Grand Prix would be a better name, but I think there were contract agreements with the Canadians (gov't or CAW?).

As far as looks, I prefer the Holden versions. They could have left the front end alone, save for a bowtie, and sold it as a Chevy Lumina/Caprice, just as they do in the mideast. In Chevy dealers, they'd likely sell more.

 

Jeremy, I said that we could rationalize it --- and that's exactly what you're doing.

G8's timing was horrible. If only it came out sooner. If only Pontiac would have called it Grand Prix. If only the economy didn't tank. If only it cost less.

What about the GTO? If only it wasn't a stale old Holden. If only it looked like a '67 GTO, ( or '64, or '71, or whatever year). If only it didn't have it's fuel tank in the trunk. If only it's dealers didn't act like such dumbasses.

If only.... Everything would be fine-----right?

Lookit, I like these cars. I seriously considered a GTO before buying my CTS. And I'd seriously consider a G8 if I were looking for a car now, (stick ONLY please!). But that's not the point , a point which you have apparently missed COMPLETELY.

The point I was making to FOG was, that Pontiac had it's chance to market these two "muscle cars", and for reasons - both good and bad and just plain 'ole bad luck - FAILED. No matter how you slice it, the story ends with Pontiac failing to meet sales expectations here. There is no denying that. You can try to justify it, sure, but no denying it. And now, there is no more time or money for Pontiac to try the "muscle car" route again.

 

Thank you for clarifying your thinking. I'll concede some of your points.

However, you use 'rationalize' as if that's a bad word. I believe that rationalizing is demanded in this situation. At least as it pertains to what GM should do next -- which is partly the point of this thread, I think.

Now, maybe where you're going is something like:
GM could take a BMW 335i, remove BMW badging, stick a Pontiac G7 GXP badge on it, cut the price $10K and sell half as many as BMW. That's clearly a losing proposition and would be an argument for killing Pontiac.

Back to the G8 and GTO, I think there's a continuum between 'met initial projections' and 'disappointing failure'. I'd say that both are in between those two, given the circumstances. I think the G8 is the only aspirational sedan in the Pontiac lineup, and though it may be selling only 15K per year, a good chunk of that is sales that GM wouldn't be getting without the G8. Whereas I'd hedge that almost all G5 and G6 sales would go to GM one way or another. Plus, the G8 is the only Pontiac sedan to make the various 'desirable cars' lists (for example the April '09 MT), and that's good for the brand too. So I'd call the G8 successful, though certainly not a runaway success. It most likely made GM's loss a little smaller than it would have been (though lost in the $9 billion implosion), and it adds a bit of lustre to the Pontiac nameplate.

But then if you're suggesting that Pontiac moving only 15K in 9-10 months is evidence that the brand is failing, I guess I'd have to agree.

 

Well, that's the bottom line -- it's very difficult to see how GM can work it's way out of this mess.

However currently GM has two Epsilon plants (Kansas City and Lake Orion) that were under-utilized even before the bottom fell out. Plus they are adding a third line in Oshawa for the new LaCrosse. Now, if they can get that down to one plant that is running at full tilt, it will should be very profitable, even in a 11M/year market.

The point being that it's not a simple equation of sales = profits. GM has a history of over-projecting demand and ending up with expensive under-utilized factories. They need to create a situation where they don't need the G6 or Aura to be a big hit in order to make money.

 

One of Pontiac's strengths was its heritage and well known model names. Uncle Bob has a MBA in Marketing, any good marketer wouldnt be bulldozing those names. Did he forget what he learned in college?

 

I think he got stung by the GTO (Monaro).

 

I understand that there are avid Pontiac fans and any notion of the brand disappearing is troublesome.

The idea, as I understand it, is that Buick, Pontiac, and GMC under one roof, dealer wise, allows a better focus for what Poniac can be, and what Buick can be.

Over and over folks decry the rebadging of Chevy vehicles as Pontiacs or Saturn, etc.

BPG removes much of that problem. Granted GMC is a trim packaging deal, but GMC does allow a higher content in fully decked out trucks as the GMC customer is willing to pay for it. GMC has brand equity among some pickup and SUV buyers. They don't want a Chevy. A point of purchase in the car business has a better chance of turning a profit if it offers light duty trucks. Ask Toyota and Nissan if they intend to get out of the light duty business... the answer is a resounding NO.

I'm more encouraged that Pontiac will have a chance to be more of it's roots than just rebadged Chevy's with a different nose and red lighted guage packages. Just because Pontiac will not be a standalone store doesn't mean there won't be a few Pontiacs that are actually Pontiacs.

I don't see Buick being a "dead" deal either. Some of the most promising markets on the planet really love their Buicks. Better Buicks will do better in sales here.

 

Everytime I see the title to this thread, I think to myself; "apparently it was".

 

Actually, Bob Lutz degree is in Production Management with a Masters in Business Adminstration, not marketing.

Looking at his career and his resume, one would likely say he's done pretty well with what he's learned.



Although Buick, Pontiac, and GMC are all sold under the same roof, I think the real concern isn't that anyone wants Buick to die. The real question lies on why is the far larger of the 2 car divisions that has perhaps greater marketing potential across the country and already has more brands, is becoming a niche brand of 2 or 3 models next to a brand that has fewer models, less US appeal, and whose strongest (and arguable, only) geographic area of sales in North America (the rustbelt) is the one that isn't the niche brand?

Even if one is neutral on Pontiac, it's hard to look at a division that typically sells more than twice as many cars as the other becoming a "niche" brand.

 

By brand, GMC fared best with “only” a 40.7 percent drop, while Pontiac dropped a whopping 60.5 percent. An 82.3 percent drop by Pontiac G6 as a model. This is Jan. 2009 deliveries we are talking.
About half of Pontiac's sales are fleet, and fleet is DEAD. . Pontiac's strongest seller last month was the Vibe. Pontiac is not set to be "gone". Neither it nor Buick can be standalone stores. Buick beat Pontiac in light truck sales in January...

Fleet sales were down 80%. GM is holding at about a 21% market share.

 

I once thought that GMC should go, but about a year or so ago I found out that it was almost pure profit so I have to eat crow on that one.

The Vibe is doing very well on retail (all things considering). But looking at the G6, although perhaps most go to fleet, it still IMHO has the biggest potential for growth. Of all GM midsize, I feel the G6 is most "import-like". The Malibu is a great car, but it's classy with almost upscale lines. And it works. G6 is a bit more sporty, almost Japanese-like.

 

Actually, here is a quote from Maximum Bob himself: "Now, I have an MBA in marketing from Cal-Berkeley, so don’t think I’m down on the marketing and advertising people. We all need to advertise, and I find it a fascinating business." Source http://media.prsa.org/article_displa...rticle_id=1218, click on link on bottom of page for pdf file, quote is on page 6

No doubt he made a lot of coin in the business and he was good in front of the media. The Malibu and CTS V are impressive cars, but I question many of his decisions and brand strategies while he was at GM. Now we see how much of a "Crown Jewel" Saab really was.

 

Intresting.

That's different than what's listed in his GM profile.

"Lutz received his bachelor's degree in production management from the University of California-Berkeley in 1961, where he earned distinction as a Phi Beta Kappa. He received a master's degree in business administration, with highest honors, from the University of California-Berkeley in 1962. He received an honorary degree of doctor of management from Kettering University on June 21, 2003, and an honorary doctorate of law from Boston University in 1985."

http://www.gm.com/corporate/investor.../bios/lutz.jsp

Google "Bob Lutz Business Adminstration" and you come up with alot of hits as it being his Master's. Google "Bob Lutz Marketing" and you don't get any hits regarding his education.

Perhaps he misspoke?

 

If there's any truth to it, I'd guess that marketing might have been his concentration while doing the MBA.

 

Exactly. The question is, why, after taking one brand, Saturn, that was one thing, and attempting to turn it into something else and failing. Or at the very least, seeing that they didn't have time or money to see it through...

Why are they going to do that two more times, simultaneously.