GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by Omegalock
I always got the impression that their usage of upmarket meant upmarket from being considered the equal of Hyundai and Suzuki. Saturn would kill their emergence before they even got off the launch pad if they started trying to sell cars in the high 20s and low 30s. Not going to happen. Or if it does it won't last long.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by falchulk
Exact quote was upmarket to compete with Lexus. I took that to mean really all the Japanese lux brands. I can easily seeing them targeting the s2000 market, especially with it being discontinued.
Lexus is the exact position GM is taking Buick.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Not that long ago GM was bragging about how it could make a profit on these cars by selling a relatively low amount. 18,000 Solstice's rings a bell.
Ironicly, Toyota had said that it would be making a profit on the new Prius when they came out.
Is it just me or doesn't anyone else remember this....
Ironicly, Toyota had said that it would be making a profit on the new Prius when they came out.
Is it just me or doesn't anyone else remember this....
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by Joe K. 96 Zeee!!
Not that long ago GM was bragging about how it could make a profit on these cars by selling a relatively low amount. 18,000 Solstice's rings a bell.
Ironicly, Toyota had said that it would be making a profit on the new Prius when they came out.
Is it just me or doesn't anyone else remember this....
Ironicly, Toyota had said that it would be making a profit on the new Prius when they came out.
Is it just me or doesn't anyone else remember this....

Not just you, I remember it also.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by Z284ever
Not just you, I remember it also.

Knowing GM the way I think I do (and I emphasize the word think!), I don't believe GM's Product Planning Board, or GM's Board of Directors would have signed off on the Kappa project if they didn't think it would turn a profit. Especially with the pensions they have to deal with and the obvious bite incentives have been taking out of the bottom line. Even the Corvette would be dead right now if it wasn't profitable.
The SSR is based off the Trailblazer, and obviously wasn't as involved as the Solstice-Sky. The Kappa is a whole new "volume" chassis, that can be cheaply reconfigured into a variety of model types. It's also being made in a plant that can produce 200,000 cars.
There's more to all this than Mr. Wagoner is letting on, methinks.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
you think guy?
it seems like yea, they'd make a profit, only indirectly
get people into the showrooms and with other quality products around (like the aura) they'll prob end up buying that or some other saturn
seems too simple though for some reason
it seems like yea, they'd make a profit, only indirectly
get people into the showrooms and with other quality products around (like the aura) they'll prob end up buying that or some other saturn
seems too simple though for some reason
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
The kappas are supposed to be profitable at 18,000 units. If Saturn only plans on 10,000 selling, the Sky won't be profitable. This is where trying to build two kappa roadsters will become a problem. Can GM find enough market for 36,000 (18,000 of each) per year?
Maybe one of them should be a coupe or a 2+2 kappa.
I would hate to see the bad planning lead to a short life for the Kappas.
Maybe one of them should be a coupe or a 2+2 kappa.
I would hate to see the bad planning lead to a short life for the Kappas.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by guionM
The Kappa is a whole new "volume" chassis, that can be cheaply reconfigured into a variety of model types. It's also being made in a plant that can produce 200,000 cars.

I know the HHR is on Delta, but where is it going to be built? Next to the Cobalt or elsewhere?
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by SGT Posaune
The kappas are supposed to be profitable at 18,000 units. If Saturn only plans on 10,000 selling, the Sky won't be profitable. This is where trying to build two kappa roadsters will become a problem. Can GM find enough market for 36,000 (18,000 of each) per year?
Of course, I do remember it being said that it was necessary to keep production low due to the increased cost of the hydroformed frame rails on a large production rate. All this at a 200k capacity facility.
Either something's missing or somethings not right with these facts. I can't connect these dots.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by guionM
Perhaps this is where Torana comes in?? 
Knowing GM the way I think I do (and I emphasize the word think!), I don't believe GM's Product Planning Board, or GM's Board of Directors would have signed off on the Kappa project if they didn't think it would turn a profit. Especially with the pensions they have to deal with and the obvious bite incentives have been taking out of the bottom line. Even the Corvette would be dead right now if it wasn't profitable.
The SSR is based off the Trailblazer, and obviously wasn't as involved as the Solstice-Sky. The Kappa is a whole new "volume" chassis, that can be cheaply reconfigured into a variety of model types. It's also being made in a plant that can produce 200,000 cars.
There's more to all this than Mr. Wagoner is letting on, methinks.

Knowing GM the way I think I do (and I emphasize the word think!), I don't believe GM's Product Planning Board, or GM's Board of Directors would have signed off on the Kappa project if they didn't think it would turn a profit. Especially with the pensions they have to deal with and the obvious bite incentives have been taking out of the bottom line. Even the Corvette would be dead right now if it wasn't profitable.
The SSR is based off the Trailblazer, and obviously wasn't as involved as the Solstice-Sky. The Kappa is a whole new "volume" chassis, that can be cheaply reconfigured into a variety of model types. It's also being made in a plant that can produce 200,000 cars.
There's more to all this than Mr. Wagoner is letting on, methinks.
Last edited by Melee Penguin; Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46 PM.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Could it be possible that the Aura or other car could be made at Willmington? I mean they already made one Saturn mid sized.
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
That's what I don't understand....you don't build 2 little roadsters at a total volume of around 30,000 a year in a plant designed for 200,000. Plant underutilization is one big thing that killed the F-car. At least one new product closely related to the Kappa architecture has to be going in there....and we don't know what it is. 
I know the HHR is on Delta, but where is it going to be built? Next to the Cobalt or elsewhere?

I know the HHR is on Delta, but where is it going to be built? Next to the Cobalt or elsewhere?
Re: GM says it has no hope of making a profit on its new Saturn Sky roadster
Originally Posted by Joe K. 96 Zeee!!
I don't think it's as easy as saying 18,000 units per model to be profitable. Certainly costs will be shared on common parts. What the number of units required is, I have no idea, but I'd guess it'd be less than 18,000.
Of course, I do remember it being said that it was necessary to keep production low due to the increased cost of the hydroformed frame rails on a large production rate. All this at a 200k capacity facility.
Either something's missing or somethings not right with these facts. I can't connect these dots.
Of course, I do remember it being said that it was necessary to keep production low due to the increased cost of the hydroformed frame rails on a large production rate. All this at a 200k capacity facility.
Either something's missing or somethings not right with these facts. I can't connect these dots.


