that makes sense if you can. could chevrolet?

 

thats why they have rebates?

 

I certainly think so.

Less supply, more demand, better car, smaller dealer network to support.

I think Chevrolet would be in a good spot. It would, to use the figure of speech, "clear the decks" for them to get down to business without having to drag along a bunch of half-dead wheezers.

Furthermore, it helps CADILLAC. How? By un-cluttering THEIR market. I have made the point here a ton of times that there is NO ROOM to position a car, let alone 3 divisions, in between the price points of a fully loaded Impala and a stripped CTS.

Chevy's large car creeps up a grand or so...

CTS creeps up a couple of grand...

Life is good.

 

Pretty much EVERYTHING (even Toyotas...) have rebates now.

I will kindly remind you that while December wasn't good for anybody, Toyota and Honda actually had is WORSE than GM.

 

I was going to post the exact same thing but then again I thought, if he didn't already know that then there wouldn't be much of a point to inform him.

 

hows toyotas profits lately?

 

i know that. i also know toyota lost money due to it.

 

Certainly better than it would be if they hadn't gone with cut-rate financing and rebates.

 

I'm beginning to see your perspective on this one.

 

perhaps. but i don't see how chevy can charge more for cars they have to rebate to sell regardless of the economy.

 

FWIW, I would have considered the crew cab version (Holden Crewman) had they imported it over here. However that was never in the plans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ho..._Crewman_S.jpg

Best real-world utility vehicle design IMHO.

 

You sure about that?



http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/06/c...pt-is-ute-ifu/

 

Definitely. The Crewman's bed is a lot more usuable for my needs.

 

Um.... actually...... it was.... sort of.

A 4 door Ute-type vehicle has always been part of the plan. However, it wasn't going to simply be a carbon copy of the sedan the way the 2 door was.

There was more to that Denali concept than just wishful thinking.

Also, keep in mind, GM has an assembly line that makes a single model based on that chassis. GM still plans to add another product based on the same Zeta architecture as Camaro to that line as soon as the dust settles and money starts flowing again. Though a sports sedan based on the Camaro is my personal favorite of the proposals, it could very well be a vehicle based on the Denali concept.


I agree that everything should have been sent all at once. This was the same mistake they made with the G6.

If the entire G8 line had come at once, it would have been seen more as a regular car lineup instead of s niche sports sedan (as it seems to be viewed as now).

I think one of the G8's problems is the opposite as the GTO's. The G8 V6 shouldn't have hood scoops. Even the GT shouldn't have them. They should be reserved for the top power GXP. The GTO looked too incognito without them. The G8 looks almost over the top with them.

People buying a sports sedan aren't buying a high performance car, or a muscle car. The G8 looks aggressive (and good) enough to sell on it's own looks. The hood scoops simply say "Juvenile" to alot of sophisticated buyers who will be the ones who would buying the G8 in volume.

Lose the hood scoops, and G8 will pick up quite a few sales.

None.

If it happened, it would have been based on a RWD Impala.

(GM isn't likely to sell a vehicle at Chevrolet that has the same sheetmetal as a vehicle at Pontiac)

I suspect that if anything, GMC will end up with a version in the near future.

They were the other division considered for the Ute in the begining, and it will sit in the same showroom.

However, I suspect if GMC makes it it will have different sheetmetal and will be sold in Australia as the replacement for the former Crewman 4 door.



Crash course:

* The vehicle is already in production....
* The vehicle is already sold in at least 3 countries (Australia, New Zealand, middle east countries)....
* All required parts (nose & modular LHD assembly) have been in production for some time...
* Any sales to the US would have simply added production...

.... therefore, the car was FLOP-PROOF!!!

As long as each car recouped the money for the boat ride over here, even if GM sold a just few hundred, this increased the sales (and production) of the thing by a few hundred.... therfore, they made additional money on an existing model by increasing sales of the vehicle.

If there was ever such a thing as an absolutely free way to increase sales (and income) regardless as to how it actually sold, this was it.

GM decided against it because they are cutting Pontiac's model lineup, and they don't feel a sports truck is one of the only 2-3 models they plan to keep.

They are being forced to pick which ones to keep. At the moment, it seems that the G8 sedan, the G6 sedan, and the Solstice are the only ones being considered for survival..... yes, the Solstice doesn't appear to be quite dead yet.

 

Still a ton better than GM's?

Not to mention that the auto market just cratered and 30% of the customers just disappeared (perhaps to never come back), and you guys are still arguing Volume-Uber-Alles? GM couldn't make money when they were selling record numbers, what makes you think they can profit that way in a down market?

I think PacerX is making a very simple point here. Build a single highly-desirable vehicle in each segement, stop carrying obsolete models and half-assed dogs, get your production and sales network in line with demand; and then watch your selling prices shoot through the roof. No more "Red Tag" sales, no more "Employee Pricing", no more rental fleet dumps.

GM is still using a "push" strategy in a market that doesn't want to be pushed. Fortunately they are moving to a "pull" strategy, but they have a lot of models to refresh and not a lot of time.

(Also, guionM, agreed about the "juvenile" hood scoops.)