CARBIZ

This was such a well researched article, that I actually kept the magazine for my files.

GM should not emulate Toyota; I have been saying that for a long time. This also proves that Wagoner saw the writing on the wall a few years ago and hired outside help for fresh ideas; whether those ideas work or not, we won't know for some time, but it never hurts to have an outsider look at the books and comment.

Every time I read a new take on what happened at the Senate hearings, I can't help but worry about how all of this is playing into Toyota's hands. After all, if you have to go before Washington and spell out EXACTLY what your future plans will be, doesn't that sort of tip off your competitors? I hope Wagoner faxed Toyota a copy to save them the hassle of hearing it 3rd hand.

The evidence (like those companies who haven't stopped leasing posting similar drops) points to "no".

IIRC the US % was actually much less than that. I believe it was single digits. I believe the Canadian numbers were in the 30+% range (it is the only way we can afford vehicles because we pay Cadillac dollars for Chevys).

Thanks to the GMAC turnaround, I bet in the last week or two of Dec GM sold a lot of vehicles to people who were turned down in November. Take a look at the taxes taken off your next check. Think about what % of that is subsidizing some schmuck with a new truck who is going to default. Thanks government bailout!

As usual, your pulling facts out of your ass: with GMAC getting bank status, they cannot lease in Canada. Those are Canadian bank rules. GM's sales were tanked in December in Canada, although not as much as Honda and Toyota. Canada's numbers have avoided the precipitous drop that the U.S. experienced, but I would expect Canada's pain to start in '09. Exhibit A would be Toyota and Honda's poor 4th quarter results.

And what we actually pay for vehicles in Canada is on par with the U.S, my mis-informed friend. Currently, you can buy a Cobalt for $14k, plus freight and taxes. GM has contracts with Enterprise, Tilden, etc. that has tied their hands with respect to cash rebates and MSRP adjustments, so GM has had to get creative with their rebates, of which there currently is $4,500 on a Cobalt; $5,500 on a Malibu. Look for actual 'cash rebates' very soon.

None of this has been paid for by the taxpayer. These prices have been ongoing since leases went away in August.

I really wish you would stop drinking the bong water.

The Grand Prix doesn't compete with the Malibu? GM is going bankrupt and they are reducing their fleet sales? None of the 650,000 lost GM "truck" sales went to a Malibu?

You're an ass. I am loathe to insult people, but if you think the Grand Prix competes with the Malibu, then you know less about cars than you do about who your wife is sleeping with.

My one Grand Prix owner I've had lately bought a Camaro.

The Grand Prix wouldn't even compete with the Impala, and they're on the same platform.

For Gawd's sake, if your going to keep making your negative remarks, at least make sense.

In day 2 of 2009, All of our cars were undriveable. The Intrepid is out until I save the money to replace the timing chains. The Mercury has had a flat for the past few days. Went to use Fix-a-Flat on it and found out the can was frozen. Went to use the Prizm to go get a can from the store and couldn't get it to start. Ignition lock cylinder is somehow not working. Worked fine yesterday, today it wouldn't turn past Accessory. Had to drive the Mercury on a flat to get the tire fixed. Had to have the Prizm towed to hopefully get the ignition fixed. So instead of saving money I'm spending it. Oh, it's going to be a great year.

Sorry to hear that, DF. That's the joys of owning used cars. My stepfather used to spend all his weekends under the hoods of the old beaters we owned when I was a kid.

We had a '64 Fairlane held together with duct tape - literally. He bought a '63 Pontiac convertible that he drove twice! Our '67 Newport was no stranger to Tremclad.

I don't understand why the pricing of these crossovers are so much higher than the sedans they are based on or close in size to. It used to be that the wagon version of a sedan might be a few hundred more. But the Equinox is at least $3,000 more than the Malibu. The Edge is almost $6,000 more.

How does the average family guy afford the average family wagon anymore?

BTW, I also agree with the post about the old station wagons being roomier. Crossovers seem like a step back in that regard. The old A-bodies had terrific cargo carrying abilities while delivering decent gas mileage.

A $300 difference in 1970 (the peak of station wagons' popularity) is equivalent to $3k in today's money, considering you could buy a Corvette for $6,500 in those days. Ditto for convertibles.

If you compare apples to apples, a FWD Equinox would be about $3k more than a Malibu LS or LT1, for example; however, naturally the AWD component is going to add to the cost.

But there is no denying that there is some price gouging on the part of the SUVs, particulary the higher end stuff like Suburban, Infinity, etc.

Inflation is not necessarily an evil thing. I read an article in the Times a very long time ago that basically said world wide inflation was necessary to keep 3rd world countries from defaulting on their debt. Out of control inflation (like Argentina experienced for a while, or like in banana countries like Zimbabwe currently have) is a bad thing, for sure.

Think about this: you buy a house for $55k (like my parents did in '74.) Your household income is $30k a year. Your mortgage is $400 a month. Ten years later, your income is $60k a year, your mortgage is still $400 a month, thanks to 8 or 9% inflation.

Of course, 21% mortgages, like back in the early '80s were nasty.

As to the taxes BS: if GM or Chrysler go down, there will be a lot of nearly bankrupt retirees out there and a lot of unemployed people. At least with 'loaning' GM and Chrysler money, there is a very good chance that all of this will be averted. Remember: the real reason GM is in trouble right now is because the money markets are frozen - and that is affecting all the car companies.

However, certain people's myopic, malicious attacks against GM are clearly coming from a position of personal gain - and they are so one-sided. Good grief: at least get a different chord to play on the violin.

It would be like me trolling on ToyotaNation and constantly harping about Toyota's failings. Why bother? A couple years ago, I trolled on TN, but decided they were a bunch of Stepford Freaks and quit after a couple months.

Maybe they have the auto lights turned off... cars I've had with automatic lights have an on/ off setting.

For 2009, Infiniti charges $4,000 for the Touring Package on the G37, to get auto on/off headlights, among other goodies. That's 2009. My '91 Caprice had it STANDARD.

As I've said, I'm an urban dweller, and I am sick of driving around underground garages and suddenly come upon some idiot in a $40,000 car that doesn't have automatic headlights. It's dangerous, and these idiots obviously need to be reminded. In 2009, it's just stupid not to have features like auto headlights as standard. But, hey, let the auto press bitch about hard plastics in the '10 Equinox because plastic dashes you can sleep on are soooo much more important to them.

These guys/gals in the auto press are a bunch of idiots. I recently fired off a letter to Jil McIntosh, who writes for the Toyota Star because that hag whined about the Aveo5's rear seat leaving a 19cm hump when folded flat. Oh, the cow took the time to measure the hump, but not the time to figure out that the seats flip a SECOND time, leaving a cavernous rear cargo area that puts the Rio (also written up in the Star that day) to shame.

They are lazy, stupid and biased. It hurts Detroit every time (most) of these idiots turn on their computer.

Most people do not look beyond the headlines. - that's the bigger issue. The newspapers love to crap all over Detroit and since all the public sees is this one-sided argument, they draw their conclusions accordingly.

Let's hope GM and Chrysler make a big splash in 18 months or so and pay back those loans. Let's see what these ass clowns have to say about that.

Hope you got a good deal! Nice way to start off 2009. Do you have pics of the rock?

Fbodfather Scott Settlemire has pointed out while GM spends tons of money on some part fo a car they tend to neglect other things.

He pointed out on the 4 Gen F body GM put a lot of money into suspension and drivetrain but little into the interior and other things that ended up as well know problem areas. Yess they had a car that could match a Porsche on the track but they had owners with power windows that failed.

Also It has been pointed out Chevy never had moeny left over to market the car as they should have. Even Ford left a little for the Mustang.

If Gm could kill off half the model they make today and keep with the best they have now and coming. Then they could afford to cover all the details and not have to cheap out in areas that come back to bite them.

Saturn is a case study of the problems GM has had. They sell the some fine cars but those outside GM know so little about them. Also they have had a few models like a large SUV that really should have been a Chevy not a Saturn They corrected that but still no marketing? But then again no money for Marketing.

GM needs cuts and they need to get trhe word out on their vehicles.

People are shocked when I come out of work and my HHR SS is running. They are even more shocked to know remote start was standard. Then I tell them it even starts the rear window de froster if it is cold enough.

Why go through the mostions on adding these great features that no one knows of unless they go into a showroom or visit the web site. The sdad fact people for the most have not considered GM enough to even check them out.

GM needs to get these cars and features in the face of the public. IF you can sell them then word of mouth will take off if the vehicle is good.

Better to sell half the models and market them well vs offering twice as many and not marketing them well if at all.

Excellent post. GM has sweated the details in places where it counts - where owners appreciate them: auto headlights, retained accessory power, speed compensated volume on radios, RDS, turn signals that turn themselves off, starter lockouts on clutchest - years before anyone else. However, the challenge is to get people to try them, and that is hard to do in a 10 minute 'walk around' with a customer. Even with OnStar - it is lightyears ahead of what anyone else offers, but you have to USE it ot appreciate it.

A Nav screen in a rental is sooo much flashier, I guess. So, I guess the moral of the story is GM needs to f@#k off the important things and spend more $$$ on door handles and soft dashboards to win over the jaded press.

Yeah, that's what I call progress.

Maybe next time I see a $40k Infinity in my underground garage with his headlights off, I'll just ram him to prove how f'ing stupid he is.............if he'd bought a '91 Lumina, he wouldn't have to remember to turn them on.

Ya, it's a bad name, IMHO. They could have called it 'Fred' or 'Elmer' which would have been equally nerdy. I've read that they hired a poet to come up with possible names--they came up with a long list, some were pretty outlandish like Utopian Turtletop. In the end, they chose the name of Henry's son. In keeping with the planet name Mercury, maybe 'Saturn' would have been a good name. (Though I think Mercury was named for the Greek God more than the planet).

Edsel did have some good model names, though--Pacer, Ranger, Corsair, and Citation, all of which have been used elsewhere since then.

Also, I would assume the decision to create the brand was made around '55 or '56, when the middle market was quite strong...then it was launched just in time for a recession.

Update:

The Wikipedia entry on Edsel has a pretty decent analysis of the failure and some backstory...makes for interesting reading while I'm sitting at the airport waiting on my flight..

Edsel story

:rotflmao:

And we all know what icons of style and quality those names turned out later on in history..... This just proves that some things should NOT be recycled.

no Yaris? *scratches head*

Sorry, I missed that one, but my head was pounding too hard to even think about the Yaris.... now, you've made my head hurt - thanks, Purdue. [runs to washroom to throw up..]

Toyota may be #1 now, but another brand can eventually knock them off this plateau if they continue to let their "perceived quality" slip (Camry/Tundra) as well as continuing to create "warmed over" redesigns (Corolla/Matrix). They seem to have developed a cynical arrogance that far surpasses the perceived complacency that the media seems to love to bestow upon GM. Toyota needs to remember that staying on top is usually far more difficult than getting there. Some of the company's recent half hearted efforts (current Camry/Corolla) and complete blunders (current Tundra) certainly won't keep them at the top. Without their "perceived quality", there is nothing about Toyota or their products that anyone could consider outstanding, exciting, or extremely desirable.

Although nobody loves trashing Toyota more than me, I'd actually take the Corolla off that bashing list. I would deny this publicly, of course, but I actually like the new Corolla. To say it is leagues ahead of the old POS would not be an understatement. However, the Yaris and the Turda are just too horrible to even think about with my current hang over.

To Toyota's (fleeting - no pun intended) ascendancy, I say 'good luck:" the Press is fickle and merciless. And as the Camry becomes the 'new' Buick (almost every one I see around here is driven by a septegenarian), GM can get back to the business of building cars that people want.

There hasnt been a Venture for 4 years. Kinda makes the rest of the list suspect, too, IMO.

Not sure about whether the G8 has bluetooth or a nav system (considering bluetooth is available on virtually all Chevys this year, I don't know how the G8 could have been missed), but as I've tirelessly mentioned before, OnStar is far more convenient than a nav system (you can get course changes without having to stop the car and put it in park!!!!!) and is standard on nearly all GM's now. Guess what, you can play with turn by turn for a year without throwing $2,000 (or more) out the window, which is what most companies charge or 'package up' for the thrill of a nav system.

As to the Nissan (or Datsun, as I lovingly refer to them as), no company represents the outrageous mythology of Japan Inc more than Datsun. From the very glory days start of the company as an adjunct to the Japanese military creating them to build tanks and trucks in Manchuria using slave Chinese labor, to the underpowered, rusting crap they built in the '80s, those 'in the know' love to beat up Chrysler for the K-car and GM for the Chevette, but I drove the glorious Datsun 210 and can attest to what a total, vinyl coated, under powered, plasticky crapmobile it truly was. I never once hear that vehicle referred to in one of C&D's or CR's or MT's, or whomever's gush-fest over the latest Nissan offering.

There may only be one of two ways that GM is going to beat this wrap, and both pretty much involve a world war. Either we see a Depression that makes the Dirty Thirties look like a Church picnic, or maybe Israel and Iran will deliver us a nuclear New Year that will bring Armageddon down on our heads, because in no other way do I see the past 40 years of fat, lazy and stupid mentality being eradicated.

And that is my New Year's message: Nihilism!!!!

Not sure about whether the G8 has bluetooth or a nav system (considering bluetooth is available on virtually all Chevys this year, I don't know how the G8 could have been missed), but as I've tirelessly mentioned before, OnStar is far more convenient than a nav system (you can get course changes without having to stop the car and put it in park!!!!!) and is standard on nearly all GM's now. Guess what, you can play with turn by turn for a year without throwing $2,000 (or more) out the window, which is what most companies charge or 'package up' for the thrill of a nav system.

As to the Nissan (or Datsun, as I lovingly refer to them as), no company represents the outrageous mythology of Japan Inc more than Datsun. From the very glory days start of the company as an adjunct to the Japanese military creating them to build tanks and trucks in Manchuria using slave Chinese labor, to the underpowered, rusting crap they built in the '80s, those 'in the know' love to beat up Chrysler for the K-car and GM for the Chevette, but I drove the glorious Datsun 210 and can attest to what a total, vinyl coated, under powered, plasticky crapmobile it truly was. I never once hear that vehicle referred to in one of C&D's or CR's or MT's, or whomever's gush-fest over the latest Nissan offering.

There may only be one of two ways that GM is going to beat this wrap, and both pretty much involve a world war. Either we see a Depression that makes the Dirty Thirties look like a Church picnic, or maybe Israel and Iran will deliver us a nuclear New Year that will bring Armageddon down on our heads, because in no other way do I see the past 40 years of fat, lazy and stupid mentality being eradicated.

And that is my New Year's message: Nihilism!!!!

I was thinking the same thing.

It sounds more like an anger problem (many stars seem to have this issue) and an "above the law" problem (Elliott Spitzer, et. al.).

At any rate, what an ass. Could you imagine the press that would have followed this if he had "taken someone out" in the process of speeding?

In Hollywood, there is no such thing as 'bad press.' Witness Robert Downey Jr. He's been in and out of rehab, jail, etc. than Zsa Zsa or Nick Nolte, yet he's still around.

For a van, I think the Ford is almost handsome; however, their extended van with the welded on 20" piece at the back is a joke. Typical Ford cost cutting. I agree the GMC/Chev vans are hideous, inside and out, but beauty doesn't seem to matter in that category any more - witness the Dodge/Mercedes offenses which are even uglier.

I would put the not - Smart car at the top of my list. I simply cannot resist a smurk every time I see one of those offenses on 4 tiny wheels go by, especially when I see one stuck in the snow. I actually gave a not-Smart driver the finger a week or so ago when he was stranded in the snow. I mean give me a f'ing break - THIS IS THE TUNDRA and he buys that POS.

The Element will always be on my list, too. I want to slap the owner every time I see one: ugly and expensive - a true indication of the owner's IQ.

Sounds like if you pay taxes at all you may pick up the tab.

Good grief: do you actually think before you type?

Here's your daily laugh: I spoke with a 70 year old retired school teacher today. She has a '98 Cavalier that is running perfectly. She was a service customer. She started yakking about all the bad news about GM/Ford and then made the declaration that her next car will be an import because she doesn't think the UAW guys deserve the pay they are getting. She said her nephew works at the St. Thomas Ford plant and his cheque was bigger than hers ( I guess this was 10 or 15 years ago) and she has a degree while he only turns a wrench.

I was simply aghast. Firstly, because here is one over-paid, pensioned out union employee slinging mud against other 'over-paid' union employees, but secondly because she feels it is perfectly reasonable to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak.

I carefully chose my words as I asked her if it were reasonable for GM to rip up their contracts with the UAW and throw the million or so pensioners out on the street. Well, at least this old bag said she wouldn't go 'that far,' but they should get a 'comeupance.' Really, I pressed, what if the government came to you and said 'we are broke (which they f'ing well are!) and, therefore, we are going to slash your gold-plated pension? Oh, they can't do that, she cried, because we are fully funded. Yeah, but how did those funds get their 20, 30 years ago? I should point out that teachers in Ontario make $65k and up - and let's not get into the 12+ weeks holidays a year they get. And don't get me started on the value of the degrees that many of the teachers hold. Full disclosure: I know far too many teachers as it is, and I despair at our future.

I would be loathe to defend the UAW, but I find it really outrageous when a supposedly educated woman starts mouthing off about something she clearly knows nothing about.

If she is any indication, then as a nation(s) and as a people, we are doomed.

Maybe GM should use Matt in their next Chev commercial.

Ugly gray plastic interior and lack of a manual availability puts the last Malibu down pretty low on any list..

My sister loves her '04 Maxx. Been a very reliable trooper. Lots of beige plastic bits, I suppose. I can't say that the previous Malibu was a looker on the interior, but everything worked great and was logically laid out. I had many as demos and absolutely loved the gas mileage, too!

And gosh, I suppose the few hundred Camry 4 doors actually sold as a standard in North America would make the Malibu equally desireable? We're really talking about a small percentage of enthusiasts versus the millions in tooling to make an engine/drivetrain compatible with a stick shift. I would hope that in the future as GM merges their international platforms more, they could accomodate people who want standard shift by spreading the costs over 5 continents.

Electrics are going to make the stick shift go the way of the dinosaur, my friends. Computer governance/green requirements/fuel mileage won't tolerate sloppy human shifting. Perhaps GM was a decade ahead of the curve - again.

you guys all sound just a bit exaggerative. both your bias and inaccurate stats/facts are showing up in your analysis of hwo the companies are perceived. stop trying to figure out something that's a bit over your heads and when we can only defer to anecdotal evidence. thier negative perception is an issue, but if they were building cars with desirable design adn quality like the malibu or astra in each of thier models it wouldn't be as big of a problem.

Not sure what you're getting at here. The list of companies made were of companies that routinely fall in the bottom tier of quality rankings. VW and Kia are perennially at the bottom of JD Powers ratings. How is that anecdotal? You're not new here and you've seen the arguments back and forth.

How is the last generation Malibu automatically inferior to a Jetta, for example? By whose estimation? Because it wasn't available with a stick? Because it had electric steering? Because GM didn't send the writer of C&D to Milan to drive it?

How do you explain that VW and Kia have built crap for decades but still sell? More importantly, why do the mags gush over every VW built and forgive everything from Hyundai, but nitpick GM/Ford offerings to death?

I would agree that one of GM 's biggest failings has been its marketing. I've seen the horrible TV ads, foolish 'giveaways', etc., but the perception GM has in the public's eye is greatly exaggerated.

Are we going to go down this road again?

Chevrolet may be #2, but GM dominates every single segment, from small cars to mid. It occupies 15% or greater market share in small cars (against 15 names, which is double the average), climbs to 25% market share (388,704 sales of 1.544m) for mid-size/'intermediate', etc. etc. etc.

This entire debate focuses on two important concepts and two only:

What will create the better long term prospect for GM? Focusing on fewer brands/models and making those the 'best in class' (whatever the hell that means) and risk losing market share as loyal consumers abandon GM because their 'brand' is gone, or continuing to dilute the diminished marketing/development dollars between a gazillion models.

That is the $250 billion dollar question. When GM finally throws the dice and decides which path to continue down, that will decide the fate of the company more than anything else.

Losing my Olds portfolio hurt me a lot, but even I would not want to have to make the tough decision as to whether more brands/models should go.

In only one example, it must be tempting for GM to steal the pickup crown away from Ford, by being able to brag about the #1 selling pickups in the country (which, in fact, GM has had for many years), but would risking the 100k+ Sierra sales in a year be worth that temptation? That's just one example.

I think Hyundai has rebounded relatively well from their 80's and 90's issues because back then they weren't selling nearly as many cars. Less people were affected personally by owning a bad one.

I've been saying that for years. The same can be applied to Honda and Toyota as well. GM had the potential to piss off 5 million people a year in the '80s, while Honda only 900k or so. Compound those perceived injustices over a decade and you have an avalanche of frustrated consumers, deserved or not.