GTO a failure?...... Um.... No!
01-12-2009, 05:14 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
GTO a failure?...... Um.... No!
In a country where sales numbers are determined in dozens or even hundreds of thousands, it's easy to look at the GTO sales numbers and immediately think the car was a failure. After all, Ford sold over 150,000 mustangs annually, and GTO's totals sales over the 3 years it was sold here didn't even reach 60,000.
But you'd be wrong to think it wasn't a success.
The Holden Monaro was created by modifying a Holden Commodore. It cost roughly $60 millionAUS (about $40 million US dollars at the time.... Camaro's 1998 redesign cost about $250 million), and was created over a mere 22 month period (typical takeoffs of existing chassis took about 3 years at the time).
The car debuted in 2001, and total production run was expected to last only 3 years at a total of roughly 15,000 cars. The entire business case involved making the Monaro a limited run coupe that made quite a bit of money as a high end sports coupe.
Then General Motors North America got involved.
GM-NA has sent people to get involved with Holden's new VE line with the expectation of exporting or even making those models here. Buick was to get a version of the Statesman, and Chevrolet was to get the Ute as a new El Camino (there was an El Camino concept that made the rounds in the early 90s that presented an idea of the return of the El Camino... though the concept was based on a FWD midsized platform). These cars were to step in when GM was discontinued their large BOF RWD sedans (which happened earlier than expected).
Even an early 5th gen Camaro proposal was based on the Holden VE... but that's something I think will be in the Camaro book, so I'll skip it.
It was one of the leftover transplants from GM-NA who stayed at Holden that alerted senior management (in particular, Bob Lutz) to the potential of using the Holden Monaro as a reinvented GTO or even a Chevelle. While the Monaro was a bit pricey for a Chevrolet (although it was sold in the middle east as a Chevy Lumina coupe), it made alot of sense as a new Pontiac GTO since Pontiac Firebird buyers were almost exclusively buying high end Trans Ams and WS6s, and seemed a better fit for the Monaro than budget minded Chevrolet buyers were.
The numbers made a Pontiac Monaro irresistable. The car used a North American GM drivetrain & Australia emissions was in some ways more strict than that here in the US. The entire car was created to be profitable selling a mear 15,000 models over it's life. It could be quickly converted to US standards (most all of the early money was made for making the car compatable with extreme winter weather and that "GTO" exhaust sound...NOT federalizing the car).
There was extreme opposition to the car. It ranged from everything from making the Monaro pass federal regulations to better places where the money could be spent. In the end, the argument in favor of the Monaro and the fact that it was such a cheap car to do and needed no substantial work while actually helping increase production of a Genertal Motors facility all but crushed every argument that was raised against it.
GM upper management confidently proclaimed they would sell 18,000 GTOs annually....They would have done themselves a great service if they has checked the production numbers of the similarly priced Firebird Trans Am WS6s first.
Car publications and the general public comparing the GTO to Ford's Mustang also didn't help. The loaded, single option (a sunroof), high end, IRS GTO obviously outclassed the Mustang line (and the GT in particular), but that didn't stop or pause critics, and those who never even personally drove one. Even the original 2004 GTO was the quickest production GTO up to that date.
However, the GTO was a built in money maker that actually gave the Holden Monaro a huge breath of life.
The original Monaro interior (which was shared with high end Commodores) recieved a whole new dash due to increased production (that rocketed to an expected 15,000 over 3 years to over 70,000 over 5 years). Monaro also inherited the scooped hood, exhaust, improved brakes, and a host of other big improvements, things that would have never been afforded under the old Monaro business plan.
As for GM-NA, they were able to add an image model and fill a gap to the Pontiac line up for less than the price of creating a GXP package. GM-NA spent between $40 and 60 million dollars for both the initial GTO and the 2005 upgrades, reciving a whole car for less than nothing.
Although the Pontiac dealers didn't know how to sell the car and GM made a huge mistake in allocation (the most successful Pontiac dealers got the bulk of early models, but those Pontiac dealers were in the Northeast... in the middle of winter... with RWD models) while the rest of the country experienced GTO shortages that sent markups into the stratosphere which in turn influenced new GTO prices nationwide (even in the snowbelt where many sat for months).
GM also erred in not including GTO in any promotionals including incentive programs. GM was still going to make money on the car, and they certainly diodn't need to move many, so GTOs were exempt from incentive programs even when other sports and high intrest cars weren't. When GM finally included GTO in September 2004, sales went through the roof, shooting from less than 1,000 monthly to over 2,000. GM latter settled on annual GTO sales of between 12-14,000.
GM was forced to stop production of the GTO for the same reason it stopped production of the F-body: New Federal Regulations. In this instance, the new federal regs concerned front seat passengers. There was new safety standards regarding airbag deployments that took place at the start of the Federal new model year (September 1, 2004). Holden (and GM) simply saw no need to spend money on a car that was going to be replaced, so they simply wound out production until they had to stop. Like the Camaro, GM continued to make the GTO well past it's expiration date. Holden ended production of the Monaro many months before Holden stopped producing GTOs.
It was expected that soon after GTO's production stopped (less than 2 years) GM North America would begin production of their own new 2 door coupe based on the Zeta. When that plan seemed to hit a wall, there was an effort to supply the new front seat safety requirements (which would require new airbags, new dash, and potentially "A" pillar airbags) & continue making the GTO until it's replacement was ready, but Holden was unable to get it funded, and Pontiac was contracted to recieve the car for only 3 years, and the car far outlived it's expected lifespan already by almost double.
In the end, Holden made money and got a long extention (and substantial upgrades) to the Monaro. GM North America got a car for Pontiac and paid next to nothing for it. Holden is a General Motors subsidary, so since Holden made far more money than expected on the Monaro, General Motors made substantial money on the car (for the small investment it & Holden had in the Monaro).
Some of the same thing is at play on the current G8.
The G8 is a car that had a business plan that made it profitable selling only in Australia via the Commodore Zeta(although the Statesman and Caprice depend on exports and knockoff kits to be profitable). The G8 adds volume to an existing business plan that was built excluding US exports.
The new Camaro will use extensive parts and stampings from Holden Australia. This both keeps Camaro affordable (and doable with no other North American car currently sharing most of it's parts) and keeps the supply network Holden depends on (much of it from Holden itself) at capacity even in a downturn.
GM is still able to make money even with the G8's seemingly slow sales, and how GM would have made money on the G8 ST.
The ST simply would have added a few thousand more units to an assembly line already producing the vehicle. The fact that it got approved over the G8 wagon is based on pumping up the volume of the Ute (wagon is doing just fine) and strictly image.... GM was looking at the G8 ST as a way to attract attention to Pontiac by offering something no one else had. In the end.... and this is official... and very plausable (though I strongly disagree with the decision)... having anything that can be designated a truck in a division that's even sheding it's crossover SUVs, and will soon adopt a performance car image conflicts with that goal.
Sorry anti-El Camino guys.... it's not coming due to moving Pontiac's image... not because GM didn't think they'd make a few bucks on the thing.
Another item regarding future cars and Holden may upset a couple of you.
Holden is handling all RWD passenger car programs except the Corvette. This includes substantially part of the so-called Alpha.
Also, Sigma is a dead end.
Without going too far into details, The big difference between Sigma and Zeta is in cost and ability to handle high powered powertrains... especially through the rear end.... and space efficiency.
Any future RWD vehicles that are V8 capable (again, outside of Corvette) will be Zeta based. Cadillac will be hanging on to Sigma for the immediate future due to it being a chassis that has it's own existing supplier system. Extending Zeta beyond Holden's capacity to make parts requires GM to spend money to create a new or expanded Zeta supply system. Something that GM isn't obviously able to do currently... and also had a bearing on Buick and Cadillac's Zeta to be postponed (though not officially cancelled). At the moment, GM still has it on their plate, but other vehicles have higher priority.
A RWD Impala is toast (till at least the middle of next decade) because the current car's replacement can't be delayed any longer, while the more recently done Lucerne and DTS actaully can be held up a year or 2.
But you'd be wrong to think it wasn't a success.
The Holden Monaro was created by modifying a Holden Commodore. It cost roughly $60 millionAUS (about $40 million US dollars at the time.... Camaro's 1998 redesign cost about $250 million), and was created over a mere 22 month period (typical takeoffs of existing chassis took about 3 years at the time).
The car debuted in 2001, and total production run was expected to last only 3 years at a total of roughly 15,000 cars. The entire business case involved making the Monaro a limited run coupe that made quite a bit of money as a high end sports coupe.
Then General Motors North America got involved.
GM-NA has sent people to get involved with Holden's new VE line with the expectation of exporting or even making those models here. Buick was to get a version of the Statesman, and Chevrolet was to get the Ute as a new El Camino (there was an El Camino concept that made the rounds in the early 90s that presented an idea of the return of the El Camino... though the concept was based on a FWD midsized platform). These cars were to step in when GM was discontinued their large BOF RWD sedans (which happened earlier than expected).
Even an early 5th gen Camaro proposal was based on the Holden VE... but that's something I think will be in the Camaro book, so I'll skip it.
It was one of the leftover transplants from GM-NA who stayed at Holden that alerted senior management (in particular, Bob Lutz) to the potential of using the Holden Monaro as a reinvented GTO or even a Chevelle. While the Monaro was a bit pricey for a Chevrolet (although it was sold in the middle east as a Chevy Lumina coupe), it made alot of sense as a new Pontiac GTO since Pontiac Firebird buyers were almost exclusively buying high end Trans Ams and WS6s, and seemed a better fit for the Monaro than budget minded Chevrolet buyers were.
The numbers made a Pontiac Monaro irresistable. The car used a North American GM drivetrain & Australia emissions was in some ways more strict than that here in the US. The entire car was created to be profitable selling a mear 15,000 models over it's life. It could be quickly converted to US standards (most all of the early money was made for making the car compatable with extreme winter weather and that "GTO" exhaust sound...NOT federalizing the car).
There was extreme opposition to the car. It ranged from everything from making the Monaro pass federal regulations to better places where the money could be spent. In the end, the argument in favor of the Monaro and the fact that it was such a cheap car to do and needed no substantial work while actually helping increase production of a Genertal Motors facility all but crushed every argument that was raised against it.
GM upper management confidently proclaimed they would sell 18,000 GTOs annually....They would have done themselves a great service if they has checked the production numbers of the similarly priced Firebird Trans Am WS6s first.
Car publications and the general public comparing the GTO to Ford's Mustang also didn't help. The loaded, single option (a sunroof), high end, IRS GTO obviously outclassed the Mustang line (and the GT in particular), but that didn't stop or pause critics, and those who never even personally drove one. Even the original 2004 GTO was the quickest production GTO up to that date.
However, the GTO was a built in money maker that actually gave the Holden Monaro a huge breath of life.
The original Monaro interior (which was shared with high end Commodores) recieved a whole new dash due to increased production (that rocketed to an expected 15,000 over 3 years to over 70,000 over 5 years). Monaro also inherited the scooped hood, exhaust, improved brakes, and a host of other big improvements, things that would have never been afforded under the old Monaro business plan.
As for GM-NA, they were able to add an image model and fill a gap to the Pontiac line up for less than the price of creating a GXP package. GM-NA spent between $40 and 60 million dollars for both the initial GTO and the 2005 upgrades, reciving a whole car for less than nothing.
Although the Pontiac dealers didn't know how to sell the car and GM made a huge mistake in allocation (the most successful Pontiac dealers got the bulk of early models, but those Pontiac dealers were in the Northeast... in the middle of winter... with RWD models) while the rest of the country experienced GTO shortages that sent markups into the stratosphere which in turn influenced new GTO prices nationwide (even in the snowbelt where many sat for months).
GM also erred in not including GTO in any promotionals including incentive programs. GM was still going to make money on the car, and they certainly diodn't need to move many, so GTOs were exempt from incentive programs even when other sports and high intrest cars weren't. When GM finally included GTO in September 2004, sales went through the roof, shooting from less than 1,000 monthly to over 2,000. GM latter settled on annual GTO sales of between 12-14,000.
GM was forced to stop production of the GTO for the same reason it stopped production of the F-body: New Federal Regulations. In this instance, the new federal regs concerned front seat passengers. There was new safety standards regarding airbag deployments that took place at the start of the Federal new model year (September 1, 2004). Holden (and GM) simply saw no need to spend money on a car that was going to be replaced, so they simply wound out production until they had to stop. Like the Camaro, GM continued to make the GTO well past it's expiration date. Holden ended production of the Monaro many months before Holden stopped producing GTOs.
It was expected that soon after GTO's production stopped (less than 2 years) GM North America would begin production of their own new 2 door coupe based on the Zeta. When that plan seemed to hit a wall, there was an effort to supply the new front seat safety requirements (which would require new airbags, new dash, and potentially "A" pillar airbags) & continue making the GTO until it's replacement was ready, but Holden was unable to get it funded, and Pontiac was contracted to recieve the car for only 3 years, and the car far outlived it's expected lifespan already by almost double.
In the end, Holden made money and got a long extention (and substantial upgrades) to the Monaro. GM North America got a car for Pontiac and paid next to nothing for it. Holden is a General Motors subsidary, so since Holden made far more money than expected on the Monaro, General Motors made substantial money on the car (for the small investment it & Holden had in the Monaro).
Some of the same thing is at play on the current G8.
The G8 is a car that had a business plan that made it profitable selling only in Australia via the Commodore Zeta(although the Statesman and Caprice depend on exports and knockoff kits to be profitable). The G8 adds volume to an existing business plan that was built excluding US exports.
The new Camaro will use extensive parts and stampings from Holden Australia. This both keeps Camaro affordable (and doable with no other North American car currently sharing most of it's parts) and keeps the supply network Holden depends on (much of it from Holden itself) at capacity even in a downturn.
GM is still able to make money even with the G8's seemingly slow sales, and how GM would have made money on the G8 ST.
The ST simply would have added a few thousand more units to an assembly line already producing the vehicle. The fact that it got approved over the G8 wagon is based on pumping up the volume of the Ute (wagon is doing just fine) and strictly image.... GM was looking at the G8 ST as a way to attract attention to Pontiac by offering something no one else had. In the end.... and this is official... and very plausable (though I strongly disagree with the decision)... having anything that can be designated a truck in a division that's even sheding it's crossover SUVs, and will soon adopt a performance car image conflicts with that goal.
Sorry anti-El Camino guys.... it's not coming due to moving Pontiac's image... not because GM didn't think they'd make a few bucks on the thing.
Another item regarding future cars and Holden may upset a couple of you.
Holden is handling all RWD passenger car programs except the Corvette. This includes substantially part of the so-called Alpha.
Also, Sigma is a dead end.
Without going too far into details, The big difference between Sigma and Zeta is in cost and ability to handle high powered powertrains... especially through the rear end.... and space efficiency.
Any future RWD vehicles that are V8 capable (again, outside of Corvette) will be Zeta based. Cadillac will be hanging on to Sigma for the immediate future due to it being a chassis that has it's own existing supplier system. Extending Zeta beyond Holden's capacity to make parts requires GM to spend money to create a new or expanded Zeta supply system. Something that GM isn't obviously able to do currently... and also had a bearing on Buick and Cadillac's Zeta to be postponed (though not officially cancelled). At the moment, GM still has it on their plate, but other vehicles have higher priority.
A RWD Impala is toast (till at least the middle of next decade) because the current car's replacement can't be delayed any longer, while the more recently done Lucerne and DTS actaully can be held up a year or 2.
01-12-2009, 05:32 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
Nice post Guy.
I guess you've answered why the Monaro became a Pontiac instead of a Chev.
I can't help but feel that the Chev Monaro would have been far more successful. It's a shame that the good old fashioned in-fighting is working against GM.
I guess you've answered why the Monaro became a Pontiac instead of a Chev.
I can't help but feel that the Chev Monaro would have been far more successful. It's a shame that the good old fashioned in-fighting is working against GM.
01-12-2009, 07:42 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bentonville, AR
Posts: 1,451
01-12-2009, 07:43 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 3,132
Another item regarding future cars and Holden may upset a couple of you.
Holden is handling all RWD passenger car programs except the Corvette. This includes substantially part of the so-called Alpha.
Also, Sigma is a dead end.
Without going too far into details, The big difference between Sigma and Zeta is in cost and ability to handle high powered powertrains... especially through the rear end.... and space efficiency.
Any future RWD vehicles that are V8 capable (again, outside of Corvette) will be Zeta based. Cadillac will be hanging on to Sigma for the immediate future due to it being a chassis that has it's own existing supplier system. Extending Zeta beyond Holden's capacity to make parts requires GM to spend money to create a new or expanded Zeta supply system. Something that GM isn't obviously able to do currently... and also had a bearing on Buick and Cadillac's Zeta to be postponed (though not officially cancelled). At the moment, GM still has it on their plate, but other vehicles have higher priority.
A RWD Impala is toast (till at least the middle of next decade) because the current car's replacement can't be delayed any longer, while the more recently done Lucerne and DTS actaully can be held up a year or 2.
Holden is handling all RWD passenger car programs except the Corvette. This includes substantially part of the so-called Alpha.
Also, Sigma is a dead end.
Without going too far into details, The big difference between Sigma and Zeta is in cost and ability to handle high powered powertrains... especially through the rear end.... and space efficiency.
Any future RWD vehicles that are V8 capable (again, outside of Corvette) will be Zeta based. Cadillac will be hanging on to Sigma for the immediate future due to it being a chassis that has it's own existing supplier system. Extending Zeta beyond Holden's capacity to make parts requires GM to spend money to create a new or expanded Zeta supply system. Something that GM isn't obviously able to do currently... and also had a bearing on Buick and Cadillac's Zeta to be postponed (though not officially cancelled). At the moment, GM still has it on their plate, but other vehicles have higher priority.
A RWD Impala is toast (till at least the middle of next decade) because the current car's replacement can't be delayed any longer, while the more recently done Lucerne and DTS actaully can be held up a year or 2.
I'm not surprised that Holden would be doing Alpha, since GME has Epsilon II, and Holden needs a smaller RWD.
01-12-2009, 08:10 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,502
GM also erred in not including GTO in any promotionals including incentive programs.
.
01-13-2009, 06:11 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 681
Is this statement based on the US version of the GTO? The GTO didn't have a sunroof as an option in the US. Also, there really isn't such a thing as a loaded GTO. The option list for the GTO isn't that long. 2004 had the Pulse Red (Was intended to be 40th anniversary package), Exterior color, interior color (depending on exterior color), wheels, transmission, SAP, Smoker's package that's about all I can think of.
Sunroofs were also available as conversions. I believe that it was supplied from the Aus supplier.
01-13-2009, 08:53 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: manassas, VA
Posts: 808
Yup. The sunroof was supplied by webasto. The SAP and smoker's package were dealer installed. In 2004 the only options were transmission and ext/int color. The 18" wheels didn't debut as an option until 2005.
01-13-2009, 09:03 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 176
man thats a massive post.
I've argued for some time the GTO wasn't the failure some would label it. It's arrival came at a confusing time for GM. You had the fbody void and the stang going retro. Plus, the name brought baggage. The media reception was cool (not in a good way).
Who could have know the geezers would throw a fit over it. Ah, forget em.
Aftermarket and community is strong for such a "low sales" car.
I've argued for some time the GTO wasn't the failure some would label it. It's arrival came at a confusing time for GM. You had the fbody void and the stang going retro. Plus, the name brought baggage. The media reception was cool (not in a good way).
Who could have know the geezers would throw a fit over it. Ah, forget em.
Aftermarket and community is strong for such a "low sales" car.
01-13-2009, 01:10 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 766
Good post.....
My biggest issue with this whole "was it a success or failure" thing with the GTO is that magazines repeatedly say that the car was discontinued because it was a sales flop - NO IT WASN'T - it was discontinued as Guy laid out because of changing safety regulations and (this is the one I was most familiar with) because the VZ platform it was built on was replaced by the VE platform and there was no coupe variant (well there's now Camaro but that's a whole other beast).
On the plus side, now that the dust has settled on the whole thing, GTOs are now (at last though tool ate for new cars) legal for sale in Canada so my options look a whole lot more interesting since I really dig the GTO - it would save some coin over a G8 or Camaro - so hard decisions lay ahead.... seems Transport Canada relaxed its rules on bumper standards or there was some other parting of the seas... I really thought the day would never come when I could consider a "new" GTO.
My biggest issue with this whole "was it a success or failure" thing with the GTO is that magazines repeatedly say that the car was discontinued because it was a sales flop - NO IT WASN'T - it was discontinued as Guy laid out because of changing safety regulations and (this is the one I was most familiar with) because the VZ platform it was built on was replaced by the VE platform and there was no coupe variant (well there's now Camaro but that's a whole other beast).
On the plus side, now that the dust has settled on the whole thing, GTOs are now (at last though tool ate for new cars) legal for sale in Canada so my options look a whole lot more interesting since I really dig the GTO - it would save some coin over a G8 or Camaro - so hard decisions lay ahead.... seems Transport Canada relaxed its rules on bumper standards or there was some other parting of the seas... I really thought the day would never come when I could consider a "new" GTO.
01-13-2009, 04:20 PM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: oshawa,ontario,canada
Posts: 3,597
On the plus side, now that the dust has settled on the whole thing, GTOs are now (at last though tool ate for new cars) legal for sale in Canada so my options look a whole lot more interesting since I really dig the GTO - it would save some coin over a G8 or Camaro - so hard decisions lay ahead.... seems Transport Canada relaxed its rules on bumper standards or there was some other parting of the seas... I really thought the day would never come when I could consider a "new" GTO.
01-13-2009, 04:34 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MA
Posts: 194
Awesome post Guy. The dealership I worked for at the time was one of those Northeast dealerships who got their Goats in the middle of a snowy winter.
One of the problems I noticed when the car first came out was that dealers were expecting it to be a big seller so they priced cars over sticker or loaded them up with so much aftermarket stuff that a lot of interested people said no way.
One of the problems I noticed when the car first came out was that dealers were expecting it to be a big seller so they priced cars over sticker or loaded them up with so much aftermarket stuff that a lot of interested people said no way.