- Posted on Friday, June 1st, 2007 at 11:34 am
Questioning Our Brand Strategy?
By Christopher Barger
Director, GM Global Communications Technology
We couldn’t help but notice a letter to the editor in yesterday’s USA Today questioning our brand strategy and suggesting that GM might be better off with fewer brands.
We respect the author’s opinion, and we certainly don’t mean to single him out… but we would like to address his concern. We’d actually argue that in today’s highly competitive, highly fragmented car market, a strong portfolio of brands is critical. A typical brand today sells only about 250,000 units a year, and some of the hottest new brands like Mini, HUMMER and Scion sell way less than that. A fast-changing brandscape like this offers lots of challenges — and opportunities.
We think that as GM continues to improve its products and sharpen its brands, our portfolio of eight brands can be a competitive advantage — if we can keep each brand sharply focused and stocked with strong products. GM’s global operations help here. For example, sharing products with Opel will give Saturn new vehicles perfectly suited for import fans, while our new global rear drive program, headquartered in Australia, will soon provide Chevy and Pontiac with exciting new performance cars.
It’s also important that we work with our dealers to build strong retail channels. As Buick, Pontiac and GMC come together in the same showroom, we are eliminating overlapping products and sharpening all three brands. The customer gets a showroom full of great products, and the dealer gets enough traffic to maintain a successful, profitable business. This also allows both GM and its dealers to streamline areas like the service department that the customer doesn’t see.
There are lots of signs that improved products and stronger brands are paying off for GM. Our retail sales are up, and new vehicles like the Chevy Silverado, GMC Acadia and Saturn Aura and Outlook are racking up sales and accolades. Yes, GM still faces many challenges here in North America. But we are confident that we are moving in the right direction. And we’d humbly suggest that if the author were to give one of our new Buick, Pontiac or Saturn vehicles a test drive, he might well share some of our confidence.
39 Comments
Kyle Rohde
Its a nice idea, thinking that all of those brands will be an asset in the future. But the elimination of overlapping products is not ending, as evidenced by the news that Chevy is going to get their own version of the Outlook/Acadia/Terraza. Now if I walk into a Pontiac/Buick/GMC dealer, I am looking at two different versions of that same vehicle.
Today, GM’s volume is very close to Toyota’s. Toyota spends its marketing dollars on three brands, all with clearly defined niches in the market. GM has eight, with only Hummer and Cadillac really being well-defined brands. GM and Ford are both fighting against quality reputations that are largely untrue today, yet people continue to believe that Toyotas are bulletproof and Chevys are garbage. Wouldn’t your marketing dollars be better spent fighting that battle then convincing me to buy one of the four variants of the new full-size crossover?
stan
Saturn is finally starting to get some better cars thanks to the wise decision to align with Opel. Now, how about getting to most promising neglected brand - Saab. It makes no sense why they aren’t allowed to develop great cars to compete with BMW and Audi.
indi500fan
Actually dumping Oldsmobile was a huge mistake. You had strong Olds dealers throughout the country (Collins Olds in Indianapolis for example) with a cadre of long time loyal customers.
Drop Olds and now those folks shop at Lincoln-Mercury or Lexus.
GM has essentially lost all the Olds volume they GAVE AWAY to competition and paid a ton of money to do it.
Olds Driver
“Too Many” brands are a function of not enough distinct and seperate products. GM has too many brands if they plan to glue on badges to the same model to support all of them. All of the GM brands were strongest when the engineering and models came from seperate, distinct divisions (albeit under a central umbrella). GM’s decline came with badge engineering and sharing of differentiating components (remember the lawsuit over the cross-company sourcing of engines?), and just bad ideas (Cimarron anyone?). Olds had a last gasp try with the distinctive Aurora and a unique engine choices, but in the end the Divisional GM (John Rock) did not have the power or resources to fill out the line-up with anything other than the same mediocre products that GM was selling elsewhere. GM is lucky today that the semi-independent structure was some how left in place at Holden-Australia and Buick in China. Everyone was afraid of antitrust action when GM had 50+% of the market; if GM had been broken up, I bet those spun off companies would be more valuable and have more market share than GM does today (see ATT).
Edward Hayes
There is not too many brands.
There is just not enough bran in the brand.
GM is the #1 automaker in the ten of the top dozen largest markets like Canada and China.
The only two where it is not #1 is of course, in Japan and Australia. Australia is one of the only markets in which GM sold its cars largely through one brand, Holden.
Holden saw market share hovering around 17% while Toyota reached 19%. If the single brand strategy is not working in Australia why bring it here. In fact, GM is now beginning to market its Hummer and Cadillac brands there and if they do Chevrolet sales will spike just as GM saw sales spikes in Russia and Eastern Europe after introducing the Chevy brand in those markets.
The fact is if we exclude the Japanese market rife with lack of competition, over regulation and government support, if you exclude Toyota’s 2.5 million sales total of mostly mini-cars in Japan, the picture of GM’s success is a whole lot clearer.
In Japan Toyota has a monopolistic 45% market share and its weak competitors are guaranteed to stick around, they can’t go out of business or consolidate. Toyota markets over 80 vehicles in Japan alone for that 2.5 million in sales, more than GM’s 75 vehicles in which GM sells over 4 million vehicles in the US alone.
The only thing a brand is is something already communicated…so if I say Hummer or Jeep you already know what it is. GM does better communicating to the customer what a Hummer H3 is compared to Toyota trying to explain what a Toyota XYZ53 is or does.
The fact is a Hummer H3 is infinitely better marketed than a Toyota FJ because the brand communicates already what an H3 is.
GM won with 5 strata and that is how it’s winning now and that is how it will continue to win.
getalifeagain
Brand loyalty is not a thing of the past. Yes the percentage of consumers buying same brands has diminished, but when a consumer is happy with a product (vehicle) they come back in 5 years to look at what their brand is doing. And if their happy they’ll purchase again.
Eric
I agree with Kyle Rohde’s comments here in large part.
I also understand having a large portfolio helps to expand and maintain your marketshare from a competitive advantage perspective. Definitely a must do. This is why Toyota has Scion, and Lexus. However, note that each Toyota brand has very UNIQUE vehicles, NOT the same vehicles with different badges for the most part. This is where you could learn from Toyota in that each brand is sharply focused and very unique for the segment they are targeting.
GM, I especially applaud your decision to bring over some Opel products and the Holden products from Australia. This was your BEST decision yet. I was so happy to see this! This is an excellent business plan if you ask me. This will be very successful I would predict!
So you definitely “need to keep each brand sharply focused and stocked with strong products.” BUT again, that does NOT mean that you should rebadge the exact same vehicle (Enclave/Acadia/Outlook) and charge more or less for it depending on which dealership you walk into. I agree with Kyle that this is exactly what you are doing with Enclave/Outlook/Acadia, and continue to do with the Cobalt variants, etc. How does this expand your portfolio? It doesn’t. It seems to me it narrows your portfolio because a buyer is going to buy one of the 3 anyway, they are just picking the one that they like the style of better, or perhaps the “cheaper” one. This to me is where you are going wrong. Instead of expanding your portfolio with 3 DIFFERENT products, you are satifisying only 1 product segment by rebadging essentially the exact same vehicle.
It would be like me saying my personal porfolio includes extensive restaurant experience. And I say I worked at a wide array of food service establishments.
Instead of Ruth Chris, Outback, and IHOP (each with it’s own marketing segment), my portfolio includes McDonalds, Wendys, and Burger King (all fast food restaurants in the same segment).
See the difference?
Regardless, keep moving forward. I can’t wait until the new Holden and Opel products arrive on this side of the world. I actually spent some time in Australia and very much admired the vehicles there.
Sincerely,
Eric
Edu-Buyer
GM, The fact that you have too many brands is A GIVEN. You can’t fool people like you did in the pre-internet age, about your cars, about your business; opinion and facts travel to fast and far.
That USA Today letter to the editor was so short and innocent (speaking in generalities to the Big-3, not even GM specifically), I had to chuckle at your pompus, corporate response. “Well Public, we (again) know better then you on this…”
If we look at GM cars only, and look at models, their trim/option/performance levels (as your website outlines on “build your own,”) then GM has 21 model/trim choices for small cars, 21 choices for midsize, and 21 for large cars. 63, YES 63, car models! How can you defend that, with your 24% market share, declining 10% every year, and with 25% of your production going to fleet sales?! Not to mention burning $20,000,000 cash in negative cash flow every day.
Here are the model (pkg) breakdowns. It’s ugly…
DTS (4), vs STS (6), vs CTS (2), vs Impala (4), vs Gran Prix (2), vs Lucerne (3), vs Saab 9-5 (2), vs Malibu (4), vs G6 4dr (3), vs LaCrosse (3), vs Saab 9-3 (2), vs Malibu Maxx (3), vs G6 2dr (2), vs Cobalt 2dr (6), vs G5 (1), vs Cobalt 4dr (6), vs Aveo 2dr (2), vs Aveo 4dr (2).
But wait, it gets worse! Add 10-30% more models to the mix, when your new ones sell along side the old one in any given year.
Bob Larson
I agree that GM should keep all its current brands. You know there will just always be people who insist they know better, and somehow managed not to get the call to head up one of the world’s largest corporations.
Regarding the soon-to-be-four variations of the Lambda platform, why is this bad? More outlets means higher volume, and each of those vehicles offers a unique spin on the same versatility, distinct sheetmetal and interiors, etc. I could see the point better if the differentiation was a just a badge and grille, like GM used to get by with.
Would a buyer shopping for a home in a new development rather have just one model to choose from, or four? It absolutely makes sense for GM’s biggest brand, Chevy, to have its own Lambda, especially without a minivan in its future.
Funny we also have the Porsche Cayenne, Audi Q7, and VW Toureg derived from the same platform, but nobody is complaining about that! My suggestion would be to have a unique powertrain option in each: definitely a V8 in the Enclave, a diesel in the Acadia, and hybrids in the Chevy and Saturn.
thabull
where is the plan for all these brands?
as one blogger has said Saab is getting no love!
when Saab should somewhere near the top of our branding and filter down to value brands.example: Saab should get Awd platform built off next Saturn Aura and Saturn next model year.
why is Saturn and Pontiac getting Astra/G8 before Saab and Buick?
jamie
Although I agree that GMs multiple brands are indeed an asset, they are still not being effectively distinguished or marketed.
Cadillac should be the penultimate RWD luxury marque for GM and move more upscale to compete with BMW and Mercedes.
Chevrolet is fine just as it is and should be the provider of FWD cars and a few RWD cars and trucks for the General. Still hunger for a revived Nomad or El Camino though. Camaro is just taking too long to come out of the starting gate.
Buick should move upward to be the AWD luxury marque for Buick-Pontiac-GMC competing directly with Audi.
Pontiac should be strictly RWD sporty cars like the GTO. How about a few turbocharged models to shake a few tail feathers?
SAAB fits in nicely as a niche product offering sporty turbocharged AWD vehicles. Get the Aero X in gear please!
Hummer is absolutely perfect and I can’t wait to see the pick-up versions dotting the landscape.
Perhaps GMC and Hummer should merge with the latter party supplying the former party. That would distance GMC from Chevy trucks a lot. I would like to see a competitor from Opel for the Dodge Sprinter stateside yesterday.
Did you notice how none of the brands overlap? It’s not that hard to do. Yeah, I know the dealers will scream bloody murder, but you got a business to run and the dealers don’t call the shots in the board room.
Speaking of cloning…Well maybe the Saturn/Opel marriage will keep the old guard happy. Yech.
Anyhoo…Saturn should merge with Buick-Pontiac-GMC to offer FWD cars for that distribution channel. You only need two distribution channels to operate much more efficiently.
As for Daewoo, the Chevy route seems the best alternative.
Holden, I guess, is stuck with their Opel product line as well for the foreseeable future. Synergies with Pontiac and Holden should benefit both brands immensely.
Oh, and keep the power grid up, but increase the MPGs throughout the entire line-up a.s.a.p.
Tom
Kyle Rohde’s post above raises some great questions for GM. How to turnaround the “perception” of Ford-GM bad and Toyota-Honda good? It’s a great strategy with the brands and consolidating dealers, but there’s only so much money to go around to support everything.
WRW
Mr. Barger,
“Kindly locate, purchase, read and comprehend teachings contained within the literary work ‘Branding Iron’, ISBN: 0-933199-04-0.”
Implementation of stated ‘brand’ concepts would do GM well.
Walter Feuchs
Mr.Bob Lutz
The global promotion of plug-in hybrid auto achieveing 100+ MPG could be in conjunction with a proposal to the Enrgy Global Award 2007 which is a precusor to the exhibit of a house that pays for itself in energy savings, and beyond within the 2008 Washington Renewable Energy Conference in March. The “$100,000 Sustainable House” objective has an optional carport for two cars which could “refuel” a plug-in hybrid.
The Energy Global Award gala ceremonies last year was broadcast to some three billion households. The concept of a house that pays for itself and a 100+ MPG auto is one whose time has come, for global mass-production. The time-frame is immediate for GM entry in the award.
Fred
The only Brand that confuses me is Buick. It seems like they are trying to make it less expensive than Cadillac, with lower performance, but at the same time more luxurious.
IMO there needs to be a bigger difference between the two. If you want to move Buick into luxury, that’s fine. But you are also going to need to move Cadillac more upscale.
Can someone please explain again why the DTS is $10-20k more than the Lucerne?
DannyK
I agree with the comments about Oldsmobile. It’s amazing to me how a company can go from having the top selling car in America in 1981 to being relegated to the scrap heap just 20 years later. Since Saturn kind of takes the place of Olds in the GM line-up, I’m wondering why not resurrect some Olds brand names like the Saturn Cutlass and the Saturn 88 and maybe bring some Oldsmobile fans back into the showroom. It also might not be a bad idea to make some of those old small-town Chevy-Olds dealers (I know there were a ton of them) Chevy-Saturn dealers.
SteveParker
The brand strategy sounds good and GM has some product successes to point at, finally, especially this past month (May ‘07). However, how can GM let XM die the death it’s going through? It seems to me the failure is AT the dealers, where salespeople are NOT pushing XM because, apparently, they are not receiving appropriate spiffs for closing an XM sale … Writers to my blog (www.SteveParker.com) tell horror stories of dealers and their personnel knowing NOTHING about satellite radio. Even when it comes free, dealers give little or no info on activation, future costs, etc. In fact, because we posted a story about Chevy offering some XM ’specials’, we get more mail about XM and problems with it that ANYTHING else! The last link in the chain — the dealers — are killing XM (and Sirius). When competitive pricing is so close and profit margins are sharper than the proverbial ‘razor thin’, WHY should a salesperson push XM anyway, if it means they may lose the entire sale?
Jeff
This article is compeletly accurate IF GM can maintain the discipline for truly differentiated products. The Outlook, Acadia, Enclave trio seem to accomplish that. Give a version to Chevy, though? Thats questionable. GMC vs Chevy light trucks? Again, questionable. Very similar product. I still mourn the passing of Oldsmobile. It only went away because of the neglect it received over the years. Remeber the under-Achieva?!? Nobody hopes GM can get their act together more than I, and I certainly hope all brands can survive the turn around process.
Bobby
[i]“The customer gets a showroom full of great products, and the dealer gets enough traffic to maintain a successful, profitable business.”[/i]
This kind of thinking drive me up the wall. Making rebadges/reskins to try to make a brand appear relevant is a bad idea. I know GM is legaly obligated to keep that dealer stocked with a full line but dont renew the contract. Each brands missions statements have been so skewed that Pontiac has been a mirror of chevy, and GMC a mirror of chevy trucks for some time now.
If you are going to keep 8 brands fine. But answer the question as to what Pontiac is. Is it small RWD cars? Great then move the Commodore to Chevy as the 2 dr Chevelle or 4dr Impalla and leave the Solstice as its halo car. Is it affordable BMW? Then work in that direction. Having a brand specialize in a few cars it does really well would be so much better than a full line I can get at other GM dealers.
Tell me what differentiates Saturn from Saab and why they are two different brands. Why does Isuzu even exist anymore? It is a blatent GMC rebadge which is a reskin of Chevy Trucks, with no sign of the Amigo. Why is the Hummer brand not coupled with Caddy as an upscale Dealer offering?
We all love Lutz, but you also could learn something from Jack Welch. Clearly define those mission statements which they dont appear to be, and continue to leverage global assets.
Having a brand that is entirely rebadges makes them look generic. They look generic because 3 or 4 brands has the exact same vehicle.
Bobby 5thgen69camaro
Eric Matthew Vest
Dear Mr. Barger:
For decades General Motors brand portfolio was viewed as strength, not a weakness. When Ford introduced the Mercury and Edsel and Chrysler introduced the Plymouth and Desoto it was a response to General Motors’ successful brand portfolio. If managed correctly, your brands should be an asset. One move that seemed a little odd to me was that General Motors gave both GMC Truck and Buick versions of its new cross over SUV. This gave the Pontiac/Buick/GMC sales channel two versions of this vehicle while Chevrolet did not have one.
F. Stephen Masek
The problem with GM brands has never been their number, but rather the lack of brand discipline going all of the way back to the 1950s. In the 1950s the dealers of each brand were already demanding a full line of cars, from cheap and basic to fancy and loaded, from slow to fast, and trucks (GMC for everyone except Chevy). Rather than enforce brand discipline and tell dealers that they had to take on multiple brands if they wanted to sell to a broader market, GM has tried to keep each and every individual dealer supplied with a full line-up within each brand.
Also going back to the 1950s, GM has been incurring tremendous costs due to the inefficiency of having all kinds of mundane parts (e.g. rear axle assemblies) different on each brand.
Consumers like choice, so the various brands can and should be a valuable asset. I agree that the Oldsmobile brand had to go (who wants to drive an old-mobile), but with good brand discipline, and excellent products, GM could even start to regain market share and profitability.
chaaalie
8 brands? Sure, if they are really 8 different experiences. But when you rebadge as an afterthought, that’s a HUGE problem. With things like the Caddy BLS, Saab 9-7x and 9-2x out there … If you are going to rebadge, why not just sell the car with a bag of interchangeable emblems, so I can drive my Saab to the country club, but take the Subaru to the grocery store. All without the trouble of having to have 2 cars.
Seriously, either the cars are designed independently using many of the same parts, or don’t bother trying to slide one to another brand after the fact.
Christopher Barger
“Wow. Since I got to GM three months ago, I think the most comments I’d seen on an FYI post was 8; this one’s got 21 and counting. We appreciate that you care so much about our brands. And I think there were some very valid points raised in this discussion.
I do want to just address one thing in particular… the comment that suggested that our response indicates that we “think we know better” than the original letter writer. I guess I don’t think that’s really a fair accusation. Someone gave his opinion. We said we respect his opinion, but that we have a different one — and then explained a little about ours. How is that acting as if we know better? By that logic, then everyone who offered an opinion in this discussion must therefore think they know better than everyone else?
I don’t think that’s the case. Blogging, at its core and at its best, is designed to be an exchange of ideas and opinions. And that’s what we tried to do here. Hey, we know we’re not perfect — and not everyone is going to be in love with every one of our opinions or decisions. But there’s no harm in our offering them up for discussion, is there? We do believe that our current strategy is the right way to go. Others may not. And that’s perfectly okay.
I appreciate the other points made in that comment and others… that line just really bugged me. Sorry to call it out specifically.
P.S. As an example of the “you can’t please everyone” syndrome at work, notice that we have some people arguing that we have too many brands — and also have some wishing we still had more.”
Von
Aren’t we all missing the point, which can be boiled down to one word “PRODUCT”.
If Chevrolet had a better offering than the bestsellers that are eating our lunch (Toyota Camry/ Corolla/Prelude; Honda Accord/Civic/Odyssey), we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Are multiple brands slowing by even a day the time when Chevrolet can offer a better (directly competitive) product against each of these bestsellers? Yea, I think we do have a “brand” problem.
Olds Driver
What GM has is a good strategy poorly executed. Besides product, they better work on the customer experience with the Dealers. When or if the better product arrives, GM better make sure the gouging and other games do not get out of hand.
Jim
After reading most of the comments I have to agree with those who do not like rebadging. I do not see the point of offering a Pontiac G5 which is just a Chevy Cobalt with a different grill and nameplate. If Pontiac is going to be an all RWD division then make a RWD possibly AWD G5. I understand that to keep the cost of manufacturing down you have to share platforms and components but there has to be enough difference between the different divisions to have a real reason for building the cars. I would love to see Pontiac build the next G6 on the same platform as the Cadillac CTS with its unequal length control arm front suspension rather than struts and optional AWD. Personally I do not like Cadillacs squared off styling and wish they would go to more gracefull flowing lines.Look at Mercedes CL-class and you will see what I mean. I think Cadillac should be ultimate in grace and opulence with world class performance. Pontiac should have sportier sleeker flowing lines with a smaller grill, less chrome, sportier tuned suspension , and like the Cadillac have class leading performance. Cadillac would in my world get DOHC V8 engines while the Pontiac would get all new production XV8 engines. Cadillac would be available with only automatic transmissions while Pontiac would also have an optional manual transmission. Both would have much of the same available equipment but Cadillac would come with more standard equipment than the Pontiac. With a 500hp engine, manual trans., auto adjusting shocks, available AWD the G6 especially the sporty 2 door could be Pontiacs performance car unlike anything else offered by GM but still based on current platforms. To simply rebadge cars is not in my opinion the best way to market a full line of vehicles. I would like to see each division have a car that is their own and not shared by other divisions. Chevy has the Corvette, Saturn could have a FWD/AWD 2 door sport coupe to compete with the Mitsubishi Eclipse. Buick could get an a minivan and Pontiac could get a new mid-engine sports car. Just something unique to the respective division.
Justin
Here is a quick rundown of what could be a very successful business model for GM.
Cadillac should be truly top of the line and should expand it’s line-up to take some business away from mercedes.
Buick should be luxurious, but not nearly as expensive as Caddy and aimed more at the retiree crowd.
There will always be a small portion of the market who will only buy THE safest car on the road. Saab could capture this market, especially if they made their vehicles a little luxurious and sporty at the same time. Such as the 9-5 Aero.
Saturn should make stylish but inexpensive family cars aimed at a younger crowd who must buy an economical car but still want it to look good.
Pontiac should definitely take over the performance car segment. They should offer equivalents for the Corvette, Camaro, CTS-V, etc.
GMC should be aimed more at the true working man who needs a very tough, capable and long lasting truck, but nothing fancy.
Hummer will continue to do well as long as it occupies it’s current high profile “celebrity vehicle” place in the market. Hummers look mean, but I bet they would fall apart pretty quick if you actually took one off-road very often. They should definitely offer something desinged to be taken off road. Perhaps an H1 that doesn’t cost $90k.
Chevrolet has always been a brand with no true focus and it’s the one brand I have no good ideas for. They make a little bit of everything and I see no reason to change it now. Rebadging does have it’s benefits and it’s going to happen no matter what. Chevrolet could offer different versions of all of it’s other niche brands.
Obviously these ideas could use some fine tuning, but is GM’s current direction really any better?
David Rosstad
I just had to reply to this line “We think that as GM continues to improve its products”.
I have observed stunningly poor quality of your Yukon SUV in particular. It is embarrassing as a GM enthusiast to see the horribly wavy body panels (doors in particular) on these new vehicles. They look like they are made from super thin sheet metal that is totally distorted when assembled. Don’t you notice these defects during preproduction?
Brendan
This is also the first time in many years that I can clearly see a GM brand locked up against another non-GM brand - which was very lacking in the 80’s and 90’s. Can anyone really say who Buick was supposed to be competing against back then? Or Olds? Which, ironically, are the two lines that got hurt the most in those times.
But now, one can clearly see Cadillac is going against Lincoln, BMW, Mercedes et al, Buick is clearly marketed against Lexus and other near luxury brands, Chevy vs. Ford, Toyota, VW, etc…
That’s the clear marketing strategy GM has been needing. Now, if we could only get the media to stop trying to destroy the American auto industry too. They seem to rejoice everytime bad news comes out of there.
Joshua Gore
Does GM have the time/money to re-focus it’s current broad sometimes overlapping brands?
Josh
p.s. Word on the street is that you are looking for a name for your Volt concept. I have that name.
gtjeff
USA Today was correct in question GM’s brand strategy, they just came up with an incorrect analysis of the situation.
Only one GM brand should be eliminated in North America, Saab. A brand with only 260 dealerships in NA that is losing money, should not be receiving the attention it is getting. Getting parts for these cars in an issue, with your great distribution system, why is that?
The current problem with some of your other brands is that you have chosen to ingore a large segment of your existing customer base.
Saturn buyers that liked the plastic panels are now shopping other brands, ask your dealers. With less than 500 dealers nationwide, this brand is being overfunded. Buick buyers that want their same reliable car, now find out its been eliminated.
Pontiac claims to be a brand with great passion. It’s great heritage has been bulldozed, replaced with generic alphabet soup.
I question the Buick/Pontiac/GMC channel strategy. With a few thousand dealerships, why are these brands being starved for products? Pontiac and Buick could again be volume brands with the right product mix.
Chevy looks to be on the right track, although the one thing that could be improved here and also with other GM brands is to stop exiting a market segment without a replacement. The impending exit from the minivan segment by GM is a perfect example of this.
GM has been improving in many areas recently. I would argue that the above mentioned issues have actually slowed the companies recovery down. The solution, admit you could use help. You know who to call.
Joe
While I am sure that GM is slowly heading in the right direction, I’m not so sure that the company advertising folks are.
At this point in time, I see tons of ads for big vehicles, SUV’s, pickups, etc. What I do not see are the ads touting the small fuel efficient vehicles that GM produces, the ones that most Americans don’t know exist.
I see that GM’s sales dropped nearly 25% in the last reporting period. Wonder why? Could it be that Americans are buying small cars that get better fuel economy in great numbers, cars from Toyoda, Nissan and Honda?
GM makes cars that are as good, and that get admirable economy, but no one knows about them. I never see an ad for anything but pickups and SUV’s on TV, why is that?
Getting the word out about the small stuff is one easy way for GM to pick up sales. The ads need to extol performance features and mileage, not just a pretty picture. Looks to me like the people in advertising better get it in gear and put the word out, particularly on TV.
For lands sake, redesign the front end of the Volt! It looks like an angry Chrysler and is about as ugly a design as GM ever put up, next to the Pontiac Aztec that is. Some folks may think ugly and vicious looking is cute. I do not
Charles R Rohde
I currently have a 2002 Buick, and though it is nice comfi car, I wouldn’t buy another unless I could get that Park Avenue that you sell in China.
Dan Cronin
GM brand strategy should include it’s truck division. I was all over the “GM performance” sites and found little if anything for my COLORADO! Why don’t we compete with ToyotaRacingDevelopment and at least offer the same performance packages that are available to the “GM tuner” drivers. I would like to see forced induction and PCM tuners, etc. available for COLORADO/CANYON!!!
Ben Bencivenga
I want GM and all US brands to thrive. I’m pleased that GM reported surprising good sales numbers for August. I want to buy American and my wife had, up until now, carried on her family tradition of only buying American. Alas, her 2006 Buick Rendevous will end that tradition. It is the negative stereotypical American vehicle. Tinny with cheap plastic everything, cheap seats, mediocre ride, terrible handling. I pray that my family never has a serious accident in that vehicle. Doesn’t compare to the “comparable” Nissan Murano crossover sitting next to it in our driveway.
Cutlass Dude
Age didn’t kill Oldsmobile (to the Old-mobile poster) GM killed Oldsmobile. GM had been trying to stifle that brand for 30 yrs! You don’t have a no. 1 in car in the 80s and 20 yrs later not even have a division. Lets stop with the brand was old and tired because if that is the case Chevy only 18 yrs away from Olds age.
If GM had any sense they would bring back Oldsmobile and give Oldsmobile the Volt as Oldsmobile was always the leader in technology and innovation. The Oldsmobile Volt!!! Bring back the Oldsmobile. I am not sure I will ever buy another GM car again after this Oldsmobile fiasco.
Cutlass Dude
ops 11 yrs. Chevrolet will be 107 in 2018 (1911-2018). The same age GM KILLED Oldsmobile.
Chris R
I agree with the statements above that entirely different cars can, and should be made using common parts. GM has some talented and imaginative people who can make that happen. They are already making it happen in some cases. Two or three vehicles on the same platform need not share any body parts at all. They may essentially be the same underneath, but with different bodies, different styling, different interiors, and different suspension tuning, a platform could serve both a soft riding Buick, with rather conservative styling, as well as a new SAAB with a firmer ride, great handling, aggressive styling and the required turbocharged engine.
Also, combining SAAB and Saturn dealers does seem like a good idea. It would increase the availability of SAAB cars and put them as an upmarket alternative to those who like the new Opel/Saturns. It would also eliminate the need for SAAB to have any sort of SUV, as Saturn would already be selling them in the same dealerships.
aurora 97
Oldsmobile was the luxury stepping stone between Cadillac and Buick but now Gm has to try to make Buick good enough to fill the void left behind by the poor choice that GM made. So much history gone becouse of poor choices. Get rid of the rebadging and bring back OLDSMOBILE So many possibilities A new Olds 442 sports car. That would be great. And bring back the Aurora.
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)