Sorry...sarcasm doesn't translate very well over the internet. I was joking about how people want to kill GMC when it makes money, but keep Pontiac

 

When you take a step back on GMC it really is ......the cost of Chevy trucks + additional options development + additional dealers and franchising (that may be a plus?!) + additional interior and exterior panel development of the same truck. It leads me to think the real reason they keep GMC is heritage.

Think about it... if they funnel the GMC extras into Silverados then what buyer is actually going to buypass a Chevrolet Sierra they claim undying love for, for an F150?

 

It also allows for Buick dealers to sell trucks.

 

Your under the assumption that GMC buyers would buy a Chevy if they didn't buy a GMC. Sadly this is not a likely thing to happen. Why? Cause they'd already have bought the cheaper chevy if they were gonna buy a chevy.

 

I for one do not believe that less brands/nameplates is going to equal more sales. GM will never make up the lost market share that each of these brands carried. I understand dumping Hummer, Saab and Saturn, it needed to happen but GM should have kept the core brands.

People say that there will be better cars because money will be spent developing one car vs. 4 or 5 for the different brands. That may be true only time will tell. I will miss the variety that the different brands offered. Back in 2002 we were looking for a new car for my wife and we test drove every version of the W-bodies: Impala, Grand Prix, Regal and Intrigue and we both liked the Olds Intrigue the best. I actually loved the styling and performance of the Grand Prix GTP, but after I drove the Intrigue the fit and finish and quality of materials used in the interior were way above the other models, my wife wanted an Intrigue. With the new GM choices are going to be slim.

 

Im going a step further. Im proposing that, if no GMC existed, the would-be Sierra customer would chose the Silverado over a Ram or F150.

 

Like Rich already said, it allows Buick dealers to sell trucks as well.
GMC outsells Buick over 2-1.
YTD
Buick 47,223
GMC 118,471

Without GMC I doubt Buick could survive on its own, leaving GM with 2 brands....

 

You'd be surprised how many people will buy a GMC, but not a Chevy because of an issue they have had with a Chevy in the past...even though the most of the truck is the same.

 

[QUOTE=30thZ286speed;6035961]I for one do not believe that less brands/nameplates is going to equal more sales. GM will never make up the lost market share that each of these brands carried. ...QUOTE]


GM isn't trying to make more sales or even retain their current market share. They are trying to become profitable before all else. Large market share does not always equal profitable.

 

To me GMC is a non issue. It makes good money. The problem I see, is the problem GM has had for a long time, how to fit Buick between Chevy and Cadillac. Buick will have to find a niche or Caddy will have to move more upscale. What say you?

 

[QUOTE=JeremyNYR;6036232]Yes I understand that, but at some point GM will want start increasing there market share and its going to be really, really hard for them to make up any ground with less nameplates.

 

[QUOTE=30thZ286speed;6036243]Like Toyota and all thier nameplates?

 

Anyone find this interesting? http://www.autoblog.com/2009/07/11/l...u-s-z28-likel/ The G8 is going to be a caprice in the US?

 

Caddy XLS?

 

I personally know people that will not buy a Chevy that own GMCs. Don't ask me why. I've challenged them on it, and they have no real answer other than "I won't buy a Chevy."

I'd say GM doesn't need the business of people this dumb, but they do...