wildcat

That's why I asked if GM may do Chevrolet - Buick - Cadillac stores. Fritz Henderson keeps saying they have to re-invent GM, so why isn't a GM "superstore," with all three brands, feasible? And please don't tell me the Cadillac snobs will hold their noses walking by the Chevies and Buicks on the same showroom floor

And your source is what? Your opinion? (As I've been saying to you tonight, I'm trying to avoid going by my opinion and go by the facts which GM has announced. Hopefully, that will give a realistic take on the future.) Sorry to keep referring to P_C-S, but I just want to remind you of something he said, to the effect of... one has to leave their past impression of Buicks behind and imagine something else, something that expands the brand. Somebody else from GM said that, too: Dave Lyon. He seems like a sincere, good guy.

I'm okay with niche status, but there's room between Chevy and Cadillac; at least Buick survives. Cadillac isn't likely to manage anything beyond niche status in Europe. I don't know specifically what Obama's team or GM has planned, other than what they said to the press. I hope they're developing something radical and worthwhile. Frankly, in my heart, GM is Chevrolet / Pontiac / Oldsmobile / Buick / Cadillac. If, for example, only Chevy and Cadillac survive, it's no longer GM to me. As I said earlier, I'm hoping for something good and am not willing to give up on GM yet.

When did this happen? I did notice the BMW in his signature, but... Did he talk about it in the Lounge? I thought, per his own words, he would follow Carl-Peter Forster into Hell?

Nobody said it will be easy. No matter what GM does, it won't be easy. (Personally, I think that they better hurry up and file for BK now! Don't wait until 60 days have elapsed.) But, to answer your question, China's Buick sales will finance Buicks for NA.

GM has said it will give Buick more models, in order to have a full range. He gets it! Yes, it does make sense. Are you talking about Buick (or Saab)? I'll buy a Buick. All the Enclave owners bought one. The new LaCrosse should stir some people to buy it. Why can't GM just consolidate Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac into a one-stop store? Good, better, best?

Oh, I get what you're saying. But you don't seem to understand me: what you're proposing is NOT what GM most recently announced its intentions were. And Pontiac_Custom-S has said, for the longest time, that Pontiac will be axed (not if, but when - as a matter of timing). Do you believe him?

Camino LS6: And to that last point, that it why I said I understand what you're saying and hope that GM (finally) gets it right. They have stated, among other things, that they will increase the number of Buick models while decreasing the number of Pontiacs. So at least they claim to recognize what the challenge is. Your posts may be rational or logical (I'm not even addressing that), I'm merely saying that they seem to be contrary to GM's known and stated intentions. I'm trying to stay rooted in what they said during all this incessant restructuring. :twocents: How about this: this is probably the last stand for all of us, as GM fans. Either they win... or lose it all. (The jury's still out on that LOL) I want to go out in full support of GM and its longtime brands. Have a good night; I fold my hand.

Some of your posts have been very anti-GM, starting when they dropped the Pontiac ST. Just look at your signature.

Then if you're a Pontiac fan, stand up for Pontiac. Lately there have been plenty of opinions expressed here and many fly in the face of what GM has publicly stated as its plans. GM is facing some formidable challeneges, and, ironically, they brought much of it upon themselves. I, for one, have never, ever called for Buick's survival at the expense of Pontiac, nor insisted that only "such-and-such" brand should survive and, if not, then they all should go. Buick isn't the problem at GM; GM in and of itself may be, however.

I don't have access to their financial statements, do you? Buick's success in China makes any expense for the NA market minimal. My statements are based on GM's stated intentions, not my opinions. Thank you for your opinion. GM seems to disagree. There are those who give GM as a whole "a wisp of a chance at survival." Then please direct your suggestions at GM's management, rather than calling for the dumping of any longtime GM brand into the dustbin.

Buick will always matter in the U.S. It was the cornerstone of GM and a profit-maker for more than a century. That's "just fact." I understand what you're saying. I'm trying to give GM the benefit of the doubt, that they know what they're doing, that they've finally learned the lesson, etc. We'll see. Glad to see you say that. I don't think it's quite so cut and dried. I'll say it one more time: Buick is not the enemy. I don't want them to get rid of Pontiac. And any problems which GM now has stretch over the entire GM portfolio, not just Buick, not just Pontiac.

By now, you both know Buick has the more global presence, a new vehicle due out this summer, etc. etc. And you've read what GM itself has said about its intentions. Stop being in denial.

GM has already explained their intentions to decrease Pontiac's offerings and increase Buick's. It isn't necessarily to either keep all of BPG or get rid of all of BPG.

Buick isn't responsible for your precious Pontiac ST being canceled. (If anyone, you should blame Chevy.) I'd like to see everyone stop being so negative toward Buick

Most of you seem to be forgetting that only a few days ago, Fritz Henderson told the Free Press they want Buick. "Why on Earth would we rid ourselves of the Buick brand?" he said in response to speculation about the brand's future. So stop putting your own spin on the story - nowhere does it say Buick is in the "bad" group.

Here's a fresh interview with Carl-Peter Forster, the GM Europe Chief. As someone else says clickity

I can see how various recent GMC concepts led to this (along with, perhaps, too much Jeep Commander / Patriot in the wheel wells), and if I didn't hope for the best, I'd say that big snout on it is GM's first step in damaging GMC now.

I would think that every poster on Cheers and Gears would want to read what President's Obama's auto task force found to be wrong with GM's viability plan. Here are the details from Jamie LaReau of Automotive News: President Barack Obama's auto task force says General Motors will be hard-pressed to meet its projections in five key areas without dramatically restructuring the company. In response to the viability plan GM submitted Feb. 17, the task force demanded that GM intensify its restructuring over the next 60 days or face possible bankruptcy. In a statement released today, the task force criticized GM's assumptions in these areas: 1. Market share 2. Price 3. Brands/dealers 4. Product mix 5. Legacy liabilities The task force did not dispute that GM is in the early stages of a turnaround, saying it has made "material progress in a number of areas, including purchasing, product design, manufacturing, brand rationalization and its dealer network." But despite that progress, GM's current plan "contemplates initiatives that will take many years to complete," the task force wrote. Key areas are: 1. Market share In 2008, GM's North American market share was 21.5 percent, down from 23.8 percent in 2006. In its Feb. 17 viability plan, GM estimated that its market share would be 21.1 percent this year and decline to 19.4 percent in 2012 and 19.1 percent by 2014. But the task force noted that GM has been losing market share for decades. "Yet its plan assumes only a very moderate decline, despite reducing fleet sales and shuttering brands that represent 1.8 percent of its current market share," the task force wrote. GM is looking to sell Hummer and Saab and has committed to providing product to Saturn through the 2012 model year. If Saturn can't be spun off, GM will phase out the brand. But Obama's team is pushing GM to move more quickly to make itself competitive. 2. Price GM's February viability plan did not discuss its expectations on pricing, said GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson. He added that "the task force went through all of this and did their own financial analysis." And the task force analysis found flaws in GM's assumptions. "The plan assumes improvement in net price realization despite a severely distressed market, lingering consumer quality perceptions and an increase in smaller vehicles," the task force report noted. It went on to mention how GM historically has struggled to maintain pricing power. The task force noted that in 2006 and 2007, GM North America achieved a 30.4 percent "contribution margin" -- the sale price minus any variable costs of building the car. GM assumes that margin will increase to 30.8 percent this year and be at 30.7 percent in 2010, 30.9 percent in 2013, and 30.3 percent in 2014, the task force says. That's despite a distressed market and an increased focus on passenger cars and crossovers, which traditionally have yielded lower margins. 3. Brands/dealers GM is currently "burdened with underperforming brands, nameplates and an excess of dealers," the task force said. GM said it plans to offer just four core brands -- Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC --and a cut-down version of Pontiac. It also said it would reduce its dealer count from 6,246 in 2008 to 4,100 in 2014. The task force said those measures are not aggressive enough. 4. Product mix GM said its restructuring plan would allow it to produce "fewer, better" entries because it will have fewer brands, nameplates and dealers. GM said cutting brands would improve profitability because more than 90 percent of its U.S. profits are derived from the four core brands. But the task force noted that GM earns a large portion of its profits from high-margin trucks and SUVs, "which are vulnerable to a continuing shift in consumer preference to smaller vehicles." The report went on to say that while the Chevrolet Volt electric hybrid car "holds promise," it will be too pricey for short-term commercial success. GM has estimated that the Volt likely would come to market with a $40,000 or more sticker. 5. Legacy liabilities GM owes $20 billion to its Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Association plan. It is trying to persuade the UAW to take half of that amount in stock rather than cash. GM also indicated that the asset values in its pension fund have declined significantly over the past six months. GM's total U.S. qualified pension plans had $84.2 billion in assets at the end of 2008, compared with $104.1 billion in 2007. That has left GM's pension plans only 87 percent funded last year, compared with 124 percent funded the year before. The task force said that going forward, GM's cash needs associated with legacy liabilities grow "to unsustainable levels, reaching approximately $6 billion per year in 2013 and 2014." For GM to meet that obligation, it will need to sell 900,000 more vehicles per year. That would leave GM "fighting to maximize volume rather than return on investment," the task force said. The task force said that GM's progress over the past few years has been "far too slow" in these five areas and that if the company is to survive, its stakeholders must engage in a "substantially more aggressive restructuring plan."

avant1963: Very interesting. They sure told the WSJ! Just when I was about to say Business Week did Buick right (based on their headline), I read their entire article... where they at the end make excuses and still mention that Toyota nonetheless had 5 of the top 10 vehicle spots. whatever Despite all the rumblings, the J.D. Power ratings have to count for something, and this time around it's a plus for Buick and GM.

Can't you and others show your support for Pontiac without being so negative toward Buick? Pontiac Custom-S has told you what's going to happen, yet you can't seem to accept it and keep coming up with unrealistic and "dream" Pontiac line-ups, etc. (And I like Pontiac, too.) Why can't you all be happy that Alpha is proceeding... especially in light of Buick's topping the J.D. Power study... and say that a Buick Alpha might be a good thing? You should want GM to give every division class-leading product!

I guess this is one time where keeping the LaCrosse name might pay off. Here's GM's opportunity to promote its new Buick LaCrosse.

Was there some concept called the Mako Shark? It's been many years and I could be very wrong

If it is, in fact, a Buick, I think it would be a mistake to call it "Skylark" or "Skyhawk." This is a step forward for Buick, not backward. P.S. - Maybe it was rumored that the Buick Alpha would be styled along the lines of the Riviera Concept, not the Delta II. But I can't edit my earlier post for some reason. EDIT: According to someone at gmi, "There will be a Cruze-based (rebadged Cruze basically) Excelle in China ONLY as a stop-gap product until an all-new, unique Delta II based sedan arrives in 2012 as a 2013 model. The all-new D2 car will be sold in the US and China." If that's the case, this looks like a quick, Cruze-based rebadge for China as the "stop-gap."

I'm unsure if people are naming what they consider the "essential" Pontiacs or their favorite Pontiacs, or both. If you're speaking models, I suppose the "essential" models are Bonneville, GTO, and Firebird. When I picture my personal favorites, they include a 1961 Bonneville, a 1963 Grand Prix, a 1966 Bonneville, a 1966 GTO, and the 2009 G8.