GM's Unique Brands!

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: Stunt

So you bought a chev product over a gmc product...GM was going to get your money anyway. They need to compete with the automakers who are stealing their marketshare; they are not.

I 100% agree with the asset/liability comment. This is precisely why I own a cheap and reliable Civic coupe. Not the car for everyone, but from a practical standpoint can't be beat.

I have never liked the grille on the GMC, so I may have purchased a Ford F150. This is one complaint I have with foreign, there is not much individuality to their cars. Have they ever made a two-tone paint job?

Who wants a two-toned paint job?

Foreigns charge a higher price and sell better...shows people like their products and they are listening to consumers.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

So you bought a chev product over a gmc product...GM was going to get your money anyway. They need to compete with the automakers who are stealing their marketshare; they are not.

That's the key there.

It still costs money to change up the little trim pieces and stamp out different logos. It still costs money to market them differently. Instead of spending the time, money, and effort trying to rebadge something 4 different ways, put that time and money into improving your fit and finish on ONE vehicle and focusing your efforts.

You don't see Honda and Toyota offering 4 versions of the same thing. (Although *some* argument could be made regarding some overlaps in the Acura/Lexus lineups).

Exactly.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
The costs already exist.

Because the brand already exists--staff, property, admin included--adding another model to an already-existing line from an already-existing vehicle probably just adds trivial cost...

So because the cost already exists...it's somehow justified?

If I always drop $200 a week at the casino and eat out every night does that mean they are fixed costs and I should look to get small discounts on frequent "playing" from the casino or deals from a restaurant....or just drop it as they add no value to my life?

No, but if you're already at the casino, no point in not taking part in the cheap buffets.

GM already has dealerships and brands set up so there's no point in not trying to make a few quick bucks off rebadging minivans

 

[JulesMaximus]

Why make only 1 POS when you can make 4?

 

[bctbct]

Many things could be done at GM to tweak the profits but in the end

Foreign plants are newer, have HUGE tax incentives, 0 legacy costs.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
The costs already exist.

Because the brand already exists--staff, property, admin included--adding another model to an already-existing line from an already-existing vehicle probably just adds trivial cost...

So because the cost already exists...it's somehow justified?

If I always drop $200 a week at the casino and eat out every night does that mean they are fixed costs and I should look to get small discounts on frequent "playing" from the casino or deals from a restaurant....or just drop it as they add no value to my life?

No, but if you're already at the casino, no point in not taking part in the cheap buffets.

GM already has dealerships and brands set up so there's no point in not trying to make a few quick bucks off rebadging minivans

See I assume a SV6 owner would own an uplander or a relay.
You assume if they don't buy an SV6 they'll still buy one of the others.

There isn't enough product differentiation to support your argument. If that was the case, the more models GM releases the more buyers they'd get.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Why make only 1 POS when you can make 4?

So your parents had three other children?




































j/k

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: bctbct
Many things could be done at GM to tweak the profits but in the end

Foreign plants are newer, have HUGE tax incentives, 0 legacy costs.

The GM plants in Canada I was referring to were opened in 1953. They have legacy costs, little tax incentives, but have indeed been upgraded...they all have at one point. These plants are some of the most efficient in North America; even including the Japanese makers.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Why make only 1 POS when you can make 4?

So your parents had three other children?




































j/k

That wasn't very nice...

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Why make only 1 POS when you can make 4?

So your parents had three other children?
j/k

That wasn't very nice...

Made me laugh

 

[iamwiz82]

I'd love to know the reasoning behind this stuff, because I'm sure there is a reason. It's most likely something petty like the President of one division whining because the others get a certain vehicle. I mean, why else do the Rainer, Envoy, Trailblazer, and 9-7x exist at the same time?

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
It's most likely something petty like the President of one division whining because the others get a certain vehicle.

BINGO. It's the whining dealers

 

[JEDI]

Originally posted by: Stunt
GM's bloated brands are doing nothing but adding cost to the consumer; do you really think any of the following vehicles are going to attract new buyers or help sales?

I don't know who they are trying to fool, but making an ugly car that nobody likes and giving it 4 names is just ridiculous.

Chevrolet
Pontiac
Buick
Saturn

Holy Quadruple vision Batman!

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

GM didn't just hit a new low - they hit it 3 years ago when the Uplander-based minivans hit the market. And yes they all suck... badly.

GM is discontinuing a couple of the models in the next 6-12 months - I forget which though (Pontiac and GMC, maybe?).

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Bah, GM does this on nearly all their models and it is quite ridiculous:

1
2
3
4
5

1
2
3

 

[Journer]

great...i have an eye bleed now >(

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
The costs already exist.

Because the brand already exists--staff, property, admin included--adding another model to an already-existing line from an already-existing vehicle probably just adds trivial cost...

So because the cost already exists...it's somehow justified?

If I always drop $200 a week at the casino and eat out every night does that mean they are fixed costs and I should look to get small discounts on frequent "playing" from the casino or deals from a restaurant....or just drop it as they add no value to my life?

No, but if you're already at the casino, no point in not taking part in the cheap buffets.

GM already has dealerships and brands set up so there's no point in not trying to make a few quick bucks off rebadging minivans

See I assume a SV6 owner would own an uplander or a relay.
You assume if they don't buy an SV6 they'll still buy one of the others.

There isn't enough product differentiation to support your argument. If that was the case, the more models GM releases the more buyers they'd get.

There isn't enough product differentiation, but people have silly brand loyalties...and less people than you would guess know exactly which brands fall under the different umbrellas.

Ask your run-of-the-mill Texan why he picked a GMC Sierra over a Chevy Silverado and you'll understand...

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
The costs already exist.

Because the brand already exists--staff, property, admin included--adding another model to an already-existing line from an already-existing vehicle probably just adds trivial cost...

So because the cost already exists...it's somehow justified?

If I always drop $200 a week at the casino and eat out every night does that mean they are fixed costs and I should look to get small discounts on frequent "playing" from the casino or deals from a restaurant....or just drop it as they add no value to my life?

No, but if you're already at the casino, no point in not taking part in the cheap buffets.

GM already has dealerships and brands set up so there's no point in not trying to make a few quick bucks off rebadging minivans

See I assume a SV6 owner would own an uplander or a relay.
You assume if they don't buy an SV6 they'll still buy one of the others.

There isn't enough product differentiation to support your argument. If that was the case, the more models GM releases the more buyers they'd get.

There isn't enough product differentiation, but people have silly brand loyalties...and less people than you would guess know exactly which brands fall under the different umbrellas.

Ask your run-of-the-mill Texan why he picked a GMC Sierra over a Chevy Silverado and you'll understand...

these cars were only released because the dealers have so much push...

and the Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade.... the escalade is a great vehicle, and looks different than the tahoe/yukon... the tahoe and yukon on the other hand, hold different spectrums in the price range.. these vans ,suck.

 

[AdamK47]

All hail the mighty Honda Civic! Hip hip huzzah!

 

[Tom]

I think it's fairly attractive for a van.

 

[DivideBYZero]

The British Car Industry had this issue back in the 1970's. Multiple divisions pumping out cars competing in the same sectors, or blatant rebadge jobs, yet owned by the same Parent company.

Look what happened to them...

 

[DurocShark]

Originally posted by: Tom
I think it's fairly attractive for a van.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA...........
**gasp**
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA...........

 

[desy]

I like GM but they make the WORST van. Never have gotten it right, from the pointy nosed Lumina thing to the Astro to the flimsy Venture to this abomination. . .