roopull

I thought this part was particularly refreshing news... Perhaps this means the end to the Pontiac Mini-Van?!?!

True, so what's not to love, right?There really was something different about Saturn only a few short years ago. The dealerships treated people with respect, the service depts were wonderful & the cars truly were unique - if not only for the plastic body panels (I for one can handle some wind noise to NEVER have to worry about dings in my car!) There will always be a part of me that wishes Saturn would have been able to expand under its original business plan, instead of becoming just another GM division... afterall, that's all it is, now.

No sweat... there's something about these forums that seem to encourage conflict for some reason...You know, the wife & I have a Saturn & loved it for years... not because it was great car - it's only average on a good day. However, unlike with our Honda, when we took the Saturn to the dealership for service, we were treated so well, we honestly didn't mind the reliability issues. (I quit suffering the Honda dealerships years ago & only take it to a private shop.) However, over time, the dealership's attitude towards us changed & eventually they insulted my wife to the point that they'll never see our car for service, again... and, with that in mind, I doubt they'll ever see us for a purchase again. They really were once something special. Now, the future of the Tennessee plant is in question, the plastic body panels are going to go extinct & most are going to be built by Opel in Europe. The Saturn some of us once admired as a bright spot in GM's line-up is being "Oldsmobilized."

The average buying age for most brands hovers around 50. Why so old? Young people buy used cars... it's that simple. I'm 31 & have yet to buy something new!While Scion may not have the average age of 25 Toyota may be looking for, they've managed to get it down to 31 years old. IIRC, that's the lowest of any brand. The strategy for Scion was to produce a brand, image & product that would appeal to younger buyers... thereby getting people hooked on the Toyota Corporate product line as early as possible. Considering THAT, Scion has been a roaring success. I think that if the Xa were dropped from the line-up, the average age would drop even further... those old farts buying these runabouts, I'm sure, skew the average age. As I said elsewhere, I'd like to see what the mode age is - the age of purchaser that occurs most. I wouldn't be surprised if 80% were in thier twenties & 20% were geriatrics, giving an average age of 31... Chevy-Pontiac-Buick-Caddy... that makes sense to me, although I might put Pontiac below Chevy (afterall, following Chapman's rule for gaining speed, you add lightness... removing all the luxo crap we cram in cars today.) Having Pontiacs be stripper versions of Chevys, except with big engines & sport tuned transmissions would certainly fit the "excitement" mantra, even if betraying Pontiac's more luxurious history. Of course, I notice a distinct lack of Hummer, Saab, GMC, and Saturn from your line-up. Would you just drop them?

That's what I was referring to... the decision makes perfect logical sense. It's just a shame that in order to even attempt to compete, GM had to run & hide from its union woes. That's the dumb part. The union has the company by the balls so bad, it doesn't create a new brand to fill a niche its current brands cannot (as in Scion or Lexus,) but builds a new brand to escape union problems.That's sad. There's nothing Saturn has ever sold that couldn't have worn a Chevy logo had GM had the freedom to do what they needed. BTW, your brief history of Saturn is spot-on.

The union doesn't exist now - nor has it ever - for the creation of a more competitive product. The union, just like any other money making institution in a capitalist society, exists to maximize profit. For a union, that means getting as many people to be dues paying members as possible. How do you do that? You do it by promising higher wages & better benefits. It has absolutley nothing to do with making good cars. No one, I would hope, would say that the Union is GM's ONLY problem, & you're right to point out the fact that an inferior product led to a good portion of the current situation. However, in the 60s, GM only had a handful of competitors & only Ford was a serious one. Today, by means of imported competition, GM must share the automarket with literally doezens of brands. Even if they had always made great cars, their %age of market share would have dropped. The union, it all its wisdom, prevented & will always prevent GM from beign able to cut-back on production. GM is paying union members even when their plants aren't running. They're paying for health care & pension promises made back when the company had a market share double what it is, today. Unions, no matter what any union member would have us believe, cripple the company they leach onto. In their greed, they have been known to destroy a failing company that might otherwise have survived (see Eastern Airlines for a good example.) GM, thanks to its union, cannot easily re-configure itself. Even if it goes into bankruptsy & cans the current union contract, a strike (which would be made twice as ugly by those Teamsters thugs joining in the madness,) would no doubt do much to sinking GM into receivership. Meanwhile, Honda, Toyota, Kia, BMW, Mercedes, and Nissan have all opened up plants down here in Dixie where laws do not give unions the massive power they have up North. Atlanta's GM AND Ford plants are closing... Kia is opening one right down the interstate... anyone wonder why unions don't have the political pull they used to? Perhaps its because former UAW members realize just why they lost thier jobs at GM & Ford & realize who hired them & why. It might not be 'all because of the UAW,' but God knows the UAW hasn't made things the least bit easier for GM!

You know, that's a pretty dumb reason! Guess I can't complain... that dumb reason netted us an SC1 that currently has over 140K & amazingly, the gas mileage keeps getting better as the car ages! Granted, everything aside from the driveline has broken at least once, but with gas at $Arm for the cheap stuff, $Leg for the mid-grade & $First Born for premium, I'll keep the little scrapper around!

My thoughts exactly. Perhaps now, FINALLY, automakers will quit coating their cars in plastic to make them look 'rugged.' GM tried it with the Avalanche & Aztek, Scubie did it with the Baja & Honda tried with the Element. All have recanted & removed most if not all of the offending plastic. Let's hope they never do this again! You know, when the Avalanch, Baha, Element & Aztek came out, I thought all four were ugly as sin when they each came out. As soon as the plastic came off, I began to like each of them - specifically the Avalanche & Baja. Okay... I never liked the Aztek. That thing is horrid.

Now, I really like the Malibu... really, I do. I ended up in a rental version & was VERY impressed. In fact, it's one of the vehicles that made me start thinking that maybe there was hope for GM, afterall.THAT being said, the Malibu is no Camry... not even close. The Camry is what Toyo does best & the Malibu, hybrid or not, is simply out-classed. I can't imagine many people cross-shopping these two.

What's with the name? Acadia? Isn't that a French speaking area of Canada? WTF? Is THAT supposed to excite me? Barf! One possible reason for this thing's existence (and I know I'm stretching, here) don't GMC dealerships better set-up for fleet sales & maintainance? I'm guessing on that... Perhaps these will be intended for fleet sales? I can imagine ORKIN being printed across the side of one.

Clever! I've never seen that done, before. The road looks a little wet... wonder how well that'd work on dry asphalt. As a side note, that wing & front end look horrid. But, I'm sure the extra weight really help stabilizes the car... afterall, that's one of the most basic laws of physics.

I believe Renault simply owns a portion of Nissan, but hasn't actually merged the two companies.... I could be wrong. Wow... judging by that response it would appear that you do & you clearly aren't too happy about it. Perhaps you aren't aware of just how obvious your emotions are. Thank you for your insightful and revealing response.

Ah... I see where we're talking past each other, now. I should have clarified by differentiating between the Toyota Corporation (which, of course includes the Toyota brand, Scion, Lexus, Hino & Daihatsu) and the Toyota brand of cars... My mistake. Methinks we see eye to eye.Mr.Krinkle, If you don't see what the problem is, how would you define the focus of each of GM's brands? I'm not being a smarta$$ here... I truly find them to be muddied & unclear. Toyota Corps' brands are crystal clear in their focus & it's easy to see how they are designed to NOT compete with each other. FWIW, I'm no Toyota fan... in fact, I've never owned a Toyota product. If it weren't for the reliability reputation, I sincerely doubt many folks would opt for a Lexus ES over a CTS. I find their vehicles largely to be dull... they are simply very very reliable appliances with all the sex appeal of appliances. However, their business plan is clearly bulletproof & I think GM could learn a thing or two from them (obviously, as you point out, Toyo has learned a thing or two from GM!)

I hope you're right. Stranger things have happened at GM afterall. I mean, who ever thought - three or four years ago - that Saturn would have one he!! of a roadster, a good looking SUV & an even better looking one on the way (complete with hybrid version,) and a European based L replacement? Not I!!! I hope they get this right!

No, I didn't miss the point. Other brands platform share, but most of those vehicles that are sharing platforms do not directly compete with each other. Camrys & ES300s do not compete directly with each other, for example. When any brand re-produces a model at the same or similar price point, it's idiotic in my book. I don't care what brand is doing it. Thankifully, GM is getting better at platform sharing, but they have so many brands they need to produce new products for, they simply do not have the budget to create unique models for each brand. This is why Lutz's plan to have Saturn share models with Opel is brilliant. IMO, it ensures the future of Saturn more than any move since the division was created. Pontiac, however, just seems lost. Pontiac might make sense to me if there were no Red Line Saturns, no SS Chevys etc. Will the Pursuit outrun a Cobalt SS? The Solstice, if test drives are to be believed, cannot outrun a Sky... That, to me, sounds like Pontiac is completely lost. If you ask me, Pontiac should, if left alive, be treated like an in-house tuner firm... Send them your 260hp Sky & they'll turn it into a 300hp STI killer. As it is now, it's just an also-ran & will remain one under this "new" plan... they should call it the deja-vu plan, imo.

You missed my point. Toyota can do with Lexus what they want. If they want Lexus to be like the Germans, they can do that. If they want them to be like Buicks, they can do that. They don't have a LEXUS history to grapple with. On the other hand, GM MUST grapple with the history & chache each of its brands brings with them, except for maybe Saturn, since they just made that up on the fly. Lexus is whatever Toyota makes it. Cadillac is whatever GM makes it, mixed iwth the last almost 100 years of Cadillac history. DAIHATSU... I was referring more to American brands, which is why I left out Opel, Vauxhall & Holden. They cater to entirely different markets for different reasons. However, had Daihatsu been successful in America, I sincerely doubt there'd be a Scion brand...

One of the things I admire about the Toyota corporation is their clearcut brand identities. Unlike GM, who acquired all of these varying brands via buyouts, Toyota acquired brands by creating them to fill a void they saw in thier line-up. That puts Toyota at a distinct advantage over GM which has to balance the future of any brand identity with the brand's history. All Toyota has to do with its brands is deal with the future. For example, when Pontiac relaesed a Mini-van, people booed & hissed because THAT wasn't what Pontiac was supposed to be. Toyota makes Lexus whatever they want... there is no history to contend with. With that, they have a very well defined set of brands: Hino - commercial vehicles, trucks, etc... Toyota - the bread & butter catch-all brand Lexus- luxury Scion - entry level/youth. I look at the GM brands & am just befuddled. Of every car company out there managing different brands, I think GM has the most difficult lot to manage. Judging by the way things are now, I'm assuming these descriptions fit the brands... correct me if I'm wrong... Caddy - top luxury Buick - luxury, but below Caddy Pontiac - sporty cars Saturn - not sure... import fighter? Chevy - GM's Toyota, a catch-all brand. GMC - commercial vehicles Hummer - Mega-SUVs... Jeep on steroids Saab - Euro-Buick? Euro-Saturn? I'll leave out Holden Vauxhall & Opel so I don't have a siezure. Anyone else see a problem here? GM is scared to kill off a brand because of intense loyalties. However, I feel that by 'building confusion' (thanks Flint,) they're turning customers away. Agree? If so, how would you clean it up? Putting your loyalties aside, how would you clean up the GM brand mess, if at all? Personally, I'd model them after what Toyota has done... not sure which brands I'd keep & which ones I'd can... but, I suppose Caddy would have to be the luxury brand, Chevy the catch-all, and GMC the commercial brand. I suppose that'd leave Saturn or Pontiac as the brand for entry level/youth marketed cars. You?

I've heard that before & I hope you're right. While 90% of what Chevy, Pontiac & Saturn make could induce a coma, Buick & Caddy are stunning. I love the feline-like elegance of the newer Buicks & the edgey Caddies are just drop dead gorgeous. Both rank well in reliabiltiy, too... specifically Buick. I'm just not sure there's room for both. Here's the thing. We keep hearing that Buick wants to be GM's Lexus. Fine... that's great. Is Caddy wanting to be GM's Mercedes or are they wanting to go even higher? See, Lexus has long been gunning for Mercedes (remember the original S-Class cloning Lexus LS?) Lexus is a moving target & it's moving upscale. If Buick intends to follow them & they're following Mercedes... that's going to push Caddy where??? Rolls Royce & Bentley territory?

The problem with Pontiac, IMO, and the reason folks are so confused is that there's little that is special about Pontiac. Aside from the failing GTO, what can you buy at Pontiac that you can't essentially buy somewhere else in the GM lineup? If GM is going to continue to do this platform sharing business, it's a recipe for disaster -FWD, AWD, RWD... it won't matter. Take the upcoming US Ponty Pursuit... What's going to be so special about it that will make it better than a Cobalt SS? What makes the Solstice better than a Sky? In fact, almost every article I read about the Sky puts the Sky as a better car - even faster through the slaloms! WTF? What makes a G6 better than a Malibu or a Saab 9-3? Why buy a Torrent over an Equinox, Vue or the upcoming GMC clone? THAT is what's wrong with Pontiac. THAT is what's wrong with GM... cannibalist competition, lack of brand identity... bla bla bla... so, yeah, go ahead & make all the Ponties RWD... meanwhile, by default Chevy, Buick, GM, Saturn will all have a version of that RWD car & the cycle will start all over again. Pontiac, I'm sorry to say, has no reason to exist in GM's line-up.

Hey, I didn't shout you down!!! I don't even know what thread you're talking about! IMO, however, both sides of the CTS argument have a point. Then again, if I were shopping for a car the size of a 5 series & had to choose between a 5 & a CTS... uh... duh. (actually, I'd like to think I'd get the CTS-V or an M3!)

I heard it was the weak dollar. They want to compete with BMW - or so they say - with cars between twenty & thirty grand.... riiiiiight. Last I heard, that badass Brera would end up being priced fully twice that. Perhaps the good folks at Alfa realize that with Maseratti here, there might not be any more room for an overpriced Italian car company. Bless 'em if they do come... competition is only a good thing for us customers.

Buick is one of the bright spots in GM's line-up. They have a clear definition of what they are & decent brand identity. One problem, though... why Cadillac AND Buick?

The problem is that while Toyota keeps selling more & more cars each year, GM is selling less. So, Toyota can afford to support its massive size & is making massive profits while doing it. GM's massive size, unlike Toyota's, is NOT an asset, but a problem. The UAW as crippled GM into not being able to properly adjust to market demands. Why else would virtually EVERY new auto plant being built be built in 'right to work' states? The other makers don't want to get stuck in GM's shoes. Brace yourselves for the inevitible... Toyota will be the biggest. However, if they keep having media black eyes like the new Avalon's reliability issues, the Prius's mileage issues & designs as dull as the Echo... while GM - hopefully - can manage to keep creating awesome rides like the Sky, C6 Vette, & tuner friendly Cobalt, things could eventually turn around. I admit, that's a big IF, though.

Um, until now, it was just about the only one in its class, wasn't it? You had the Suzuki Aerio (I believe that's the name) that competed price wise, but was much bigger. You had the Rio & Accent - again, similar price, but much bigger. You had the MINI, but that was the same size, but much more expensive... I'm not trying to knock the Aveo... As far as the big players go, Chevy got to the segment first & they don't get the credit for it. Now that the Japanese & ChryCo are going to get into the ballgame, Chevy MUST redesign the Aveo to keep it up to par... specifically, some nicer sheetmetal & a better drivetrain are musts. They actually are... ...to the intended demographic. (People like...me.) I wouldn't be so sure about that. The AVERAGE age of Scion buyers is 31, however, that's an average. If 80% of the buyers are 20 years old & 20% are 70, that leaves you with an average of 30 year old buyers. What is the Mode age of the buyers... the age that occurs the most? I have no idea where or how to find that info, but I'd be willing to bet it's below the average of 31... as others on this board have noted, old people seem to love that Xa!OTOH, I just read an article that said Toyota was running the Scion plant on overtime to keep up with demand. Here's a snippet of that article: And another snippet that shows just how much of a success Scion is becoming: Even if the mode age turned out to be 31, it's still a whole lot better than every single other manufacturer out there & much better than Toyo's corporate age average of 48 years old (IIRC.) What I think the folks at Toyota & everywhere else are forgetting is that most kids first car, the car they buy at the target demographic, are USED cars... not new ones. I suppose that could explain why Scion was first launched in the relatively wealthy state of California instead of say... Mississippi.

Yeah... that's it... a rose (or turd?) by any other name...