But those costs are far outweighed by the benefits of keeping GMC around. Buick-Pontiac dealerships need GMC for sales, GMC is marketed as (and in most respects is) an upscale version of Chevrolet. The styling is less aggressive, and the overall image is one of refinement that Chevrolet just does not have.
There are huge marketing costs for ANY brand, and GMC is no exception. That said, it helps spread out costs between Chevrolet, HUMMER and Cadillac. Like Mercury to Ford and Lincoln.
GMC is very profitable, and GM would be foolish to get rid of it any time soon. I do not doubt that a boneheaded plan to phase out GMC was in place back in 2000 because that's the same time-frame as the boneheaded phase-out of Olds. Dumb dumb dumb.
Now granted, GMC could be phased out without the huge costs of Olds due to the fact that GMC has very few (if any?) stand-alone dealerships. But again, it all comes down to two things: volume and consumers. The new Yukon and Tahoe are prime examples of two vehicles, essentially the same (different front clips, rear trim, slight interior modifications), who are marketed to and bought by two very different demographics of consumers. GM would be crazy to abandon this, especially since most GMC owners wouldn't be caught dead in a mechanically-identical Chevy.
It really does not cost GM that much to design and manufacture a new front clip, taillight housings and guage cluster faceplate. Certainly nothing close to the 35-55k GMC charges for these vehicles.
All those overhead costs I am sure are also minimized by the way GMC is internally set up with Pontiac. Same marketing budget between the two, and a very complementary product lineup.
Sorry, I'm not buying it, especially since you yourself have said it would be crazy to get rid of GMC. :rolleyes: