- #79 of 874
-
Re: To Kick Things Off... [jchan2]
by fezo
-
Nov 26, 2008 (5:41 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: jchan2 (Nov 26, 2008 4:34 pm)
I'm with you on the Volt which still sounds like they are counting on a miracle.
They do need to keep up on product development. They are only now catching up with the market.
|
- #80 of 874
-
cross-posted brand cutting
by steve_ HOST
-
Nov 26, 2008 (5:59 pm)
-
|
GM Said to Study Shedding Saab, Saturn, Pontiac to Win U.S. Aid (Bloomberg)
Maybe they hope Congress will pass a law letting GM get rid of the Pontiac dealers without having to pay them off (a bankruptcy plan without having to file Ch. 11). Congress gave the Alaska Pipeline a pass from NEPA laws and rules, so I suppose it's possible.
|
- #81 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [steve_]
by fezo
-
Nov 26, 2008 (6:09 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Nov 26, 2008 5:59 pm)
Considering there are barely 100 Saab dealers and not that many Saturn and throw in that almost all the Pontiac dealers are also GMC and Buick dealers I don't see where this helps them that much in shedding dealerships.
I guess every bit helps.
|
- #82 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [fezo]
by cooterbfd
-
Nov 26, 2008 (6:17 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Nov 26, 2008 6:09 pm)
Ironically, this is where a merger w/ Chrysler would help. Imagine all Saturn and Jeep dealers merging. Then, instead of 400 dealers, you would have over a thousand, and a more complete auto lineup.
|
- #83 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [fezo]
by gagrice
-
Nov 26, 2008 (8:59 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Nov 26, 2008 6:09 pm)
I don't see where shedding dealers will save them anything. I do understand they have responsibilities to supply cars. The number of dealers should be a plus in getting their products to market. Another few months there won't be any GM dealers left in business anyway. They are dropping like flies.
|
- #84 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [steve_]
by nippononly
-
Nov 29, 2008 (12:29 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Nov 26, 2008 5:59 pm)
Well, dealer count aside those are the first three brands I would dump on the way to reducing overhead....and it's still questionable whether they should keep Buick and GMC. But the thing is, if they eliminate the brands but can't do anything to eliminate the excess production capacity, what good does it do?
Hopefully Gettelfinger will be as good as his word and the Jobs Bank can be dropped immediately. In that case they could close plants right away, and dropping the brands would be meaningful in reducing a HUGE amount of ongoing costs associated with maintaining those brands.
|
- #85 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [nippononly]
by cooterbfd
-
Nov 29, 2008 (1:29 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Nov 29, 2008 12:29 pm)
"..Hopefully Gettelfinger will be as good as his word and the Jobs Bank can be dropped immediately. In that case they could close plants right away, and dropping the brands would be meaningful in reducing a HUGE amount of ongoing costs associated with maintaining those brands. "
What good would dropping brands do if the dealers need to be paid off??? Dropping 1 brand may work, as they can tell the BPG dealers they still have 2, or offer Saturn dealers BPG, but to rid them all would cost billions.
|
- #86 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [cooterbfd]
by fezo
-
Nov 29, 2008 (1:48 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Nov 29, 2008 1:29 pm)
This is something we agree on. If you are going to have to pay off dealers I don't see any savings in that.
I'm guessing that in most areas where there are Saturn dealerships that there are already Pontiac-GMC-Buick. It's a tough situation.
I don't what it costs GM to have a dealership as opposed to supplying x number of cars. If eliminating a brand saves money in and of itself then Pontiac is pretty easy to eliminate because there aren't many Pontiac dealers that don't also sell the others.
|
- #87 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [fezo]
by cooterbfd
-
Nov 29, 2008 (2:05 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Nov 29, 2008 1:48 pm)
If anything could save Saturn, it may be turning Hummer into a Jeep like product. Think about it. The whole purpose of selling Hummers to the public was to capitalize on the facination that the public has with Army vehicles, like the Jeep CJ. What they SHOULD have done was to aim and price it towards normal people. $60,000 or more for an H2??? Who needs a pimpmobile like that. They could've toned it down quite a bit and sold it for $40K. How about making a Hummer looking competitor to the Wrangler for under $20K??? If you combined Hummer and Saturn dealers, you could come up with an entire low to mid priced full line of vehicles with a totally different atttitude and character from the mainstream GM lineup.
Unfortunately, it's probably too late for that.
|
- #88 of 874
-
Re: cross-posted brand cutting [cooterbfd]
by fezo
-
Nov 29, 2008 (2:28 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Nov 29, 2008 2:05 pm)
I agree with both parts - that it would have been a good idea and that it's too late now.
I do hope they are able to put a realistic package together to keep things going but the sacrifices will be all around.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views 
