Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Linky
GM's going to phase out their "excitement division" - by the end of next year, too. (So much for it rivaling BMW by the end of the decade!) Now, if they just cut everything else except Chevrolet, Cadillac, and GMC, they might (might!) have a chance. Pontiac has long had to live a double life - it was supposed to sell upmarket, sporty Chevy cars, but since it shared a dealer network with Buick and GMC, it also had to fill "the entry level" position for those dealers. Thus, the dealers (who apparently thought they could have their cake and eat it, too, with both high-margin luxury sales and high-volume Pontiac sales) constantly clamored for more and more accessible product, to the extent that Chevy and Pontiac often ended up competing with each other. (That happens way too often at GM.) Case in point: The G3, the "exciting" version of the Chevy Aveo, and the G5, a "sporty" version of the Cobalt. Both hastily re-badged, both sales disappointments, both awful, awful vehicles. We shall not speak of them again. The G8 and Solstice were legitimately good cars, and I'll even give them the G6 (which is, years later, still most notable for being the car given away on that one episode of Oprah). But that just shows the "dual nature" of Pontiac over the last, oh, forever now. GM wanted it to be a niche performance brand, but dealers wanted it to be a mass-market cushion against poor Buick sales. It ended up being an aimless brand that appealed to nobody. Which is a shame, because I'd argue there was potential for Pontiac to be the Scion to Buick's Toyota. Pontiac has always been fairly popular with young buyers, probably because they're reasonably spunky and cheap as hell used. GM really could have capitalized on that, but that would mean making one of their brands a niche brand. *Gasp* The horror! It's best when all of GM's brands are directly competing with each other, obviously. Sarcasm aside, I'm glad that GM is finally reducing their number of brands to match their diminishing stature in the auto world since the '80s. It just makes me a little sad that Saab and Saturn are probably next. Y'know, the Big Three's troubles could be an excellent opportunity for any reasonably well-heeled investors that want to get into the auto market. Pontiac, Saab, Saturn/Opel/Vauxhall/Holden, Volvo, and, um, every Chrysler brand could be up for grabs, at least brand-wise (if not company-wise). I think automobiles are an area where having an established brand, even if that brand has a spotty reputation, is important - nobody wants to buy the first car ever sold by a company. So even brands that haven't been around for a little while, but are still in the public consciousness, have some value (Geo, I'm looking at you!). It makes me wish I was a reasonably well-heeled investor. Sure, I'd probably lose it all, but it'd be fun. I think history will remember the person who develops the first mass-market electric car just as friendly as it remembers Henry Ford and his Model T, I really do. That's something that could literally change the world. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
quote |
Rocket Surgeon
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Canadark
|
Every Pontiac I've ever been in has been awful. Just little things, like making teh seats go all the way to the floor so you cut down on foot-room, or weirdly raked rear seats, or horribly detuned gas-guzzling engines. Good riddance, IMO.
|
quote |
Sneaky Punk
|
Considering there haven't been any good Pontiac branded cars since the 1970s, it is about time!
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
|
Quote:
But this seems to be essentially a public takeover of GM. The Globe and Mail reports that, after this restructuring, the U.S. Government and Unions will effectively own almost 90% of GM. Well-heeled investors need not apply. |
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Pontiacs are pieces of shite. Same with many Chryslers. Adios, good luck and good riddance. Our auto industry needs to re-invent itself and purge the shit brands from its existence and start fresh. Also spin Saturn out into its own company. They had a different sort of model going and some good cars back a few years ago if I remember right. Ford has some good stuff going... follow their model, cut down on the middle management and union ass-kissing and get back to making world class cars. Amen.
...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
GM should have gotten rid of Oldsmobile years before they did, and Pontiac years before now. And why are US manufacturers the only ones in the world who think that it is necessary to have "mid-luxury" brands (Buick, Mercury), when those brands have always had problems with product differentiation and nobody else feels the need to have them? I get that Buick is a big seller in China. So keep it. In China. I don't think it makes much sense in the rest of the world, and it will make increasingly less sense as its remaining loyal customers die off. If GM insisted on having a mid-lux brand, the "new" Saturn made more sense, because it could at least share Opel engineering, and thus had much lower development costs (not to mention brand loyalists that weren't octogenarians). Quote:
Saturn's current cars are actually pretty great - Saturn has the freshest product line-up of any GM brand, and it shows. GM is apparently puzzled why Saturn hasn't taken off (pardon the pun), but I could tell them - keeping the SL/SC platform around for so long (a decade!) with only minor adjustments and then botching its replacements really hurt the brand. What's the point of investing millions in creating an all-new brand if you're going to ignore it to the point where it gains an uncompetitive reputation? And yeah, treating Saturn more and more like any old GM division probably hurt the "different kind of car company," too. I'm not sure why GM ever bought Saab, other than the obvious: it was there, and it was cheap. But even not including Pontiac, GM currently has five competing "upmarket" brands, to varying degrees of "lux-ness" - Buick, Cadillac, GMC, Saab, and Saturn. Add Hummer and that's six. That's about five too many, to be honest. Quote:
and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|||
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
AFA Ford I had forgotten about the POS Lincoln and Mercury brands (Mercury is another instance of consistent garbage from one year to the next), but Ford itself does have some good designs with decent quality ratings, etc. The 500 (or whatever it's called now), some of their trucks, etc. They're clearly doing things better than the other American auto companies in certain respects. I think they have some huge, state-of-the-art design centers too that the others didn't have...
... I don't know. Do we really need more than four brands of US cards? Ford (mix of trucks and cars), GMC (SUVs), Cadillac (luxury) and Saturn (economy) seems like more than enough. I hope Chrysler bites the dust... ...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
Agreed, unlike GM Chrysler's products are still crap. |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
|
Tesla and the "reinvented" Detroit in CA. :/
|
quote |
meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
Tesla probably won't make it big for awhile. I doubt they will probably make it big as I bet as their technology reaches practicality to mass produce, someone will buy them up. Or the big companies will have their own products to compete with Tesla and consumers go to the big automakers forcing Tesla to go under. I hope them well, but it is hard make it big when it comes to the auto market especially with such a product offering a untried technology.
giggity |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
I thought the new GTO was kind of blah, to be honest. The G8 was good, but not enough to build a brand around.
The Solstice was styled like a bulbous, warmed-over Sky, with less standard equipment. I actually really like the Sky, but it's not going to kill the MX-5, let's be real. The Japanese are kicking our asses, in that regard. Quote:
and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
quote |
meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
The Solstice did outsell the MX-5 back in 2006. Quote:
4 GM products and no major problems with any of them. giggity |
||
quote |
Sneaky Punk
|
Not much to say about those cars, other than ugly, as it is a matter of personal taste. To make matters clear I think my own car (04 Corolla is ugly too), I don't have too many kind words for most modern car designs.
I'll stick with my original statement, and make no further comments on the subject. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
4 out of, what, 48?
That the fact that GM has "no major problems" on a whopping four models is newsworthy kind of proves my point, IMO. Yes, the new Malibu is good. Yes, the new CTS is better. Yes, GM is improving. But to say that, as a whole, GM doesn't suck seems kind of....wrong? Like I said, Cadillac releases the new CTS and everybody is shocked that it's actually decent. Not a good sign. The fact that you're scrambling to point out a handful of GM cars that don't suck says it all, really. Yes, they're in better shape than Chrysler, which really has no such models. But that doesn't mean they're competitive, as a whole. Saying "Chrysler sucks, unlike GM!" is kind of laughable. Even if they were, being merely competitive isn't enough when you're trying to disprove your reputation. You have to be noticeably better. The Malibu might be just about as good as an Accord or Camry - wow! - but how many Accord or Camry people are going to buy it, just because it's supposedly "as good"? Even if the "word on the street" is correct, they would gain nothing, and lose familiarity. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
quote |
meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
And I am only posting my personal experience. Not saying all people will experience the same with my experience( or judge what I constitute as a major problem). giggity |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
|
Or maybe a car - electric, of course - from....Apple. We've discussed it before. I see it now....the Apple 'Sydre'. I would advise Apple to stay away from purchasing the GM brand-names. We don't need another Apple G5.
When there's an eel in the lake that's as long as a snake that's a moray. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
I wish there was an "Apple of cars" though. We always equate Apple with BMW, but that doesn't seem quite "right." Audi maybe? But that's off-topic. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
quote |
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope. Join Date: May 2004
Location: Inner Swabia. If you have to ask twice, don't.
|
gm needs to die.
or rather needed to have died sometime in the late 1990s. if we could have avoided the whole infantile my suv penis is this big era of cars in the us, we would be better off for it... |
quote |
meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
And further kill US industry? The Japanese may have lost in military battle to us, but they are winning the economic war.
|
quote |
Not sayin', just sayin'
|
It's amazing to me how many chances GM has been given or given themselves, how often they are so tone deaf and lack any long-term outlook. I don't think GM needs to die necessarily, but they need to get their shit together, like, fo' realz.
Let's see, they can't figure out how to make Pontiac a successful sporty/youth badge. Well, Pontiac never did have a history or name for itself. I still can't figure out what Buick is supposed to be, I guess somewhere in that narrow slot between Cadillac and Chevy? They made Saturn as an honest-togoodness real and really successful attempt to match Japanese brands, then petty internal politics decimates the brand and lets it rot for 10 years. Oh, so they did finally make new Saturns and good ones too,. But too little too late! And only now are taking small car design seriously, 30 years after Honda proved (then Hyundai) that strong design with small cars leads to big success. Having said all that, I'm glad Chevy is going in a good direction in terms of their designs. I will have a hard time trying to get my wife to entertain a Ford or Chevy when it's time to get a new car though. That's the Big 3's biggest problem (except for Chrysler which is still making utter crap and doesn't even have a clue about how to turn things around it seems -- at least Chevy woke up about their quality and lineup troubles). Any ideas on how to change perceptions, aside from hang on for dear life long enough that word gets around? |
quote |
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope. Join Date: May 2004
Location: Inner Swabia. If you have to ask twice, don't.
|
Quote:
But regardless, so? GM isn't profitable because it was run into the ground. It should die a natural death. |
|
quote |
meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
Americans need to learn we need a level of protectionism, a level of regulation, and a level of capitalism. Nothing 100% will work. We need to keep vital companies alive and do whatever necessary to insure that. You may hate it, but our auto industry is vital as the automobile is a huge factor into our economy. You should not have a foreign company as our main source of something so vital just in case our relations with Japan ever sours..... giggity |
|
quote |
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope. Join Date: May 2004
Location: Inner Swabia. If you have to ask twice, don't.
|
Quote:
I understand you love GM cars for whatever reason, but it is clear to everyone that if they are to survive, GM needs to become a boutique manufacturer since that is the demand for their cars. You cannot save the company as it was in its heyday. It is impractical and our resources would be better spent investing in the future rather than the past. Attachment and preservation, though it may come as ironic on an apple themed board, to any one company is irrational, unproductive, and economically infeasible... |
|
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
And I sort of agree with BuonRotto. It amazes me just how much GM just doesn't get it. Up until this recent economic crisis basically forced them to change or go bankrupt (and they still might go bankrupt!), they were essentially running their business like imports from Japan/Korea didn't exist. They were still (until today, anyway) trying to do the whole "first you buy a Chevy, then you buy a Pontiac, then you buy a Buick, then you buy a Cadillac, and you never own a non-GM vehicle in your life" thing. But that just doesn't work, because nobody does that, in the real world. At least not anymore. But save for effectively replacing Oldsmobile with Saturn (and, um, adding Saab and Hummer) they hadn't adjusted their brand portfolio, until now, to reflect their greatly diminished stature in the automotive world. That's just unbelievable, to me. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
quote |
meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
I am not afraid the Japanese as an economic group. Competition is good, but when something is vital to our lively hood, we need to have an auto industry of our own. GM will never return to their heyday, but they can still be an auto company that sells to average Joe and compete against Toyota and Honda. giggity |
|
quote |
M AH - ch ain saw
Join Date: May 2004
|
I'm more worried about the Chinese buying up all of our debt rather than having to buy all my cars from Japan.
I don't care much for American cars. I've never tried to make that a secret but I've also never gone around with the intent to hate on American cars. I think I will be sad to see Saab go under, out of all the brands that GM has under its umbrella. Saab is an old company with some nice European heritage. Tell me that isn't beautiful. User formally known as Sh0eWax |
quote |
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope. Join Date: May 2004
Location: Inner Swabia. If you have to ask twice, don't.
|
it isn't beautiful, but i am lying.
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
|
|
quote |
Not sayin', just sayin'
|
Oh, I don't mean to say they got it a while ago, or that they fully get it. They almost got it with Saturn (well, the Saturn guys got it because, at first, they were left to their own devices, unencumbered by GM brass), but screwed the pooch. GM has only very, very recently begun to get it, and even then not completely still. GM still doesn't understand the details of what makes something like the Fit fun. Small cars to GM are still cheap cars, and that's not the case with other manufacturers. They're getting better, but they aren't getting the big picture still. It's like the difference between strategy and tactics. GM is all tactics, and that's why even an overly-cautious and somewhat conservative (in terms of execution of policy at least) White House immediately saw through the lame reorganization the execs drew up. Even for a White House that trusts bankers to fix what bankers fucked up in banking (and for everyone), they don't trust the car execs to get themselves out of their own mess.
|
quote |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
|
You know, almost everyone likes the OLD 70s GM cars. Reconditions GTOs can sell for a LOT.
Why CAN'T they just make the same exact body type with updated emission and safety crap (to comply with laws)? I mean EXACTLY the same exterior and interior. People would buy that like CRAZY. The mustang is kind of going down that path... The best design Pontiac has seen is probably the vibe... But thats really the Toyota Matrix.... So long Pontiac, Hummer, and Saturn... SAAB, how DID you get into this mess? JTA |
quote |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
|
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
blargh i are stupid :( | Robo | General Discussion | 23 | 2009-04-20 10:38 |
Is my PB dead? | Phoenix | Genius Bar | 2 | 2007-07-03 12:05 |
pc dead :( | evilswan | AppleOutsider | 13 | 2005-12-23 14:43 |
Dead PS or dead logic board? How to tell | kretara | Genius Bar | 1 | 2004-12-05 22:35 |