Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views GM News, New Models and Market Share
8078 messages, Last post on Nov 11, 2009 at 9:27 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Nearly three-quarters of car shoppers prefer to buy American-made products, according to a survey by Kelley Blue Book. More than half say they try to buy American-made products if the price is competitive, and 14% say they will go out of their way to buy American. Six percent say they will only buy American-made products and they will do without if an American-made product is not available. Let's look at the keywords here: "more than half will buy American if the price is competitive", GM's pricing is not exactly competitive, it's competitive so far because of the healthy discounts. The real keyword is IF, if GM needs profit, discounts must be lifted, when that happens price will be much less competitive. The next keywords: "American-made". Honda Accord is American made in Ohio. If you insist that American made means domestic brand, remember that Ford is American, and it has the more public trust and confidence than GM-Chrysler. "Seeing the domestic automakers' recent struggle has ignited a heightened sense of patriotism among some American car shoppers, and the latest Kelley Blue Book Marketing Research indicates that people are pulling for the Big Three to survive and thrive," said Jack R. Nerad, executive editorial director and executive market analyst for Kelley Blue Book and kbb.com. Will they keep their words and buy domestic? We shall once again see if the sense of patriotism will prevail over the sense of logic and reality. History has shown that logic wins most (if not all) of the time. I'll be patient and wait for the results. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: m4d_cow (Jan 12, 2009 6:34 am) We'll check on Hyundai when they're 100 years old. I'm not sure what 100 years has to do with anything here, but I'll play the silly number game on years. I disagree with the tenet that in 1998 GM was selling below par quality. The propagandists would have you believe that, but last I recall Honda had transmission problems and Toyota had sludge in that period. >still maintain (sic) it's (sic) stellar customer service. Hmmm. Check in on the Odyssey and VCM discussions re customer service. The higher profit per vehicle the foreign companies enjoy due to their having come to the automotive party late without any legacy costs of older employees allows them a built-in warranty so they replace transmissions up to 100k free and have built up some customer resentment over their handling of seamless VCM action and vibration. Our neighbor across the street is on his 8th Honda product (all Acuras) and they have never seen a dealer service box. He uses an independent HonAc service store--he avoids that stellar customer service current owners are getting). As for GM having poor quality, I would determine it was greatly improved in 1989 and has continued up from there. And I've owned the products, properly serviced them, and they have served me well. So it's time to break the chain of negativity passed on because it's chic to say negative things about all GMs. If you had a particular model that failed you, whether it is because of poor build or your failure to properly service the car,, I feel sorry for your problems, but don't ascribe your experience to all GMs. People owning HoToys started having more problems in 03 as their quality regressed to the mean. |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jan 12, 2009 7:00 am) You totally missed the point, what I'm saying is with a cenury worth of experience GM should've learned the lesson mush earlier instead of too late like now. We gave them too many chances to improve they get spoiled and lazy. The same with employees, you go too easy on them and they'll bite you back in the butt. As for GM having poor quality, I would determine it was greatly improved in 1989 and has continued up from there. Nope, I believe the quality improved significantly in around 2005. GM before then had too many crappy products that belong in the dumpster, Aztek, Cavalier, Malibu, GrandAm, GrandPrix, Trailblazer (and it's clones), MonteCarlo, just to name a few. Significant improvement compared to past GM, but not significant enough to lead the class. I've owned 2 Hondas so far (98 Civic and 06 Acura TSX). And yes my '98 Civic got that problematic auto back then, but it was immediately recalled and replaced under warranty. Domestics don't do that, and if they do, they usually wait for a serious problem to come up before fixing it.
|
|
|
I admit maybe I wasn't being clear, so here goes. I was impressed not by Honda's quality, but by their customer service. The way they fix things, quick, hassle free, and professionally was, and still is the best as shown with Acura's. Toyota I'm never impressed with, their quality is falling and customer service is below par by my standards, marginal at best. Vette's article shows GM's Chevrolet service is about on par with Toyota, yes I agree. Toyota going down, Gm going up so it's only natural that GM finally caught up. Toyota and Honda have tranny problems, so? GM of that time had even more problems. No product is trouble free, it's "how problematic" and "how the company handles it" that really matter. I've said this earlier, GM has improved in the former part, but the latter GM still needs to work on. Improvement in just one area isn't nowhere near enough to shake off the old image.
|
|
...Mercedes-Benz practically invented the automobile and they were having reliability problems until recently. Studebaker was the oldest vehicle manufacturer in its time. Where are they now?
|
|
|
Replying to: m4d_cow (Jan 12, 2009 6:34 am) GM needs to find it's way...somehow. The new Malibu is proof it can be done! |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jan 12, 2009 5:27 am) Oh nonsense. The sludge discussion dragged out 5,500 posts - what more can you add? Sludge still comes up in all the various Toyota discussions around here. And the last I checked the Odyssey transmission problems discussion was still going strong too.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: m4d_cow (Jan 12, 2009 6:29 am) Any data? Vette's article shows GM's Chevrolet service is about on par with Toyota, yes I agree I supplied the data? When was this? Can you show me where this was?
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jan 12, 2009 7:00 am) My 1998/99 pre strike Suburban was a great vehicle. Wish I had held onto it. By contrast the 1994 Toyota PU I bought for my son was not so great. Clutch failed at 11,000 miles. Not covered. Some kind of timing belt failed at 60k miles. Not covered. Total engine failure at 107k miles. I don't consider that a great vehicle. My current Sequoia is a very nice vehicle to drive and ride in. Two issues the dealer would not fix. JBL CD player skips on many discs that were fine in my 2005 GMC Bose player. Their response it plays our test disc. The pneumatic tailgate lifters do not go up when the temp drops below about 35 degrees. Toyota response we have to see it happen to change the lifts. Well after you drive 35 miles to the dealership it is warm inside the vehicle. Not life changing just annoying. And there are other little gripes. So GM does not get any worse marks than Toyota on customer service. My experience over 45 years of new car buying I would rank Toyota near the bottom and GM near the top. Too bad GM does not build anything I want to buy..... |
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 12, 2009 7:48 am) I could not get by the insufferable arrogance of the sales people to even consider buying a Honda. I guess some people will put up with that to buy a name. I understand snob sales in a Rolls or Ferrari store. Not in a lowly Honda dealership.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views GM News, New Models and Market Share
