smk4565

GM had 50% market share in 1960, they have 19% now and have added Hummer, Saab, Saturn (killed Olds) since then. They can't fund 8 brands to make them bad ass with 19% market share. The Sigma platform is too expensive for anything that doesn't carry a Cadillac price tag. Astra is a money loser because of exchange rate, and they have a near 400 day supply on dealer lots, it is GM's slowest selling product. The Vellite was a cool looking concept, but GM doesn't have the money to make it, and a $40-45k Buick convertible probably won't sell in volume.

Well they only have 3 products, 2 of which are extremely dated and uncompetitive, so it is hard to make a website look good when you don't have much to show off. Valid points though, the features on the cars are mismatched and there is too much overlap between them, much like has happened with the CTS and STS. Lack of funding and poor product planning.

I read it all, but I made my point already. People can praise the car all day, they sold 1,000 last month, 12,000 so far all year. GM needs more than 12k units a year out of a product if they want to make money and stay in business.

SNL wasn't ripping millions of hard working Americans, they were ripping 3 CEOs that make $15 million+ a year to run failed businesses and showed up in front of Congress looking for a loan without a business plan.

If GM dies (which it won't) it is no one's fault but their own.

I thought it was funny, especially the chart with dates and amounts of money they wanted and how no one watches C-span. Fred Armesen's Barney Frank was good too, better than his Obama. Detroit needs to learn to take a joke if they are offended. If the Detroit 3 didn't lose $100 billion over the past 5 years, and the CEOs didn't look like fools on the first trip they went to Congress SNL wouldn't have had anything to use on them.

Great cars still well in awful times. By "don't like" I meant I don't like the styling and probably wouldn't buy one. I know they make a great car, best car I have ever driven, and the inline 6 is great, perhaps better than their V8. The 5-series drives so well I'd consider it even though it is ugly and has iDrive. Luckily the Jaguar XF came along and is better. RWD Impala. A $26-35k rear drive Impala to go against the 300C would be great, and they would have a big advantage over the front drive Maxima and Avalon.

I paid $18k for a 2.5 year old, 26k mile Aurora that stickered for $39,960. I capitalized on poor depreciation. Actually, if the Aurora's interior was in the G8, that would solve the G8's biggest problem. Then they could take the supercharged Aurora V8 from the Shelby Series 1 and replace the Silverado engine, and the G8 would be looking good. Lamar, I've driven the E39 and E60 5-series, best cars I have ever driven, but the styling and iDrive don't do it for me. I haven't driven a G8, but I wouldn't buy it because of the interior.

I don't like BMWs, but they are the best driving brand of cars, they are the benchmark. GM compares every performance car they have to BMW, but there is more to a BMW than 0-60 time, or skidpad number, there is the feel of the road, intangibles, and build quality. The M5 in its 5th model year still sells without a rebate, the CTS and G8 already have rebates after 1 year. The G8 is typical poor product planning by GM. If Zeta wasn't overweight, and they developed an American looking sedan with great styling and gave it an interior suited for America (better than the Malibu LTZ's) they could have had a new Impala that would have been a success. Instead we get an Aussie retread that is selling even worse than the GTO did.

There are many good cars for $40k, and the G8 isn't one of them. The interior is horrible, and it is slower than a Camaro, GTO, 335i. People can buy an Infiniti, Cadillac, or BMW for $40k, why buy a Pontiac. The M5 at $85k has the same top speed as the ZR-1 at $120k. I wouldn't buy an M5, but it's still the performance sedan standard that every other brand aspires to. No other automaker wishes to be like Pontiac. Personally, I want a Jaguar. The G8 was outsold by the 7-series last month, and that is the old model with no reason to buy it since the 09 model comes out shortly. The G8 isn't selling well, and probably half the 1,000 they sold were V6 models that go 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, which isn't really a true performance car.

This is a good idea, it saves them $7 million a year and they need to save wherever possible. I never liked the deal in the first place, and he made little or no impact on sales, since Buick sales have dropped every year since they signed him. They need to cut every celebrity endorsement, cut the private jets and cap executive pay if they want a bailout.

Slower than a car from 11 years ago is not a win for the G8. Pontiac is beyond savable, they should be working on the BTS and a new Impala instead.

The E39 M5 does the Ring in 8 minutes 28 seconds. E39 is a better performance comparison.

That is a good time, but if lapping the Nurburgring at low cost is what you want, an E39 M5 is faster than this thing and goes for about $26,000 used. Why does Pontiac compare the G8 GXP to the E39 M5 anyway, are they bragging that in 2009 they can do what BMW did in 1998? They could have put the STS-V engine in the G8 GXP and at least made it somewhat special, rather than recycle the 6.2 pushrod that is in multiple Chevy and GMC products. The Camaro SS can out perform this car for $8000 less, so I don't see where the "value" is in a $40,000 Pontiac. My main problems with the G8 are interior fit and finish (Cobalt level at best) and the Aussie styling. The GTO flopped because it wasn't designed for the American market, this car is selling 1,000 units a month for the same reason.

Agreed. But Hyundai has more cache sadly.

In any other industry, if the CEO oversaw a 95% drop in stock price he'd be gone. I don't know why the shareholders and board haven't thrown him out yet. Time for new leadership and they need to go outside the company to find a CEO, Lutz or Henderson will just bring more of the same.

Right, but how do you pay for it? Because Buick needs new product, Cadillac needs new product, Saab is starved, Saturn even though it has new product isn't selling, Chevy needs the Cruze, Volt, a new Impala, etc. The pie is being sliced too many ways. I'd like to see Pontiac or Buick make good cars again, but with 5-10% of GM's resources going to the brand it won't happen. This is why years ago I said Saab, Hummer and Buick should go, so they can salvage what's left over.

I forgot about the gallon difference, the Polo has a 10 gallon tank by their measure, 12 by ours, so over 730 miles they still got 60.8 mpg, which is rather strong. They did mock the Prius saying how the Polo and even a Subaru Legacy diesel can beat it in mileage.

The Two-mode isn't available yet, and the 2009 Vue hybrid gets 25/32 mpg. Until they beat the Prius, Congress and the critics are always going to say, "well Toyota's hybrid gets 46 mpg, why do Detroit's only get 26? when is Detroit going to make a 50 mpg car?" They should put a 2.0 turbo diesel in the Malibu to make it a 40+ mpg car, hybrid option to get it to 50 mpg. 50 mpg in a family sedan would make the Camry hybrid's 33 mpg look rather weak.

Mulally should drive there in the 39 mpg Fusion hybrid. Wagoner's problem is the Volt would probably break down and not make it, and is left with the 20 mpg Tahoe hybrid. Same problem for Nardelli with the 20 mpg Durango hybrid. On last night's episode of Top Gear they had a 700 mile race with any car they wanted, the only stipulation was they would only get 1 tank of gas. Richard Hammond with a Volkswagen Polo diesel averaged over 70 mpg on the trip. GM makes a big deal that the Cruze may get 40 mpg in 2011, but that is mediocre for what Europe is doing now. The Detroit 3 execs are out of touch with what is going on.

I agree with the first few points. A year ago I would have been in agreement with the last point, that Pontiac should be a small car performance niche, going after Mazda Speed, Mini, VW GTI. They had the 2.0 turbo, they could have made some sporty small cars, mostly with rear drive and gone for the Fast and Furious crowd. The imports really capitalized on the youth on the west coast, if those 20-somethings stick with their import, that is 50 more years of import buying and a big opportunity missed by GM. However, now that GM is broke, they don't have the resources to reboot Pontiac or make it a performance brand, so fleet sale brand or joining Oldsmobile in the graveyard are the options left.

G6 is a mechanical twin, and had the same radio/hvac console as the Malibu, it is close to a rebadge. It could work for rentals because it looks different than the Malibu, yet would still be cheap to produce. They fleeted the new Malibu at 37% in October (or September, I forget), it should be 5% or less. If Pontiac was going to focus on low volume, they would have never made the G3 or G5 or Torrent, and the G6 would be in GXP trim only. In an ideal world with adequate funding, GM could do a lot of things with its brands, but with 19% market share and facing bankruptcy, they can't support 8 brands or make Pontiac a performance brand or Buick a Luxury brand or Saturn like VW, etc. The money doesn't exist.

The 335i or G37 won't be cross shopped with a G8, I am just stating that the market for performance sedans lies with small to mid-size sedans that also have more luxury. GM is going after a small niche market of people that want 4000+ pounds of large car and 400 hp. This could be the 2009 version of the Mercury Marauder. Why not put the money into a car that can sell in volume and turn profit. The Camaro (or 2010 Mustang) is a far superior buy than the G8. The Camaro interior is probably better, Camaro is faster, should handle better and looks 1000 times better and is cheaper. Only a fool would buy a G8 over a Camaro.

Rental car. And I'm serious, the money isn't there to make a half decent Pontiac, the best strategy is to take previous gen Chevys, rebadge and fleet sale them like crazy. The 2009 G6 is basically a 2004 Malibu rebadge, this is what Pontiac should be. Then Chevy fleet sales can drop to zero, and save resale value.

Rebadging failed in the 80s with the original W-body cars and Cavalier/Cimmarron disaster. Failed in the 90s with the Lumina MPV vans, W-body again, and failed in the 2000s with the Trailblazer/Bravada/Ascender/Rainier/Envoy/9-7x (6 way rebadge might be an all time high) and is still failing with the Torrent, G3, G5, G6. I don't understand how GM can make the same mistake multiple times over, and still repeat it. If GM wants to turn it around, they need big volume from strong vehicles that sell without rebates.