Well BDnF, lets put it this way, it's not selling as expected or as it's supposed to. That's the only way I think it can be accurately described.

 

Someone doesn't pay attention as I wasn't talking to you, but ETSS instead. And most Thirds I've been in have been pretty good in the rattle department, that's my experience. (they've all been in good condition) BTW, the absolute worst rattling F-Body I've ever heard was an early 4th Gen Firebird. I could hear the car making all kinds of squeaks while I was driving behind it. Obviously not a car that was taken care of and in need of repairs.

 

Interesting statement. Is it selling at levels satisfactory to you? Is it selling at levels satisfactory to GM? If so, what is that "satisfactory" level and when did GTO sales meet said level?

Please be as specific as you can. Thanks.

 

One biggie there is TA had T-tops . I love the GTO , but I couldnt possibly see myself owning a car without even a sunroof . Why does the GTO not even have that as an option


Local dealer the same 4 GTO's its had for months and 2 more coming . That dealer you can get a GTO at invoice which amounted to $3000 off sticker with 2.9% for 60 months . I didnt have to ask , its the 1st thing the salesman said . If it had a sunroof I most likely woulda bought one . Something like that may seem trivial , but if your gonna blow $29K it better have everything you want .....my opinion .

 

As I've already stated, it is quite possible for dealers to have sunroofs installed on these cars. I've got pictures of the dealer demo car my sales manager at Bob Sellers Pontiac-GMC showed me, with a sunroof already installed, a sunroof they offered to throw in free due to the car having a few K of demo miles under its belt.

Unlike some here, I'm not too big to admit my ignorance on a subject. I frankly don't know... because I don't know what PROFIT levels they are selling at. I'm not privy to that data... are any of you? (***crickets chirping***). Didn't think so. But I can safely conclude this - one can deduce that so far GM hasn't been terribly alarmed about GTO sales or profits (hmm maybe because thousands aren't even DELIVERED yet?). I'm seeing now that GM is adding incentives... yes those incentives, the ones with which GM TOOK THE LEAD in the marketplace after the 9/11 attacks to help keep the US economy sailing along, the incentives that other carmakers carp and moan about nonstop due to them not being the LOWEST-COST producer in North America

I'm growing a little tired of the whining, blaming attitude of some of the GTO cynics here. "Oh... drat... the dirty dealer is charging extra!" Dealers are independent businesspeople. They are PERFECTLY JUSTIFIED in charging whatever the market will bear for these cars. If people want them bad enough due to their unique attributes of splendid RWD V8 power and distinctive, high-quality 2+2 interior, they will pay the negotiated price. It's clear in many cases they are not - so dealers are adjusting accordingly and buyers are making it clear what they are willing to pay. Is there some kind of crime there? The same thing happened with the Thunderbird, the 03 Cobra, the PT Cruiser and IIRC the 300C (strange... no Toyotas are coming to mind ). Damn those greedy dealers!

 

That would be a nice surprise. But let's visit this theme a little more below...

Nope. I haven't a clue (backwoods definition of ignorant). Then again, I am neither stating that said car is a failure - or that it is not a failure. You're stating its not - yet you have nothing to base your conclusion on? Oh wait - some deductions below. Ok. Perhaps you're not so ignorant as you lead us to believe?

And you know this because............how?

Or maybe its not. Please provide evidence - otherwise, you're just pissing in the wind.

Oh. The "patriotic" angle now. "Father GM" was instrumental in pulling us out through the post-9/11 economic slowdown.

Pathetic.

Maybe some of people are growing tired of the same old apologistic attitude from those with usernames starting with "BIG"?

I can point you to some good deals on Ritalin, if you'd like.

Absolutely. And the cars are perfectly justified in just sitting there, too.

Hark - we've found the problem! People don't want them bad enough. Ignorance is once again defeated!

Nope. They have to do something to move them off the lots. Got overhead?

Indeed. And at least one of the above is a sales failure - and you'll have no problem at all admitting which one it was. Why? Because its not a GM, and you take off your rose-colored glasses when you look at other makes.

So I guess you really don't have a clue if it is a failure or not? Do we (or you) even know what "failure" is, in this case?

Interesting.

 

I didn't say that you in particular had made the claim... only implied it to the extent you implied it with your question "Is it selling at levels satisfactory to GM?". As for my claim that it is not a failure, I stand by it, based on the observation that GM has made no drastic changes in incentives nor announcements of future product cancellations for the car. It indicates GM does not believe the car to be a failure, nor a "sales failure" (whatever that is ).

Evidence of what? Your question is unclear. Evidence they are not all at dealers yet? I saw that in a recent article... could dig it up but I have no faith it would sway your dogmatic mind so why bother?

It happens to be true. Your GM-jealousy prevents you from seeing this objectively... but you would if you could. GM is certainly not single-handedly responsible for the post-911 US recovery (surely you aren't thinking that is what I meant! ). But they had a leadership effect in spurring a 20% US car sales spike in 10/2001 according to the Detroit News. And their low-cost advantage has allowed them to continue offering incentives ever since. Or do you want to dispute that too

Is that all you've got now, personal attacks? That's the surest signal you can send that you are shooting blanks in refuting my actual points being made. Speaking of pathetic...

Is it time to offer a little golf clap for your lame humor?

So you answered my question... no crimes happening. Free commerce, independent businesspeople with the latitude to weigh the value of having a unique RWD V8 muscle car on their showroom floor to help draw in sporty car buyers of all types, vs. moving inventory to keep overhead costs low, vs. maximizing profits on units sold. *yawn*

I'll assume you speak of the Thunderbird, a car I felt would fail from the get-go. Underpowered, poorly launched and marketed (remember the ridiculous tv ad with the girlie-man driver who refused to race?), and a smiley-face-Barney front end only its female-dominated design team could love. Ford was clear in their statement that the car has a very limited production future, a statement that I'm sure comforted the car's buyers... The TBird CAR was a failure. But that didn't stop dealers from maximizing profit for an initial burst of deliveries... as they are PERFECTLY ENTITLED to do.

I do have a clue, and have already stated the case... unlike some on here, who have no objective quantifiable basis for claims of 'sales failures' (whatever that means).

 

ROFLOL. The car is out ~7 months, and part of your reasoning for the car not being a failure is that GM hasn't announced a "future product concellation"? Wow. That's a good one. As for incentives...guess not. I suppose GM is quite happy with the ~4000 cars they have sold. Must not be a failure.

LOL. My question is unclear simply because you have no good answer for it.

You saw a recent article....ya, I recently saw a Jackalope, too. Guess I'll go dig up a pic so you will believe it.

HAhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

ROFOFOFOFOOFOFLFLFLFLLFLFL. That has got to be the funniest (if not stupidest) line you've ever written (though I haven't seen anywhere near everything you've written, so I suppose I'm not qualified to say that). Jealousy? Objective? OH MY. Yes, I'm so jealous. I'm so damn Jealous, I think I'll just go down and buy me a 2004 Comp Grand Prix today! Or maybe a GTO! I mean, they look about the same - right? Or perhaps I'll buy my last car back from the guy that I sold it to. To get over my jealousy, of course.

As for objectiveness....go back and find a quote where I've taken one side or the other (GM vs Ford vs DCX vs Imports vs whatever) on silly arguements like this.

Jealous. LOL. That is truly funny. Thank you for making my day.

Oh man - I was worried about being wrong on that one!

I'm sure they did. Or at least you are sure they are sure they did. I'll go buy a GM just to support the cause. Thanks.

Nope - not something I brought up. By the way, how's their profit margin doing? What's that? You don't know? Oh.

Goofy, if you consider that a "personal attack", I will indeed find a low-cost provider for your medication.

As for "shooting blanks", that requires surgery. Can't help you with that - sorry.

Offer what you wish. We don't expect much, based on past performance.

Yup. Car's not selling. Question answered.

ROFLOL. So, the cars are sitting on the showroom floor to "help draw in sporty car buyers of all types". LOL. Looking for what? GP's with ghetto wheels? These dealers would rather keep these "unique" cars on the showroom than move them. Hmmm. Interesting.

Ok. What was that about "objective" and "jealous"?

Obviously if you felt it, it was as good as gone from the get-go.

You know. And we know you know. But you are correct, that is what I was referring to.

Hey - there's objectivity in action!

Personally, I never liked the latest T-Bird (was a fan of the old one first the first few years it was out). I thought it was ugly, over-priced, and under-powered. Then again, I wasn't trying to defend a car that is/was selling so poorly. Was I, Vern?

No doubt the dealers were overwhelmed with buyers coming into the showroom floor totally dismayed that the car had a very limited production. I bet those comments were just running rampent through Ford dealers on a daily basis. Yup. You hit that nail on the head.

You'll get no issues on what dealers can or cannot do from me. I remember quite well the markups on F-bodys in Va Beach. Yup, even the normal Z28s....$3000 or more. Their choice. Absolutely and completely irrelevent to the discussion at hand - but still an accurate statement.

I'll take your word for it.

Then again, maybe not.

Go back and read all my quotes, goofy. I'm not saying it is or isn't, though I'd lean toward the "is" part of the sales failure case (based primarily on the low number of cars sold, and the print media's similar assessment - I'm sure they forgot to ask you before they printed their stories).

What was your objective, quantifiable basis again? "Objective" implies you can consider all sides and issues, without bias (and we all know that you aren't bias - no no, you consider all car makers equally. Ya). Quantifiable implies that you have some factual numbers that support your claim.

Let's see....you and your brother "Big Al" are about the most GM-biased GM apologist on this Forum. You even admit it (want quotes?). Objectivity? Ya right. As for quanitfiable....it wasn't sales figures (those could only be used to claim failure). It wasn't profit margin (we don't know, and we cannot use what we don't know). I'm at a loss here, help me out. What was your "OBJECTIVE, QUANTIFIABLE" basis for your conclusion that it is not a failure?

Thanks, and have a wonderful day.

 

Bob, I love your posts, they crack me up. BTW, although it doesn't mean much coming from me since most people here think I'm Ford biased, you're fairly objective from what I've seen. Everyone has a little bias, but in moderation there's nothing wrong with that.

 

LOL. Tks. Some might be surprised to hear what I really think on some of these matters (not that it does matter for anything other than curiousity).

BTW.....you've now been branded.

 

You don't think you're Ford biased? Give me your unbiased answer

 

My unbiased answer (which I have given many times on this site) is that I prefer Ford products over GM products. However, as a car lover (plutonically of course), if GM were to make a vehicle I like and Ford did not offer a like vehicle, I would buy the GM. Case in point, my wife and I are considering buying the Colorado Crew Cab Z71. The new Dakota is butt ugly IMO and not being considered. We actually owned a 98 Dakota and liked it quite a bit. Ford unfortunately does not offer a small quad cab truck. I like the way the Colorado looks and it has decent power. Like I've said in another post, I've owned other makes before, yes, even GM products...so I'm not as biased as many here make me out to be and goes back to what I said in the previous post, "Everyone has a little bias, but in moderation there's nothing wrong with that."