evok

Well your favorite auto company formally trained me! Yea, I have done a lotta things over the years. There might still be a little part of my handy work in your Solstice after all these years as carryover. And you?

A couple of mine say just that.

Actually the Corvette is the most profitable car GM sells as a % margin. XLR, well that is another discussion. But you bring up an interesting point. If GM could put the same energy into a Camry competitor, that appeals to the public at large, sells close to sticker without heavy incentives IMO the naysayers would have no issues with kappa. But in many ways, I do believe the Corvette in the great scheme of things at GM is a product that should be put on hold until everything else is straightened out. The Corvette will not save GM. Also, remember the Vette was to die in 1997. So it would not be the first time this topic came up.

I have a good idea what the car costs to make but it is way to early to talk profitability and I am done talking about the subjective halo effect merits. There are two unique discussions there, one for each kappa vehicle.

Retail is the only real measure.

The Kappa cars are not sold out and I do know the Lutz quotes you are refering to. GM has orders booked but orders do not necessarily equate to sales to the end consumer. Production sales are different than retail sales. They are often confused.

In six months I will ressurect my "absurd" point of view on the kappa cars sales and if it really is money well spend. Until Sept. 06.

There is a difference, I put most of your opinion in the same catagory as the BM. Irrational and not based on reality; just opinion and I have no use for that. There is another difference, you might think me absurd, but I will be more right than wrong. Touche - pick another angle with a real thought out argument and I might actually have some respect for you. Until than I do not. You do not challenge me with your insight. Because there is none. I only banter with you because you are an easy target.

Yup - The Mods bring it on themselves by not focusing the discussion. If you have a problem with it?

"Pontiac and Saturn wouldn't be entering a segment "too late" since they are practically creating the segment. What else competes? Miata? That's about it. Producing them now is an investment...yes...but a bad investment. We have a white elephant platform that is decent at producing one type of vehicle. That's it. Hardly an investment for the future. This is what I read from Croc: Money could have been better spent. I agree. Kappa was and is a waste of continuing resources. The platform is limited and can not spawn the variation that is need. IMO I would rather have today a small 4 door RWD vehicle than a limited rag top. Why a small rwd is volume, the Solstice is not. For me that is case closed. For me to put this into perspective. You hope for a futuer small rwd vehicle. Kappa does not make that possible. But if GM were smart, kappa would be doing that right now and you would not have to hope. That is why kappa was stupid.

Come on - you know I agree with you but we have cheerleaders here not business people. Great GM is profitable selling a couple 2 seaters at the moment. Wow, but that darn 4.490 million other vehicles that are not. Go GM, the is great news. Wow I have hope for the future. GM is great. Three cheers, Gooooooo GM. You prove to the world you can sell 2 seaters but no other cars. Wow great news.

Even though reason tells me to drop it, I will only continue because this point was not made by turbo, enzl or The OC and it applies to this post. Camino just as you have your loyalty to GM, there is an every growing legion of consumers who are just as loyal to the Japanese brands and frankly any brand. Just as in politics there is that rabid fringe Left and Right that make up the two main US political parties. But in reality, elections are won by the independents in the middle. This analogy is important because enthusiast do not make or break companies. It is the automotive equivalents of independent voters that are casting their votes for other companies besides GM. They are not putting up good candidates and they are not getting the sales. I recently took a ride to Honda because I am in the market for a crossover/SUV and test drove a new Pilot. For the money and the deal, it is a hell of a lot better than products at GM. And I have the GMS discount. I did not intentionally look for the Honda (it was next to where I was so I stopped in out of curiosity.) and it was not even on my list. But the vehicle sold itself and jumped to the top of my list. My actions are the action of an independent voter. You vote for what appeals to you. I do not want to hear from anyone; wait BUT GM has the lambdas coming out. No, my purchase decision needs to be made today and not tomorrow. That is the reality GM faces with consumers. Just as the independent voters make or break elections, they do the same thing to auto companies. I care about what I drove but when it comes down to it, the vehicle is just transportation. The SRX is again on my list but is it really worth the extra cash?

Claims and assertions can not be made on 1 data point as the article does. Is is predictive and realistic given the historic size and significance of the 2 seat convertible market. There are no claims made that can not be supported with data.

The analysis that the Solstice significantly dropped the age of Pontiac from 54 to the low 40's. That is not true. Mathamatically it is not possible and secondly last year Pontiac's ABA was already in the low 40's. Even the significance of the ABA is overblown for full line OEMs. With baby boomers aging the OEMs have to follow the money and as a result the ABA will be increasing in the near term anyway. So Toyota's ABA will increase naturally.

As I have said I am not reposting the past articles but if you want primary source material type "average age car buyer" in yahoo or google and the data will pop up. 2005 Pontiac - 43 Toyota - 42 2006 Pontiac - 41 Toyota - 45 That is the data from last year and this. Nothing of significance has changed. It only shows that there is a problem with the article. There is only normal year to year variablity. As for Kappa, kappa is but a passing blip in a much larger problem in GMs portfolio. Once the irrational exhuberance wears off, sales will tank from current levels.

No this thread was started out based upon false data or analysis by the author of the article. There is no positive piece of news when nothing has changed. This chorus is that people want to believe what they want to agree with even though it is false.

The replacements for those vehicles have not begun their design process as of yet where platform and plant will be hashed out. But that is scheduled to begin later in the year. Until that begins everything is just speculative.

I posted the data. look above. How many god damn times do I have to repeat myself. I have posted the links countless times over the years and just recently. If you are too lazy to look it up, screw you. Why the hell do I have to do the work. Look it up on the net. Rude. That is becaase you make points without backing your statements up. It gets old. Why should I be otherwise when everyone has access to the internet. Use it, you will be surprised what is out there. Do not be so lazy. It gets old. You have fingers to type, do it in google! I have shared plenty of info and source material including links over the years inproving the discussion around here. Take some time out and do the same. Things need to be a two way street. It gets old because it takes time and effort on my part to compile info and you can to.

Yea, placing blame on everything but the root cause is a pet peeve. Blame marketing! Blame the media! Blame the mindless public! Blame the UAW! Blame the President! Blame the Japanese Government! Blame everyone but ... No root blame is the Big 3/2.5 management over the years for the product that turned people off and continues to fail to attract.

Yea but it does not show how the auto operation is doing!

That really is one of the most ludicious thing I have heard. No, GM, Ford and Chrysler Corp., not producing product that people have wanted made Toyota and Honda what they are. Fuel efficient cars in the 70's Reliable cars in the 80's The #1,2, and/or #3 sales title in the 90 on forward. And a loyal, happy, satisfied customer base today. GM, Ford and Chrysler Group have made their own bed and now they sleep in it. They actually deserve what they continue to receive because they lost the good will of the general public because of their product over the decades. That is fact. No, sorry it is 30 years of $hit, f'ing product overall, compared to the competition that has soured the taste of GM, Ford and Chrysler and is gradually making these companies irrelvant.

I just briefly went through the data in the release and yes the corporate loss was not what I was expecting and taken a little off guard because I was still expecting GM to book more 1 time charges as a result of DPH/GM employee buyouts etc. That I suspect may still come as the year unfolds. But what really drove the less than expected loose was that GM booked the revenue from the couple billion from the VEBA withdrawels and the Suzuki sell off. The real automotive numbers do not look all that bright but it does show that GM as a entitiy still has breathing room to pull off the restructuring. That is what is driving the stock price. Still with the pending GMAC cash infusion in the 4thQ, more 1X charge to come, you need to look behind the press release to get a better understanding as to what is happening over there.

1.253 Exactlly as issues in the 10k.

First off let us use logic. A brand does not jump from the mid to low 40's over a 5 year period (this is called a trend) to the mid 50s in a single year as reported by reputable market research firms. It does not happen. There either is bad analysis of the data or in the data collection process or the author of the article misunderstood the data. Trend, there is no trend other than the one I pointed out. If you know anything about data analysis, a blip or a single data point is not a trend taking the Edmunds number at face value. Particularly when the data show that the historical average age for Pontiac is in the low 40s. The article has problems as I have pointed out. If you want verification, do your own research and anaylsis instead of relying on 1 data point that is being shown to be in question. I have done mine and have verified it with source material in the past on CG. This discussion is not new. 2005 Pontiac - 43 Toyota - 42 2006 Pontiac - 41 Toyota - 45 This data shows or proves nothing other than that the average age of Pontiac and Toyota buyers is about the average age of the general vehicle buying public. There is an irony in all of this which you will need to figure out for yourself. As for your headline point - no one really cars and it does not even matter.

That is your problem. I am sitting on the numbers right in front of me. I have posted the information a number of times on this board with some links to back it up already, they are burried on CG somewhere. Also it is simple math that a limited volume product like the Solstice as is claimed in the article can have on increasing or reducing the sales weighted average age of a fleet.