfellow]

Exit, Pontiac excitement...

Enter, Buick lethargy

[AmpedNow]

What niche does Buick fill?

Are they de facto Cadillacs for blue collar retirees who can't afford a real Caddy?

They have zero appeal to me. But they seem like status symbols among older people.

[Hoosier Daddy]

Most of the GM side brands were designed to offer flanking sales in markets that would support a variety of dealerships. For example, if a city already had a Chevrolet dealership, GM could license a Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, Cadillac and GMC dealership in the same city or area without technically infringing on the Chevrolet dealer's exclusive sales territory. In smaller areas, you'd see combinations like a single Buick-Pontiac-Oldsmobile dealership, carrying smaller numbers of each product line. Ford did the same with Lincoln and Mercury, and Chrysler ditto with Plymouth and Dodge.

The biggest problems with this business model involved each division having their own management team, engineering and design staff, factory production lines, parts departments, etc. Very little was shared between automobile divisions. At one time, when American cars were the only practical choice, this model may have worked. Detroit didn't scale back and restructure when their numbers started plunging, and this has proven to be a huge mistake. So sad the company had top hit rock bottom before they considered killing off and/or combining their most popular brands.

For what it's worth, I never understood the attraction of a Buick or an Oldsmobile. As mentioned previously, they just seemed to be an old person's mid-level price range mode of transportation. I'd probably put most Chrysler and Mercury products in the same boat.

[genlock]

In the 1950's (and before), there were far more differences in the product lines of General Motors.
At that time, you could look at the product line from Chevy to Caddy and not see a common line.
Motors, bodies and suspensions were different. When Japan entered the picture is when the body lines
started blurring and at one time GM had a PR disaster when Chevy engines were found in Oldsmobiles.
They lost a huge lawsuit over that and as a result, started calling the engines "corporate engines",
further blurring the separate auto identities. In the 1950's GMC and Chevy trucks were really
different trucks. GM has run it's course and I will be surprised to see it hang on even with
tons of federal money propping it up. Chrysler? Even with the help from Fiat, I see it as a goner too.
Americans will still have to buy the cars and will not trust the companies to be of value.

[AmpedNow]

Just throwing things out there, since this thread is meandering around a general topic.

I remember taking a field trip in high school to a Chrysler plant in Newark, DE. It is absolutely amazing how automobiles are made, and the hundreds of hands it passes through on the assembly line before it become a finished product.

Sadly, that plant was shut down, to the best of my knowledge. I think about the guy they talked about who showed up to work there every day for 43 years, and if he was shitcanned in the same manner as the guy in the video.

That video kinda made me feel guilty for buying a Toyota. But them I thought, is this really Toyota's fault? The "traitor" consumers? Why couldn't GM compete with them on their home turf?

It came down to the different business cultures, IMO. The consumer can't be blamed for this.

[Bob Campbell]

The plan behind GM autos was to have a car for everyone at every stage of life.
Chevy was the entry level vehicle, followed by Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Caddilac.
Each step us was supposed to be slightly higher quality and price.

Chevy and Pontiac shared a lot of chassissssss(I give up on that one) for similar models, most notably the Camaro and the Firebird. And man, weren't the first years of both hot cars.
No Mustang mind you, but pretty hot.

Of course the Corvette always existed in a kind of world of its own.

I would just figure that Hummer won't make it either. At least as an auto brand.

[Jet Black]

Wrong again. General Motors brands were differentiated by price level. This is how Durant envisioned it. Back in those days, a price difference of just one or two hundred dollars made a major difference to buyers, so Durant tried to position the brands he had either bought for GM or developed in-house on regularly increasing tiers. Chevrolets were the bottom of the line, but were the thrifty-sale leader, back when such a thing was not looked down upon by consumers. Pontiac was a step up, then Buick, then Oldsmobile, then Cadillac. Somewhere along the line Buick and Olds traded spots. In the depression era, Cadillac, ailing in sales, brought out LaSalle as a low-price Cadillac, and Buick had a line called Viking I think it was, but these ill-positioned products cut the hairs on price tiering too closely, and didn't make it through the depression.

When Olds bought it a few years ago, I thought that a sad thing. But the death of Pontiac is proof in my non-corporate-understanding mind of GM's inability to build cars that people wanted. They lost all their understanding of the brand and the breed. I lay this on non-car-guy management and too many influential foreign designers in the GM studio. America is not France or Korea, we want the cars we want. Look at the GTO flap. The GTO badge was too far back in time to be of interest to any but the Pontiac faithful, but when it came, nice as it was for what it was, those GTO people were disgusted to see GTO plastered on an overpriced Australian front-driver. GM threw that all away. GM's failure to get a rear-drive V8 on the road since 1996, it's tightening and cheapening of it's bread-and-butter trucks, it's failure to build the world-class product in truth or perception, is responsible for Pontiac's sacrifice on the financial alter ever bit as much as the uncontrollable economic downturn.

[CoolBreeze]

I lay this on non-car-guy management and too many influential foreign designers in the GM studio. America is not France or Korea, we want the cars we want.

I sort of disagree with this:

If GM had been more European in styling, they may lasted a few more years at least. The crap they've been putting out is not European in my opinion. (at least not until VERY lately). I go to Europe every year, and I'm always amazed at the beautiful small cars that I see, and often rent. Funny thing is... most of these cars are Japanese, and sometimes even GMs Opel. The Europeans don't want the Japanese (or American) designs that we see here. The Europeans hate the boxy or cookie cutter designs that the Japanese are forced to build for Americans. So... the same Toyota you see here may be completely different there.

I'm not saying that the Europeans have the answer, but their cars have an excitement (even the Japanese cars) that we lack. The Japanese knows what sells here in stogyville, and what sells in Europe. Personally, I have to go along with them at least on this issue.

[Hoosier Daddy]

You both make good points.

[Arp2]

Is it my imagination, or has GM intentionally chosen to "keep" the brands with the cheap, old, and stodgy images that are sure to die probably even before the baby boomers do and ditch all the younger, less-associated-with-GM brands that normal people might actually buy at some point?

However, "cheap," "old," and "stodgy" are all in keeping with the cars made available to the proletariat, aren't they? No wonder this "plan" has been "approved" by the "czar."

[Jet Black]

I said it myself before the bailout came, back in November; and I later heard Mitt Romney say the same thing, and I still believe it's true. If they made them go bankrupt, which is the normal legal way the market works, and should work, GM could have reorganized and survived. But with the bailout, it means GM is dead. There will be, as Romney said, no GM auto business in America in 5 years. Chrysler along with it, probably, and Lord help Ford with all the parts suppliers being sucked down as the GM ship goes under the water.

The free market should have been let alone to work as the free market should. The government getting involved was wrong, very wrong, and I lay this at GB43's feet, although I believe 44 is taking conscious advantage of the situation to advance his own plans. The impersitive now as I see it is not to hope that government comes up with the right plans and tweaks to save the economy, but to hope that the government can be got back out of business before the free market no longer has the ability to create wealth.

[CoolBreeze]

Just one example of GMs problems that brought it to it's knees:



....As I sat with Ron Zarella, then GM’s head of North American operations, talking about the Pontiac Aztek taking advantage of the crossover trend, he said…”Well, not so much the Aztek. We have other vehicles coming.”

Huh? I thought. You are late to the party with crossovers, spend hundreds of millions of dollars developing a vehicle and you are already apologizing for it before it hits showrooms?

The Aztek has been the poster-car for GM’s canny ability over the last decade to survey the marketplace, poll consumers, anticipate style trends and come up with something so wrong-headed as to make Sony’s commitment to Beta look like marketing genius.

My sister-in-law once called me on the phone, having just picked up an Aztek from Avis, asking, “What the hell am I driving here? It looks like a giant grasshopper wrapped up in caution tape (it was a bad shade of yellow.) GM product boss Bob Lutz has quipped, “We’d fire the guy who greenlighted the Aztek if we could find anyone willing to admit it.”

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/ ... ummer.html

[cgarison]

What niche does Buick fill?

Are they de facto Cadillacs for blue collar retirees who can't afford a real Caddy?

They have zero appeal to me. But they seem like status symbols among older people.

And for younger people who want a comfortable highway/touring car and are willing to sacrifice a bit of that supposed control that is a result of European handling which does nothing to make vehicle dynamics any better but does make the auto tiring to drive for over a 60 minute period and wear out passengers from being jolted and jostled on the smoothest of highways. Do I really need a car capable of great autobahn handling at 200k/h when I do not plan to ever exceed 90 MPH on American interstates?

Well, that is my argument for purchasing another Mercury. And honestly, their is no reason to purchase a Lincoln over the brand engineered Mercury version except to have the bragging rights to show you can spend an extra $10K for a logo and fancy stitching on the seats.



I have to quit referring to my middle aged self as "younger." Damn. I am getting old/grumpy.

[Bob Campbell]

Ford, to a lesser extent than GM had about the same plan. Ford as entry level, then Mercury, then Lincoln.
Didn't Jet call me wrong up there and then repeat exactly what I'd said. Maybe he was talking about something else.
You know one Buick I loved? The Roadmaster. Like living the "Vacation" movies. My brother had a Roadmaster wagon back in the early 90's that was awesome. He drove it about 200,000 miles and it rode like dream with room for a couple Army divisions.

[Jet Black]

Maybe I slightly misinterpreted you, Bob, but GM brands weren't tiered by age/interest (young guys, middle age, etc.) Maybe that's not what you meant. But GM tiered by cost, which you might say was equivalent to social status. If you owned a Buick, you dreamed of the day you could trade up to Cadillac.

See? You remember the Roadmaster, and it was but an echo of GMs output at the top of their craft.

[Bob Campbell]

GM was actually a bit of both. Price from Chevy on up and hipness too. Olds, Buick and Caddy were always aimed at older buyers. Chevy and Pontiac at younger.

I had a friend with a '69 GTO that would pop rubber in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. Awesome muscle car.

[Mike]

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/28/u ... ration-50/

No way they don't get their asses sued off over this... The rescue "plan" for GM and Chrysler to avoid bankruptcy... UAW gets majority of Chrysler, huge share of GM, Obama gets control of both, shareholders and bond investors get the shaft (10 cents on the dollar).

Basically the taxpayer is on the hook for both companies and Obama is in charge.

There is no way in hell this agreement is legal, in bankruptcy the bond holders would get 100% of their investment back as secured creditors. This is what I figured would happen, the unions would be taken care of no matter what. No way in hell this leaves EITHER company viable. The problem is 50% management, 50% union, getting rid of management and letting the inmates run the asylum does nothing to fix the problem.

And now that they have Specter, card check will make sure that all the Japanese auto maker plants in the south get the UAW even though their employees don't want it.

[Mike]

Just one example of GMs problems that brought it to it's knees:



....As I sat with Ron Zarella, then GM’s head of North American operations, talking about the Pontiac Aztek taking advantage of the crossover trend, he said…”Well, not so much the Aztek. We have other vehicles coming.”

Huh? I thought. You are late to the party with crossovers, spend hundreds of millions of dollars developing a vehicle and you are already apologizing for it before it hits showrooms?

The Aztek has been the poster-car for GM’s canny ability over the last decade to survey the marketplace, poll consumers, anticipate style trends and come up with something so wrong-headed as to make Sony’s commitment to Beta look like marketing genius.

My sister-in-law once called me on the phone, having just picked up an Aztek from Avis, asking, “What the hell am I driving here? It looks like a giant grasshopper wrapped up in caution tape (it was a bad shade of yellow.) GM product boss Bob Lutz has quipped, “We’d fire the guy who greenlighted the Aztek if we could find anyone willing to admit it.”

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/ ... ummer.html

The Aztek was like you tried to take an AMC Pacer and make it into an ugly SUV.



Actually the Pacer was probably a better car, and was ahead of it's time actually.

[Force Commander]

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/a ... _keep_jobs

Now this is funny, sad but funny.