Our first car was a navy blue Opel Kadett. My father was off to sea; my mother took us on an inaugural daytrip. When my father returned to the Norwegian mainland, he dismissed the car as too small and upgraded to an Opel Kapitän. This was followed at short intervals by an Opel Rekord and an Opel Admiral. (The hierarchical naming scheme of Opel marketing in the 60s-70s was pretty obvious.) I’m sure my father would have moved to a Senator with time– but he was ready for a Mercedes. Once he’d switched allegiances, he never looked back.
They were good cars, the Opels, but they were also ”’tweeners”: the brand you bought until you made enough money to move on to something better. Then as now, Teutonic carmakers offer such a wealth of quality choices that it’s hard for Opel to stand out. For the last two decades it’s been the ”we’re here too” brand: a low to middle market alternative to higher-priced, better-regarded imports and homegrown ”names;” roughly akin to Chevrolet’s current position in the U.S.
And now GM has decided to populate its ailing Saturn brand with Opels, both platform derivatives (Aura) and outright imports (Astra). The American brand born as GM’s ”import fighter” is down to relying on imported European design, technology and production for its salvation.
The irony is delicious, the choice of donor inauspicious. Although Opel is currently undergoing an extensive product redevelopment program, the Euro-brand’s tweener mainstream products are a stretch as pinch hitters for a quirky niche player.
It’s hard to tell what GM has on its mind these days. They’re building Opel-platformed Saturns, Vauxhalls, Holdens, Chevrolets and Saabs (designed in Germany, sometimes rejigged and rebadged as Cadillacs). While platform sharing and international parts commonality shouldn’t be an impediment to shrewd, sustainable and distinctive branding, you wouldn’t think it from looking at the products coming from GM’s mashup of mid-market models. Can Saturn carve out a name for itself deploying generic German motors? Not likely.
There’s a Black Hole hovering over RenCen. This irresistible vortex devours any automotive brand with a definable identity, pulls it through the Event Horizon, and spits it back out again, bland and denuded. Every brand-specific selling point and distinguishing feature is lost, replaced by variations on the badge slapped to the hoods of identical look-and-feel automobiles. Saturn disappeared into that time – space distortion a long time ago. The new Aura may be a great car, but it’s not a great Saturn.
Hang on; what’s one of them, then? No one’s really sure anymore.
That such a fate should befall Saturn is tragic. Like Lexus, the brand was born an empty slate. Within a few short years, Saturn’s plastic-panelled vehicles, no-haggle pricing and customer-focused dealers built an intensely loyal following. While Pontiac stopped building excitement, Cadillac disappeared into a fug of mediocrity and Oldsmobile vanished, Saturn buyers stood by their brand. They knew they were a different kind of customer for a different kind of company.
This description once applied to Saab buyers. Talk about bad karma; The General bought the brand about the same time they started Saturn. As the import fighter found its inner quirk, the quirky Swedish brand born of fighters was stripped of its mojo. The General tried to turn Saab into a cut-price luxury marque (!), alienating the brand’s core customers. At the same time, GM’s mandarins gradually starved Saturn of product and marketing resources, until the brand’s soul was gone.
Which leaves GM with not one but two formerly distinctive brands that have lost their direction. The General is now talking about brand distinction, even as it begins badge-engineering on a global basis.
Too late. If GM had begun nurturing its divisions’ branding when it mattered, back in the late ’80’s, it would now have a lineup of companies serving a palette of consumer needs. Instead it has a vortex of brands pretending to be different, stacked up in the middle of each segment.
Saturn sits in a particularly tepid part of the goulash. Back when they began, Saturn dealers’ honesty, stress-free service and customer focus was a big deal. In these post-Lexus days of customer CSI’s and J.D. Power ratings, when Saturn hasn’t sold itself as the car customer’s best friend for over a decade, the brand’s [unstated] promise of warm fuzzies is no big thing. When they ditched plastic panels, product differentiation died. Which left Saturn with… nothing.
Take it from someone who’s grown up around Opels, Opelization will not save Saturn. Opel has no glamor to bestow upon Saturn; its geist is middle-of-the-road. This, of course, will not prevent The General from throwing its reserves at another researched-to-death brand melée. But Saturn’s customers have already moved on, as my father did with his Opels. And they’re not looking back.
Thank you for this this market context for the Opel brand. Yet you have failed to mention that every single euro-styled and euro-precisioned Opel is better than any single Saturn, both in terms of mechanicals and design. After seeing the new Vue, Aura and Astra and reading countless reviews), my sense is that these will be winners in the US market littered as it is with small (and very competent) Asian cubes and jelly bellies.
I traveled to Opel’s site on the web to see what else they have in the stable, and boy what a shock. There are some outstanding cars here from what I could see. GM would do well to bring more of them here, either as outright imports or re-skinned models made for the NA market.
I am not sure but I believe Vauxhall is doing well in the UK. The new Corsa is a Yaris, Fit – killer if I ever saw one. It has to become a Saturn IMHO.
Smart Move GM, given you can’t seem to make any world-class cars here at home. Bring em all here. My predictions is that so far these new ‘Op-urns’ will all be successful relative to what came before them. Given the alternative (Day-wooooooos), not a bad play at all.
I grew up around Opels also, and don’t remember the story nearly the same.
In most of the 20 years I was keeping track, Opel’s Kadett, later Astra, would be in the top three selling cars in the country. Usually duking it out with the VW Golf for the top place, it was always a bestseller. A bestseller based on many sales to return customers, who did not feel the need to upgrade to another brand or even another model within Opel.
Now, how this applies to sales through Saturn here in the US, who knows? Better not to speculate on the fate of a car in the US based on its European history.
After all, the VW for retired old farts in Europe, the Jetta, is considered a sporty sedan for generation X and Y in the US.
I buy used Saturns to use as loaner cars for clients. Why? Because they’re very cheap in comparison with Japanese alternatives and they don’t rust out as fast, thanks to the plastic panels. But I drive fifty different cars a week in road testing after repair and the Saturn is a really horrible little car. If I need a used engine for one, I have to wait a month or more, until another one flips onto its roof, because almost all Saturn engines have self destructed already. Opels can’t and aren’t that bad. And, being Saturn branded, they’ll make good, cheap, loaner cars in the long run.
Uh, hello? GM has officially admitted that the Euro-zone Astra headed stateside will be sold at a loss (despite Mr. Lutz’ ill-informed assertions to the contrary).
It could be the best small car on the planet, but every single car sold represents a loss for GM. So the more they sell, the more they lose.
What’s more, please note Mr. Leikanger’s larger point: that the Opel brand has no brand cachet or, indeed, distinct brand identity, to share with Saturn.
The wider point is that building a good or even great car is not enough. It’s got to A) generate a profit and B) reinforce the brand.
Of course, point B refers to long-term profitability. An Aura or Astra or Sky can generate a short term boost, but unless the model helps build the brand, it actually hurts it in the long term.
I seem to remember an Opel GT that enticed me as a teenager, until I tried to wedge myself into one (6’5″).
The funny thing is that the Astra is a markedly superior car (sans plastic) to the Ion that it’s replacing. It’s a damn shame that GM wasn’t forward-looking enough to realize that the time for a sporty, fuel-efficient, upscale hatchback has come again, and designed and tooled for a domestic “Ion II”. Instead, they relied on the dismal (except for fuel economy) Aveo, which is a car that people will skip not because they have the money, but they can move (with low-cost dealer financing ) to the next level. Why doesn’t GM ask the customer what they want, then try to deliver it with domestic resources? (I could answer my own question, but I’ll leave it).
The Astra is now on my “short list” to replace my ’97 Camaro RS (3800 V6 5M), which is a very fun car to drive, and it can (and has) hauled a small water heater, flat-screen TV, and a carpet cleaning machine. I don’t thnk that the new “gangsta” Camaro would fit the bill…
Aura owners don’t seem to notice the issues pointed out in this article. Many are very enthusiastic about their cars.
That said, I’ve also wondered about the financial viability of selling Opel’s as-is in the States:
http://www.truedelta.com/blog/?cat=16
WRT to the Astra, I was able to look it over and sit in it in Chicago. We’re getting Opel’s low-end trim level, so it’s not impressive inside. And I don’t think a 140-horsepower 1.8-liter is going to cut it these days if you’re not Honda or Toyota.
My Astra impressions from Chicago:
http://www.truedelta.com/blog/?p=31
Lot of doom and gloom over these Opelized Saturns, which I think is a marked improvement over the Ion and L300, especially in the style department. Saturns never really had any brand identity to begin with other than cool plastic doors that resisted dents really well and very friendly salespeople.
I liken this to Version 2.0. Version 1 faltered because GM neglected it. They had a Civic/Corolla fighter for too long and when they finally realized that they needed an Accord/Camry fighter too, it was too late. Now that they’ve reimaged the brand with vehicles that follow the design cues of their flagship Sky roadster, it now depends on whether GM can keep their attention on them long enough to fully develop this new image.
Losing money on every Astra is a problem, indeed, but how much more money would GM have lost if they continued to sell the Ion and L300?
Hello!!
My 3rd car was a ’72 Opel 1900 Rallye, called the Manta in later years.
Compared to the Japanese and even the other German imports of the time, it had some very unique features, to wit: Cam-in-head valvetrain, a half torque-tube multilink rear suspension, short/long arm front suspension, and excellent dash layout.
A HUGE trunk, spacious underhood, very comfortable interioir.
Excellent handling gave the BMW 2002 owners fits when I autocrossed it.
Unfortunately treated like the retarded stepchild to be kept up in the attic by the BUICK dealerships that sold them.
Kinda funny…the Chevrolet Vega used the Opel 4-speed transmission with a gear removed to make it a 3-speed. Draw your own conclusions.
The message I get from GM and Ford is: “Be a REAL AMERICAN PATRIOT and buy your import car from US!!”
Ditto – Quasimondo!
You bear out my initial point that anything is a marked improvement over what Saturn represents now in the marketplace.
RF – so that leaves only Day-wooooos for Saturn’s small cars? Given that GM is incapable to design/build competent and profitable small cars, Day-wooos are its only other option. What does Sat-wooooos do for the brand in the long term? And for sustained profitability? Despite GM’s many shortcomings right now, Opel is not one of them despite this editorial. If smartly done, leveraging Opel vehicles in NA can prove to be a wise move.
And why then cannot these Op-urns be built in Korea or Mexica or Canada even? VW has built cars in Mexico for generations. Surely there is a way to get them here and still make money on these cars. I realize the US dollar is in the toilet compared to the Euro and that building anything in Europe is more costly. Yet doesn’t a global automaker have other options? Isn’t this the main advantage of being a global company, with manufacturing assets stretched far and wide?
No my friend, given GM’s clumsy track record in the small car segment, you cannot convince me that this is a bad play, by any way you look at it. Yes they have to make the financials work, but isn’t this why these execs make millions of dollars?
Let's try this again… The multi-millionaire execs' plan: use the money losing (from the git-go) Astra as a "place holder" in the Saturn lineup. If the Astra does well, figure out a way to build them cheaper. While I'm thinking decontenting and the usual degradation in quality (e.g. the hecho en Mexico Golfs), they're thinking, um, something else. It's the same "global strategy" they're applying to the Pontiac G8: see if it flies, then commit and figure out a way to make it here-ish. But back to my main point: what is a Saturn? Why buy one over the competition? It's not JUST about product, but product would be a good start. What makes the Astra unique, different and Saturn?
Robert, I understand your premise here, but I have to ask…
Has Mitsubishi or Mercedes saved Chrysler? Has Mazda or Volvo saved Ford?
I see no difference here. The home team has basically given up in the small car segment, and relies on others for basic engineering.
quasimondo: Is that the plan? Let's lose less money than we did before? Carnut: When a brand relies on an "anything's better than what we had before" justification. well, that's not good is it? Call me crazy, but I thought the whole Saturn plastic panel thing was a winner. With modern memory materials, maybe they could have built a "self-healing" outer shell. Terry: Good question. No, Mercedes has not saved Chrysler. Nor has Mazda or Volvo saved Ford. So where does that leave GM?
Actually, I would prefer opels as saturns and holdens as pontiacs. That is the best thing that ever happened to Saturn/Pontiac. Mazda, Mitsubishi did provide key technical prowess and platforms for Ford/Chrysler. So, I wont say they didnt help. Without them, they’d still be selling old inefficient engines/platforms.
Robert, it leaves GM, Ford, and ChryCo looking like International Harvester truck maker wannabees whose product fell out of favor due to gas prices, but will unhappily sell you a small car if you absolutely have to have one. Dont ask where it’s made, just buy the damn thing, dont compare it to what else is out there and live in ignorant bliss. In other words… the same ol’ corporate BS brought to you by the High Priests of the Temple of Syrinx…
RF:
If the end result is a vehicle lineup that can put them in a direction of recovery instead of a car that is truly rental fleet caliber in design, engineering, and build, I think a hit to the ledgers is worth it. Certainly building the same stodgy things that can’t even generate showroom traffic wasn’t helping.
The plastic doors was a good gimmick, but unfortunately, that’s all it was, a gimmick. After a while, nobody cared about that anymore, and that’s about the time people went back to buying Civics and Corollas.
…”we’re here too” brand: a low to middle market alternative to higher-priced, better-regarded imports and homegrown ”names;”
Euhm…I would say middle market, definitely not low market, except if you would consider it’s direct competitors, in case of the Astra the Peug 307/Toyota Corolla/VW Golf(Rabbit)/Renault Megane/etc low market. Untill 2 years ago, Opel was the biggest selling brand for 36 years in a row in the Netherlands (even if, indirectly, our government had a big influence on that).
I think that as a car, from all GM brands it mostly fits what Chevrolet should offer. Of course, in American perception it might not be American enough to be a Chevy (then again, what about the Daevrolets they’re selling now???).
After that maybe Pontiac, but I can see why they haven’t since they’ve already made a Saturn out of the Aura.
There might be one point why this car could be a Saturn. I think their is no quintessential Saturn (I mean, plastic panels???), but, from what I’ve read as a European never having seen as much as one Saturn in my life, Saturn as a brand stands for a dealer experience and ownership service that you wouldn’t expect buying relatively cheap cars. In that sense every good value car can be a Saturn.
I remember admiring a lady friend’s dark blue 1st-gen SC-2 coupe many moons ago. Then Saturn offered one with a third door, which I thought was a brilliant idea- until I noticed that it was on the DRIVER’S SIDE! Apparently, the engineers responsible weren’t aware of a city phenomenon known as “parallel parking”, and that unloading of youngsters into oncoming traffic was not becoming of Saturn’s “safety conscious” image at the time. That’s when the thoughts of buying one left my mind completely.
All of this will become irrelevant on GM takes over Chrysler(according to some reports)and becomes the biggest Auto manufacturer in the world again and with that new Sebring chassis as a base, all will be right again. maybe the GM & Chrysler death watch could merge as well.
“But back to my main point: what is a Saturn? Why buy one over the competition? It’s not JUST about product, but product would be a good start. What makes the Astra unique, different and Saturn?”
I think what makes it unique is that it’s European. Maybe it’s not a differentiated brand in Europe, but in the US, the very FACT of its being European differentiates it. Think about Volkswagen … a totally mass-market product in Europe, but differentiated in the US by virtue of being small European cars. So I seriously don’t see the author’s point. Saturn was started as the “import-fighter,” the small car that was more Japanese that the mainstream American offerings. Now it’s fighting the small imports by being an ACTUAL European car. That’s what makes the brand different. Small Chevys and Pontiacs are small American cars, comfortable and cushy, and small Saturns are small European cars, tight, stylish, and fun to drive. That absolutely seems like a brand differentiation to me. OK, maybe it’s stupid to import cars that you lose money on, but you can’t convince me it’s bad brand strategy.
Great article, well written too.
As someone who’s used Opels in Europe before (late 80’s/early 90’s) I never understood how bringing them over here could save GM. Yes they are better than most of the homegrown offerings (GM’s USDM small cars) but they were never *stellar* automobiles. For a long time GM treated their European subsidiaries as underlings to their American operations – beancounting is still easy to do from across the Atlantic. Europe was never dominated by one company at a share of more than 12% or so (which Opel and Vauxhall never achieved) so they had little credibility when most of the money was coming from NA.
GM can’t keep creating different identities for each brand every decade (or less…), and whenever the corporation’s leaders decide to pull a brand in another direction. There many more ways to shuffle a stack of 12 cards than 3, and this constant shuffling is more proof that GM has far, far too many marques. And needs to eliminate several.
The next step should be to do away with the Saab USA dealer network and simply sells Saabs alongside Saturns in the Saturn network. Saturn has a great dealer network while Saab’s dealer network stinks.
If Saturn is going to be a mid-range Euro brand then it makes even more sense to offer the Saab as a premium Euro brand alongside it. First, of course, ditch the Saaburu and SaabBlazer!
RF/Posters –
This is more a request than a comment… I’m relatively new to following the auto industry. Yes, I grew up with dad who worked for GM, but I didn’t really follow the global auto industry until I really started reading… GMDW. What I’m wondering is if some folks who have the facts could do a GMDW/FDW/DCXSW editorial based on history? What I’m thinking is a case study in big industrial companies going under. We’ve heard about Packard, etc and how they were run out of business or whatever, but what happened at International Harvestor? Caterpillar? US Steel, Bethelehem steel? These companies were all old line industries in the States, and at some point they had to reorganize, whatever. I am guessing that these are case studies in MBA school. I suppose I could wikipedia these things… ok I just did. I’m thinking that someone writing an editorial here with an eye towards parallels between those companies and the current US Auto industry would be a worthwhile read.
Thanks in advance.
Opels as Saturns and Holdens as Pontiacs doesn’t bother me one bit, as long as they fit into each brands mission. From an engineering $ and a capacity utilization perpective, sharing cars around the world makes sense. I like that the Sky is being sold internationally, GM needs to do more of this. Look at Dodge – I know it’s hard. They sell US built Dodges as Dodges all over the world. GM and Ford need to learn from this.
As for the Aura, it currently LOOKS like the Vectra, but is really just a restyled G6 underneath. The next-gen Aura is supposed to be a Vectra copy.
It’s sad, really. I mean, why did GM need an “import fighter” to begin with?
It was a source of corporate pride. “We TOO have the technical expertise, and more importantly…the WILL to build a World-Class product right here at home with home-grown talent. Right here in the USA”.
They could have imported Opels from the get go. But nope, pride is what motivated them.
What’s even more sad is the truth: GM was taught first hand(!) by the Zen Master himself (Toyota) how to build a small car. Recall, Toyota’s very first US assembly plant was not a Toyota facility at all…it was GM’s worst of the worst (Fremont, CA…which had been shuttered).
So…yes…GM is a impotent…their vasectomy occurred back before Saturn was even a company. And they’ve been shooting blanks ever since.
This 1986 Toyota/Chevy Nova represents in spirit more of what a “Saturn” is (or is supposed to be)
http://www.synlube.com/images/nova86.jpgthan today’s Opels:
come again:
http://www.synlube.com/images/nova86.jpg
I’m going to have to stand on both sides of the fence on this one. Everyone’s posting this as a black and white issue when in reality, there’s an awful lot of shades in the gray.
First off, Saturn isn’t deviating much from their initial intended purpose. The brand is still GM’s ‘import fighter’ they probably the best overall brand image for import buyers who are looking at GM’s stable.
Most folks even today don’t recognize Saturn as a GM division. Back when they first came out, the L and S series cars (sad to say they only sold two vehicles for nearly a decade) were extremely popular. As Farago already mentioned, the Saturn SL1 & SL2 were probably the most widely appreciated subcompacts GM ever made and the SC’s offered a clean design that filled a niche that the Celica/Integra/Eclipse sports coupes were abandoning for higher price ranges.
GM made a lot of mistakes though along the way. Saturn was starved for product throughout the 1990’s and lost a lot of customers as a result. What did you do once you trade in the Saturn? There was no way to move up in the brand other than buying an optioned out coupe which was a non-starter since a lot of the (young) prior owners had families once the car shopping process became a necessity.
Instead of offering a minivan, mid-sized sedan, luxury car, upscale coupe or SUV to Saturn ( which was offered to Oldsmobile thanks in large part to the politickig of Mr. Rock), Saturn got zilch. The S-series redesign was actually quite well done but the L-Series midsized sedans received an interior that was an absolute abomination along with an exterior that was as bland as the last-gen Olds 88. Like a lot of folks have already metioned, Saturns became very affordable used cars and rental cars since the mechanics of the late 90’s – early 00’s were quite good. But a good used/rental car doesn’t equate to a healthy profit. GM, in effect, screwed their own pooch.
I could go on about the Saturn Vue. But it’s pretty much the same story as the L-series… so let’s skip that chapter and look at what Saturn is doing now…
The Aura and Sky are very solid models overall. I would buy a Sky over a Miata (and that’s saying a lot since Mazda is my favorite mainstream brand) and the Aura offers a credible alternative to the Camry/Optima/Impala blandness in the mid-sized field. The current Altima is a very strong competitor to it… but the next gen Accord will most likely become the new standard. However I’m prognosticating that the imported Astra will be a big hit in the US market so log as the overall design isn’t screwed with. That’s a big if… but I know too may folks who hate the anime inspired Civics, the bland Corollas, and the tepid Yaris.
Hmm… the more I look at what Saturn’s line-up is forming into, the more I believe that Nissan, Mazda and VW (to a lesser degree) will become the primary competitors.
It should be interesting…
So GM (Saturn) is now looking at Opel to bail them out with a sedan, Ford is being pressured to import their small car European in-house designs (Focus and Mondeo where are you?), and the only shining light Chrysler has managed to ignite in several years recieved its chassis from a German designed sedan? (Thanks, multi-billion dollar car company merger of equals.)
Perhaps I’m looking too far ahead, but my TTAC crystal ball is delivering some prognostications that appear more than mildly alarming.
Big picture; what does this mean for American car design and engineering? Will we no longer have the capability to create a sedan/small car on our own that we would buy?
Somebody hold me, I’m scared.
Uh, hello? GM has officially admitted that the Euro-zone Astra headed stateside will be sold at a loss (despite Mr. Lutz’ ill-informed assertions to the contrary).
They did save millions of Federal Researve Notes by not having to develop from scratch so the loss will not be as great….Ugh. Maybe their strategy is to get the teens interested and then sell Mom and Dad an Outlook when they go to look. Or maybe they have no strategy.
My first experience with an Opel was a Manta…Mid-80s…In Scotland…With a rally car driver behind the wheel…And late for a Wedding…With an incredibly hung-over Groom in the car…The look on the Bride’s Mother’s face as we power-slid to the front of the church was priceless…The only thing to do to not throw up was to start drinking again…The Astra should be a “fun” car!
You couldn’t be more right. I am one of those who drank the Saturn kool-aid some time ago and in fact my 1995 wagon is still my daily ride 225,000 miles later. The caq had quirks and one made some comprimises (interior materials and NVH). But the car was bulletproof. In fact when I refreshed the still running motor at 215,000 it was still shifting via it’s original clutch. The car literally had less than 500 dollars of unscheduled maintainance costs and thanks to the aforementioned plastic panels still looked great.
Much of the same can be said for my wifes 2002 Vue though the Opalazation (and eventually even Hondazation) had began. Like my wagon it’s pretty good bang for the buck with compromises in interior fit and finish. However Saturns have always been easy to maintain and now, with my Vue having needed a thermostat for weeks due to a replacement procedure that involves removing the intake manifold to install a 50 dollar replacement, the koolaid is getting bitter.
And on my last trip to the Saturn Store (I still refer to it not as a dealership) I looked at the Aura. A nice looking midsize car. Nice, but not really a Saturn. It’s no different then a Camry except that it looks better but probably isn’t built quite as well. Alas, I’ll probably be tradingg in the Vue on a Sedona when we outgrow it (The Relay, Saturns first badge engineered job) costs more then the Chevy clone and is equally ugly. As for my wagon, well, it may be the last car I’ll own myself, but if it ever needs replacing I can’t imagine going with the new Astra derivitive. At least the Ion still had a propper plastic body.
Lunched with a German the other day. This is the actual German pistonhead’s priority list: Volvo, BMW, Audi, Mercedes, VW, Opel, Ford. As told by a man driving 55000 miles a year, traveling to his company’s other office 175 miles away in 1,5 hours – in a Volvo.
My turn:
Saturn, the import division, is selling the Outlook, an over 5,000lb barge of an “CUV”?
The L Series exterior was almost indestinguishable from the prior generation Opel Vectra, except the grill. We all know what a big hit that was.
The Astra is old meat: the current generation came out in 2002. The “2007.5” refresh is extremely minor and superficial. And it still all rides on the platform of the prior gen Astra (1998), including twist beam rear axle.
Opel in Europe has been fighting for its ilfe in Europe the past 8 years. Massive restructuring, cutbacks, lay-offs. The reason they’re impoting the Astra is because of gross overcapacity in Europe. Not to say they’re bad cars. Stein lays out the issues well in his article.
What’s really interesting in all of this is the different directions GM is taking from Toyota/Honda, which more than ever is building cars unique to the US market (Camcord/Civic/newXB-XD/etc.) Is GM’s (and Ford’s) strategy of going “global” an act of desperation, because they can’t or won’t develop proper US small car products; or are they being “smart”.
I could probably write 800 words on this, but I’ll keep it to a comment.
Opel may be a middling brand in Europe, but it’s done something good for Saturn. Thanks to Opel transplant DNA, Saturn now has the best looking and most cohesive lineup of cars under $30,000. While other mid-market marques’ design languages are a steady diet of pastiche, Saturn’s new lineup deploys good-looking and recognizable design cues from its compact to its full-size crossover.
Most consumers in the US aren’t used to seeing this design language on Opels and Vauxhalls. To us, they’re completely new. And a fantastic looking design it is too; even the Outlook looks the part, a feat that not even Mercedes has been able to achieve on the ML and GL.
I don’t think people yet understand what this is going to do for Saturn. People are used to budget manufacturers producing bland-looking, derivative blah-mobiles. A cohesive design like this can change Saturn’s image overnight from a producer of mediocre plastic-bodied automobiles with fantastic dealer experience to a producer of fantastic-looking cars with the same fantastic dealer experience.
“That’s a Saturn?” isn’t going to be a question once people get used to seeing Auras, Outlooks, and new Vues. This is going to have a huge impact on GM: for the first time since the original Saturn launch, one of their brands will be gaining mindshare, not losing it.
That’s a Saturn.
(Disclaimer: I used to own a Saturn L300, which was a plastic-bodied Vectra. Since then I’ve moved on to an Acura TSX, but still have a soft spot for the brand.)
A fine commentary. To add to that, I’d say that the fundamental reason that this plan won’t work is that American consumers of bread-and-butter cars don’t particularly want European cars.
Yes, there is a relatively small niche market in the US for European cars, particularly among premium and near-premium car buyers. But on the whole, Americans generally don’t like the body styles or smaller sizes favored in Europe. Europeans will pay a premium price for small cars, while Americans deride them as “econoboxes” and view them as essentially cheap. Europeans prefer hatchbacks for their versatility; Americans like sedans with trunks for their look.
One need only to look at the Honda Accord to understand the issue. The Accord sold in North America is a completely different car than the Accord sold elsewhere. The key difference in these two cars is size: the American car is a larger car with a larger back seat, the US gets larger engine choices, and Americans are not offered a diesel option. The Accord sells very well in the US, for Honda has gone to great lengths to differentiate its US (and Canadian) customers from its other markets, and has realized that the most popular segments in the US require their own unique models. What is badged as the Honda Accord abroad is called a Acura TSX in the US, with the TSX generating just a fraction of the sales volume of the Accord.
Forbes reported that during 2006, the German automakers (this must exclude the Chrysler side of Daimler) had a combined market share in the US of 5.9%. Collectively, they sold about as many cars to Americans in a year as GM built in North America in about three months. If GM wants to learn how to regain a connection with the mass-market consumer, looking to Europe is a way to ensure that they achieve the opposite.
The L Series exterior was almost indestinguishable from the prior generation Opel Vectra, except the grill.
Well, it did have plastic panels. And my understanding is that it actually rode on a slightly lengthened version of the platform shared with the 9-5. Park a 9-5 (even a 2007 model) next to an L300, and their outlines match perfectly.
Brian E. Sorry, no plastic panels. It was simply an Opel Vectra with a few front end touches to make it sadder looking. No, the 9-5 is an evolution of the old 9000 platform, not shared with GM. The 9-3 shares the Vectra platform.
I second most of what is being said about Opel; personified medicrity. However, as the 60’s drew to a close, Opel brought out a truly remarkable vehicle, that did not have its parallell from any other European maker (except the exotics), namely the Opel Diplomat. This was a big barge much in the American tradition, and what set it apart from other European cars at the time was the powerplant. Somehow, the Opel engineers managed to shoehorn a Chevy 327 between the front fenders. There was such a car in my family at a later stage, and I was particularly “impressed” with the way they had obviously installed the spark plugs before installing the engine; it was virtually impossible to get to the rearmost plugs without lifting the engine. They hadn’t skimped the rest of the engineereing either, it had a rather complicated De Dion rear axle that was supposed to combine the best of the solid rear axle with the best from the independent systems.
Well, this is past tense, the 69 Diplomat it sure isn’t gonna help The General’s grip on the US car market one bit!
I disagree – GM had good Euro designs that they wanted to bring to the US and needed a brand to badge them with. Pontiac, Chevy and Buick are too steeped in US history for a car like the Astra to be in their lineup. Enter Saturn – originally devised as an import fighter brand that had been now reduced to selling sub-standard plastic panel cars. The Euro gig fits perfectly – dealers with a good reputation and customers that don’t care for too much machismo image cars.
I too have lived in Europe and know what Opel means to their customers but that has no effect here in the US where customers are completely unaware of the Opel brand.
The bottom line is that the Euro imports have improved the brand image of Saturn by offering far superior products than their previous offerings and it also returned them to their original intended role as an import fighter. Let’s face it – you would cross shop a Mazda 3 and a Cobalt, but you may consider the Astra as an alternative.
Q: Did Volvo and Mazda save Ford?
A: No. But they HAVE given Ford better product. Mostly without wrecking Volvo and Mazda.
Whether or not Opel will do this for Saturn remains to be seen.
Saturn is failing perhaps because they never realized what their brand identity was all about. “Import fighter” is not a useful brand identity. Around here, the ‘burbs, Saturn was the company of “Practical Little Cars.” Mid-level luxury cars are not part of that brand identity. The Vue was a reasonable extension of this (practical little sport-ute, like a Rav or CR-V).
The people I know who bought Saturns were people who wanted just what Saturn was delivering – “practical little cars” and would otherwise go Corolla or Civic but had an American preference. Oh, yes, they all had awareness of the plastic panels and liked that feature very much.
However, many of the people I know who bought Saturns 8 or more years ago have switch to the Corollas and Civics. Why? They felt their Saturns were used up at 100K miles (or had seen high repair bills already) and felt they deserved more in a car. It didn’t escape their notice that their neighbors were doing better with their Toy-ondas.
Beyond the durability issue, at some point, Saturn lost its way. A 5K lb CUV is not a Saturn. An Astra might be.
KixStart: There is another way to look at the "help" Mazda and Volvo have given Ford. Maybe these brands ultimately dragged Ford down, by allowing the mothership a relatively quick and easy way to circumvent its own corporate culture. Did Mazda and Volvo enable Ford's denial? Something to think about.
Robert: good point. Taking this issue further: The growing importance of “premium branding” is critical too. That particularly is what is creaming Opel and Ford in Europe. A generation or so ago, they were seen as the modest vehicle of the “practical family man”.
That demographic segment is as good as dead, especially so in Europe, where having kids is beginning to be seen as an STD.
Look at the explosion of MINI. BMW 3/Audi A4 are near the top of the sales in Germany. Everybody is (or wants to) wearing designer clothes or fashion accessories.
Saturn doesn’t have that kind of premium/desireable brand image. Frankly, GM should just as well have killed Saturn at its recent near death and changed the name to SAAB (sorry to all you old time SAAB lovers).
At least SAAB (possibly) has a name worth trying to resurrect as the “import/premium” brand for GM. I don’t see it with Saturn. Plastic bodies and no-haggling prices aside, the S series was always a cheap shit-box. Sorry, but true.
Well Robert, I doubt Volvo and Mazda “gave” Ford anything. Ford looked at their own empty bag of tricks, decided to take the easy way out and raid what they could from their other divisions.
It’s been asked what Saturn now stands for, what is its image.
I ask you, in light of all these posts what does GM stand for, what is its corporate image.
Cuts right down to the core, doesnt it?
RF, it’s not like Mazda, especially, has been a recent acquisition of Ford. They’ve been “together” since, what, 1979? It was only more recently, early 2000s, that Ford assumed “majority” ownership of Mazda — even then to the extent that Ford did not assume Mazda’s debts.
Ford was profitable until just a few years ago, as buyers started NOT buying Explorers and F-150s in droves — despite the drain imposed by Jaguar, et al. It was at this time that everyone in Dearborn woke up (I know, relatively speaking) and realized they hadn’t spent a dime on new product on the car side of the ledger. Mazda had a good platform riding under the 6 — and it made for a quick fix to bring the Fusion and now the Edge into being.
The point is, it was not Mazda/Volvo/Jaguar’s fault for Ford’s current problems. The fault lies directly in the top floors of the “Glass House”. They were asleep at the wheel for far too long.
I read about the saturn/opel duo and the memory of my father’s assessment of the Omega/Catera comes to mind. Some years back at a GM event for investors he drove the Opel Omega and the Caddy Catera. What was his assessment of the domestic version, in one word… ruined. He had some positive words for the Omega, but the caddy post lobotomy was ruined for him. Why should I expect GM do do anything else with their saturn products.
There was indeed a brief period of time – maybe five years total – when Opel developed some cache with American buyers. That was when Car and Driver and other magazines tagged the Opel GT “a baby Corvette” and the Opel sedan – whatever it was called – was campaigned successfully by Patrick Bedard in SCCA. There was more than a bit of irony, in that a few years earlier, a writer for C/D had called the Opel Kadett station wagon “a eunuch on four wheels.”
The Europeans have, per usual, gotten the best of the renewed interest in Opel, prior to the States. But of course, the bottom line, is can Opel underpinnings, beneath Saturn sheet-metal reinvigorate Saturn?
It seems unlikely methinks. Not only has editor Farago made the key point, that each of the new cars are sold at a loss, but equally important is that Saturn lost that unique aura – pun intended – that brought people into Saturn stores, back in the Nineties.
That process began with the ill-conceived and ill-timed LS series, pulled after just a couple years of production. And when Saturn had to go to Honda to get a decent V6 for the VUE, it made them look like losers. And as F. Scott Fitzgerald once said, “There are no second acts in America.”
I do feel sorry for all those workers who likely will lose their jobs, as Saturn plants go silent.
Terry said:
“…Dont ask where it’s made, just buy the damn thing, dont compare it to what else is out there and live in ignorant bliss. In other words… the same ol’ corporate BS brought to you by the High Priests of the Temple of Syrinx… ”
Hey Terry, is your last name Brown? ;)
Kind of silly to say that Opel is for tweeners, and therefore not worthy to be Saturn, which are pretty much the same niche. Does anyone seriously aspire to own an Opel? Or any GM product at this point?
Saab is resurrect-able, but frankly not as a luxury brand. How about a back-to-basics sporting hatch? Position it as the much sportier alternative to an VW GTI/Audi A3 with a little less luxury and a lot more sport? Not everything has to be luxury or near-luxury nowadays… Nobody is going to pick a Saab over a BMW in the luxury market, but they might in the sports-sedan market that BMW seems to be washing its hands of.
Brian E. Sorry, no plastic panels. It was simply an Opel Vectra with a few front end touches to make it sadder looking.
Paul, I owned one for five years. Are you telling me I don’t know what kind of body panels were on the car I drove? It was plastic. If I whacked it, it did not dent. The panel gaps were a mile wide. The doors gave a hollow clunk-rattle every time I closed them.
Brian E: I stand partly corrected. Unlike the S series, which had a monocoque structure (a la Fiero, Lumina MPV) covered completely with plastic panels, the L Series was a conventionally built Vectra with plastic bumpers (nothing new), front fenders and the door outer skins. The rest of the structure, including rear-quarter panels, was steel.
@ akatsuki
Given previous discussions here, and the gist of this commentary, I’d say that the point is GM’s mismanagement of brands. They’re moving their pieces around on the board without plan or symmetry – treating every brand in the same manner.
Saturn could have been developed better, in its direction, instead it was dropped by the wayside when GM went for the Gigavehicles. (Though it was my opinion, back then in the 90s, that Saab in the US should have gotten the attention Saturn received – instead, both brands suffered by being “misunderstood” by their owner.)
I completely agree that Saab should be sporty driving — or as we liked to say it then: as low as you can fly, while not in a plane.
At any rate – the middle of the market is the worst place to be in today …
The Car Czar speaks, re: Saturn
“It’s a no-excuses product lineup,” GM Vice Chairman for Global Product Development Bob Lutz said in an interview at the Chicago Auto Show. “I told the sales and marketing guys if this lineup doesn’t work, I’m out of ideas.”
http://www.dailyherald.com/news/illinoisstory.asp?id=282237&cc=&tc=&t=
So the imported Astra may or may not make money for GM. OK. I don’t recall any editorials criticizing VW for importing the competing Rabbit and not making a lot of money.
What’s the difference?
As for what Saturn stands for, to me it always meant decent cars and a great, fair dealership experience — something that appeals to a lot of people who traditionally get robbed at the dealership, like women, the elderly and minorities.
Now Saturn stands for great, stylish cars at a great, fair dealership.
Boo GM, they changed their market position!
SherbornSean: On the VW front, watch this space. On the Astra front, we're not talking about the Astra "not making a lot of money." We're talking about the model losing money. While I applaud Saturn's sales gestalt– GM should make ALL their dealerships no haggle– it's an unfortunate truth that all capitalistic enterprises must take in more money than they spend. Sorry, there's just no getting around that.
Why do minorities get robbed at dealerships? I’ve heard that about women and the elderly but… minorities?
As a former Civic hatchback owner, I’d say the Astra is a pretty good looking little hatchback-especialy in 3-door form. (The 5 door is kinda fugly.)
Too bad they’ll loose money on each one sold. If they do end up building them over here-ish, RF, I too would worry about the resulting quality–or lack thereof. Right now, the center stack looks as if it’s not from the GM parts bin–a good thing.
An interesting historical tidbit regarding the Astra name from About:Cars.com
…this isn’t the Astra’s first time on these shores. Remember the little front-wheel-drive Pontiac LeMans hatchback from the mid-80s? The LeMans was a Korean-built version of the Opel Kadett, known in England — and, after 1991, in the rest of Europe — as the Astra. Let’s hope it gets a warmer reception this time ’round.
Anyway, the current “Saturn” Astra looks to be a direct competitor to the Mazda3 hatchback.
Too bad we won’t be getting the 200 HP turbo Astra with 6-speed manual. That would make shopping among the Mazdaspeed 3, VW GTI, and Civic Si, into a fun day of driving!
But no, it’s got about the same engine specs as my 2006 Civic EX coupe: 1.8L; 140 HP; low torque (126 ft. lbs. Astra; 128 Civic); but both cars will generate great MPG numbers. Call it: GM Ecotec vs. Honda iVTEC engines.
Would I cross-shop the Astra with a Honda?
Well, is GM/Opel engineering = or > Honda engineering?
USDM Civic chassis.
Finally, I wonder how large (or finite) the small hatchback segment is in the U.S.? I keep hearing we Americans don’t like hatchbacks. It’ll be interesting to see how the Astra sells.
While I applaud Saturn’s sales gestalt– GM should make ALL their dealerships no haggle– it’s an unfortunate truth that all capitalistic enterprises must take in more money than they spend.
GM’s in the unfortunate position of choosing how much money to lose, not how much money to make. The Ion needed to be killed, and GM couldn’t go without a small car in the Saturn brand. At the same time, GM had excess capacity in the Astra which would have cost them money too.
I’m of the opinion that it’s OK for GM to take a hit on the Astra at first in order to revitalize Saturn. In the long run, this is the smartest move. Focusing on immediate profitability produces long-term disasters like Chrysler and Dodge’s current glut of SUVs – and hasn’t this site aggressively decried this, too?
Doesn’t the base Aura come with the 3.5L version of the V6 that debuted as a 2.8L engine in the Citation way back when? I guess that could be good or bad. Good if it has benefited from 20 plus years of evolution…bad if it hasn’t. Anyone here driven a car with this engine lately?
I was one of those loyal saturn s-series owners patiently waiting for the next generation s-series. What we were given was the hideous Ion and I turned away and never looked back. Now the plastic panels are gone and Saturn is nothing more than described in this editorial. RIP Spring Hill.
As an aside, my first impression of an North American Opel GT was an erroneous one. It had a Chevy small block stroked to 383 cubes.
It was fast.
Brian E:
I think you missed a verb there: GM put itself in the unfortunate position of choosing how much money to lose, not how much money to make.
Does that sound completely insane? It does to me. The idea of a loss-making car as a placeholder is laughable. Placeholder for what? Something they should have developed five years ago? Or is that ten?
More to the point, since when is losing less than we did before a victory?
Anyway, again, as THIS PIECE SAYS, Saturn, indeed all of GM’s brands, need to start (start again?) with a basic premise. And then fill it.
“Same as it ever was only different” is not exactly what I’d call a compelling brand proposition. They might as well just come out and say “We still don’t shaft you and our products aren’t as crap as they used to be.”
Ladies and gentlemen, the Aura is a sales disaster. What in the world makes you think the Astra will do any better? Is it a better car than a Fit or Yaris or Versa?
Granted, Hyundai is a vast empire…they do much more than cars.
But just think: When Saturn was in it’s infancy, so TOO was Hyundai in the US.
Today rumor has it that Hyundai might be considering purchasing Chrysler!! (Not that I believe it…afterall, WHY would Hyundai do such a ‘tarded thing?).
Do you people SEE the difference? it’s night and day.
One company busts their ass…repeatedly!! Year after year after year…always working to improve upon what they’ve already accomplished.
Other companies….other companies such as GM ….they sit on the sidelines…thinking their future is completely assured.
No, we don’t live in a global marketplace. Not at all!!
I’ve owned an SL2…it was trash. Road noise, the doors slamming like a hinged plastic trash can…the trim literally falling off the insides…(no lie)…and the steering felt like those bumper cars at Magic Mountain.
How can these corporate “chieftains” of the US auto industry honstly look themselves in the mirror when they collect their pay? It’s a complete sell-out…and the customer is the one who pays.
But you see…even that has its limits. Hell yes, I’d buy a Hyundai over anything GM, Ford, and Chrysler produce.
I’m digging that new Vera Cruz…looking mighty nice.
If I’m to spend the requisite 24.5 work-weeks to own something, then by God the vendor can work equally as hard in meeting me with a fine vehicle.
Saturn…what a god-awful hoodwinking of the American public.
I still remember those commercials…of the “sincere”…”honest”…”hard working” people who gave up everything to move from Detroit to Spring Hill TN.
Give me a break. Better yet, give me a Hyundai.
GM should make ALL their dealerships no haggle
I think it would be better if they just sold direct and got rid of dealers. But that will never happen.
Open your mind, just a little:
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/09/detroit-auto-show-2007-hyundai-veracruz/
Read the specs for the 3.8 vs oh…say, GM’s 3800.
And recall who had the 80+ year head start!! Hint, it wasn’t Hyundai.
You see, sometimes one must recognize hard work. It’s what America was founded upon. Hard work, effort (and lots of it), and a strong determination.
I have not seen that in the Big 2.5 in ages.
Perhaps I can interest you in a slightly used GM vehicle? :) The depreciation on the thing has already fallen through the floor…I might have to one day give it away. Maybe the Salvation Army will take it. Knowing my luck, I’d be stuck with HazMat fees.
I’d have to disagree with the author here. Given that GM can’t afford to kill off anymore brands (litterally it would cost too much), the idea of Opelling Saturn and Holdenizing Pontiac makes rational sense.
Eventually it will provide GM the opportunity to better distinguish its portfollio (the three or four Lambdas notwithstanding). There is clearly no saying a Astra is a Cobalt, is there? Also, if Pontiac goes RWD in partnership with Holden, the G6 is gone leaving the easily distinguished Malibu and Aura to match up against Accord/Camry.
GM has said that its core NA volume brands will be Chevrolet, Saturn and Cadillac with the others limited to niche roles. Combing Pontiac, Buick and GMC distribution centers will minimize the pain of this transformation long term.
However, just because the Saturns are European in origin, does not make them autobahn burners:
BTW, why isn’t this a GM Deathwatch article?
Well, again…which company is in the financial position to be floating rumors of a Chrysler acquisition?
You don’t see the comparison, quite obviously.
Product and corporate culture, and yes…financial strength kind of go hand in hand
But after 20+ years of Saturn, we’re supposed to rejoice their latest undertaking…the importation of mediocre Euro vehicles?
ok…
And yes, to answer your question…Hyundai has accomplished more in 20 year what GM has had 30+ years to accomplish…and they Still have not turned their “situation” around.
If that’s the mark of a sucker…then Hyundai will (and IS) having the last laugh.
Their plant in Alabama is recognized as being the world’s most modern. What does that tell you? …when they not only have the capability, but they do so in your very own back yard!!
I guess Barnum would call Toyota a 3rd-rate automatic loom factory too.
These are interesting times…you either meet the challenge head on, or someone ELSE will kindly do it for you! PT Barnum or not…trust me on this.
@Rastus
You make the point that still has not dawned on Mr Lutz:
You either meet the challenge head on, or someone ELSE will kindly do it for you!
Interestingly, it’s only now that Lutz is willing to declare that he could be fresh out of ideas – he’s been a one trick pony since forever, so that takes some doing.
That said, of course GM has to do something to survive. My claim is that by pretty much doing the same thing, across its many platforms, it is working against itself, and to the detriment of its brands.
And here’s a unique “problem” that few latch on to:
No one buys a GM. But GM itself thinks that people do. But people buy (or should want to buy) a Saturn, Saab, Opel, Cadillac …
There is no GM branded car. Unfortunately, whenever GM shows its cars to the world, they are presented as GM product – the cars are “sub-brands” at best.
And this mismatch in brand perception is what I have chosen to call GM’s Black Brand Devouring Hole: Chews ’em up, and spits ’em out as GM-product.
The market has become spoilt for choices, and is not buying this any more.
Regarding the Opels
Opel does not have inferior products. Build quality is exceptional. Design is much more daring than VW. The technology you normally find only on much more expensiv cars.
What Opel lacks is a strong brand. This is a serious problem and it is questionnable if the Opel leadership can handle the change needed, IMHO they cannot.
In the US market, the Opel cars should be a smash hit. Opel cars fit perfectly to the Saturn brand that now finally can be filled with meaningful product.
Perhaps Opel execs can get from their high horses and borrow some cues on branding from their Saturn counterparts.
@ Snotfjold
Opel does not have inferior products. Build quality is exceptional. Design is much more daring than VW. The technology you normally find only on much more expensiv cars.
This being a car enthusiasts’ site, I expect that a large number of posters have tried out cars from different manufacturers. What strikes one, as a general rule, is that the standard of manufacture is high, across the board.
This is due to a number of factors. Regulation and safety standards being chief among them; but consumer advocacy and a relentless “compare models” focus in the media has also helped to level the field.
Opel’s build quality is not “exceptional” – it is par for the course, in my opinion, since it turns up everywhere as GM pushes Opel parts and assemblies on its other brands.
As to Opel’s technology being in the premium category, I must wonder whether you have driven them much, at anything approaching the speed limits? They handle horribly – and it is an absolute disgrace that Rüsselsheim is now dictating Saab chassis quality.
Having said that, I am perfectly aware that Opel is trying to revitalize the perception of its brand, through an effort both into its products and its marketing.
As you write – Opel also lacks a strong brand, and how are they going to get that, as long as GM sucks the brand dry of everything that could be unique?
Opel’s “tweener” status remains, made worse by the fact that the brand has become a parts bucket for a lot of other ailing brands.
Lichtronamo:
I watched the Top Gear video that you linked — Clarkson’s words “catastrophic understeer” sound really bad — then, there it is, right in front of your eyes! If the Astra is the same chassis as the Vecta, count me out! I may even sell my motorcycle after I see my first Astra, as the opposite lane won’t be safe anymore.
Oh — that was with the engine upgrade – now I see GM’s “wisdom” in offering the 1.8 only; the existing chassis is unsuitable to handle any more power.
Truth is, no one here truly knows what GM will or will not earn on the US Astra. Revenues will certainly cover variable costs, but will they cover fully loaded costs, including healthcare and pensions for employees long retired? We don’t know.
But if I had to guess, a lot of cars aren’t making money these days. How can Lexus make money on the SC with such dismal sales? Or Infiniti on the Q? How can Suzuki make money on anything they sell in such small numbers? Did BMW make money on the Z8? Does DCX make money on the Maybach?
Does anyone really make money on a hybrid?
Or is GM the only manufacturer stupid enough to invest in a market for a few years until it is in a position to make money?
“Uh, hello? GM has officially admitted that the Euro-zone Astra headed stateside will be sold at a loss (despite Mr. Lutz’ ill-informed assertions to the contrary).”
– RF
Reference, please? I’ve been looking for this statement from GM, haven’t found it, but have found the following (both from Ward’s Automotive news items:
“It is not the optimal circumstance, (but) it does (add up) for us from a business sense. And since it did, we said, ‘Let’s do it,’”
– Troy Clarke
“When we made that decision the profitability outlook was better than today. Now it’s going to be more difficult because the euro is simply so strong,”
– Rick Wagoner
Neither of those statements admit that the Astra will be sold at a loss. If you are basing your assertion on some other piece of information, could you please provide it? If not, could you please stop saying it?
This is irony: GM is at the same time using Opel to uprate the Saturn brand while it is damaging the Opel brand in Germany.
Opel in Germany is now offering the Antara, a subpar Asian excuse for an SUV. It has been criticized in the press as detrimental to the brand.
And numerous Opel dealers here are taking on Daewoo/Chevrolet as a second brand with a pretty similar range (albeit at a much lower cost). One multi-dealer told me Chevrolet had more durable quality and better value than Opel. I asked him how he could say that while selling Opels; he replied all he was interested in was making money and having satisfied customers.
bestertester said: “And numerous Opel dealers here are taking on Daewoo/Chevrolet as a second brand with a pretty similar range (albeit at a much lower cost). One multi-dealer told me Chevrolet had more durable quality and better value than Opel. I asked him how he could say that while selling Opels; he replied all he was interested in was making money and having satisfied customers.”
So, was the (maligned by many) Daewoo purchase the “only” smart move GM has made lately?
The cars are engineered and built better than the GM-Europe products, and are less expensive too? Even with some engines being cast-off GM-Holden built (2.0 liter 4’s)?
Doesn’t this speak volumes, also, about the likelihood of Saturn Astra hatchbacks’ success in NA?
Plus I have to say – what were they thinking – the four door should be a sedan, the 3 door can be a hatchback. Look at the Hyundai Accent, the Toyota Yaris (prime competitors). The only 5 door hatch ‘out there’ is the ‘out there’ Honda Fit.
Speaking of which, I STILL say Honda should have used the Jazz name in the US/Canada, not “Fit”.
When you have several meanings for one word, it “might” be a great idea to look into them all.
What’s next, a “Saturn Seizure”? (Perhaps I’m just overly sensitive as my elder cousin passed away from epilepsy a few years back).
As an ex successful GM dealer, I think Robert has been dead on with the death watch. It just seems to be taking longer than I would have expected to find some end ground. They just keep wallowing around in mediocrity, which worked up until a few years ago.Now they are scrambling. They have to shut down 3 or 4 brands,tell the union to take a hike, fire RW and Lutz the putz, and build best in class vehicles, of which they only have a couple of. possibly full size SUVs and pickup trucks. But these segments are in trouble, especially with Toyota ramping up the 1/2 ton truck . I just dont see anybody there that is even close to being able to do these things. And I should not leave out there will be major attrition in the dealer body. thanks
@ corvette I would be very interested in your opinion as to which brands GM should retain, and which positions each brand should be aimed at, given you've been at the handshake end of selling the cars.
This well written piece reminded me of what I’ve seen with Opel in India. When the govt. opened the doors to private companies in the 1990s, the Opel Astra was the BMW 3er of India. It had the German driving experience, a great set of leather couches, yuppie-like price and image…everyone wanted one.
Then “my people” found that Opel’s weren’t as reliable as the Honda City and other Asian sedans. And Opel wasn’t prepaired to give decent service after the sale…and subsequently got the hell outta Dodge (Bombay).
GM now sells Daewoos (rebadged as Chevys) in India. Seems to be a much better proposition in that market. I really like the Saturn Aura XR, but I can see the parallels between America and India.
But I like Opels, and Euro Fords too. I want the damn things to do well in America!!!
I found this one Indian review of the Opel pretty cute:
I just did a barter for my daewoo nexia to an opel astra club edition. Believe in me brother, the car is worth the price and a work horse its a tank rather i would say the only thing that she requires is a little pampering ! Get it serviced on time, do not neglect her !
quasimondo:
Saturns never really had any brand identity to begin with other than cool plastic doors that resisted dents really well and very friendly salespeople.
WRONG!!! The first generation Saturns looked cool, and the Sx2s were quite sporty, with excellent handling. (The engines were pretty bad tho–I had a new one installed at 65k). They dumbed them down in ’96, with bland styling, and crummy handling. I’m one of those first generation owners who, as the Mr. Liekanger says, will never look back.
I think the new Opel-urns are nice and could be a good starting point for a new direction for Saturn. But, I don’t see anything that convinces me GM will actually stick with this direction. The big 3 either let a product die a slow and painful death or completely replace it with something totally different. Other than trucks and sports cars, what vehicle (much less brand) have they had any kind of consistent focus on?
Will they retool or build new plants in low cost manufacturing sites to produce their “placeholder” vehicles so they can be sold for a profit? Coordinate changes between Europe and the US to the shared vehicles to satisfy all markets demands and regulations? When have they ever done this?
A lot of this stuff seems easier said than done…
…They have to shut down 3 or 4 brands…
I don’t see that happening, period. I think the big bosses would rather undergo a root canal with no Novacaine than go through the Oldsmobile experience times four.
…tell the union to take a hike…
The UAW has them by the balls. True, they dug their own grave with this, but things are what they are, and you can’t change the past. GM is but one strike away from disaster, and trying to shove an 800 lb gorilla out the back door won’t help.
…fire RW and Lutz the putz…
And replace them with…?
…build best in class vehicles…
GM will have the stigma of subpar vehicles that will be with them for at least a generation, and that will affect them even when they do build best in class vehicles. The Malibu when it was revived in 1997 recieved Motor Trend’s Car of the Year award, and even that didn’t help transform it into stellar sales. I could only go as far back as 2000, but even those results weren’t good as it was outsold by the Camry by a factor of 2 to 1. The Camry is solid reliable transportation. The Malibu is solid reliable transportation (see for yourself: http://www.edmunds.com/used/2000/chevrolet/malibu/7831/ratings_jdpower.html). This brings us back to one thing: Perception. The Malibu will be burdened by the legacy of past vehicles like the Lumina and Celebrity, while the Camry recieves a boost from previous models.
So how should GM build a best in class vehicle? Styling? Power? Handling? The Mazda6 and Nissan Altima blow the Camry out of the water in those categories, and they don’t measure up to Camry sales. Fuel economy? The two were dead even from EPA estimates (yes, I know they don’t indicate real world numbers, but it seems that in a controlled environment, they both sip rather lightly).
These quick fix suggestions are no better than Lutz’s quick fixes of Holdenized Pontiacs or Opelized Saturns. It took them a long time to dig themselves into this hole, it’ll take them a long time to dig themselves out of it, but the first thing they need to do is tackle the perception that everything they sell is garbage.
WRONG!!! The first generation Saturns looked cool, and the Sx2s were quite sporty, with excellent handling. (The engines were pretty bad tho–I had a new one installed at 65k). They dumbed them down in ‘96, with bland styling, and crummy handling. I’m one of those first generation owners who, as the Mr. Liekanger says, will never look back.
Their competition (namely the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Acura Integra, and Toyota Celica) was much sportier with better handling, though.
I will begrudgingly admit that they did have the advantage of cultivating a ‘feel-good’ atmosphere among their owners, but when was the last time they’ve organized a nationwide gathering at their Spring Hill plant?
Do they still make cars in Spring Hill?
Captain Tungsten:
The statement regarding the Astra’s lack of profitability in the US market came in response to a question by Chris Ceraso of Credit Suisse at the GM presentations at the Detroit Auto Show (NAIAS).
GM CFO Friitz Henderson (base salary $1.5m) admitted that the Astra would not be profitable.
Wow. How did that manage to stay out of the news?
Quasimodo, I found those JDPower numbers for the Malibu to be surprising. And disheartening. I just bought a used Toyota this summer and paid a fair amount of cash for it. I bought a Toyota and I was willing to part with the cash because I put a premium on reliability.
On reading your post, I had to wonder, did I overlook an exceptional unknown value?
I checked against the Toyota and the JDPower long term numbers for the Malibu are, surprisingly, very similar for the Toyota I bought and, in fact, the Malibu ranks better in one category.
So, still thinking I’d made a big mistake, I checked the owner reviews on Edmunds.com (I love reading these, anyway). The first 3 titles for the ’00 Rav4 are:
“Love my Rav4!”
“Couldn’t be Happier”
“love em”
The first 3 titles for the Malibu reviews are:
“I don’t think I will buy another Chevy”
“Below Average”
“Agree w/Good Frosting, Bad Cake”
and the owner ratings are 8.3 for the ’00 Rav4 and 6.6 for the ’00 Malibu. This is well-aligned, by the way, with what I remember from Consumer Reports when I started shopping around.
If GM has made a reliability and durability turnaround, I don’t think the ’00 Malibu is evidence of it.
Question of the day: Where the heck does JDPowers get its data?
Wow. How did that manage to stay out of the news?
The news is pretty good about glossing over trivial matters such as accounting and finance. Ever read one of Detroit’s 10K reports?
In Germany we have this saying:
“Audi has four rings…each of which stand for 100,000 km the engine will last. Opel has one Ring…and it’s crossed out.”
“Saturn’s customers have already moved on.” Ain’t that the truth! My wife and I owned 3 Saturns: a ’94 SL2 sedan, a ’96 SW2 wagon, and a 2001 LW2 wagon. We loved them for their quirkiness: the plastic body, the space frame (that actually saved our lives once – yes, we have one of those stories to tell, like many Saturn owners did. When we grew out of the last wagon, however, Saturn had nothing to offer us.
We traded in a Honda Accord on that first SL sedan, and we traded in our last Saturn wagon on a Honda Pilot. Now, I couldn’t find something that satisfied me in a Saturn showroom if I tried. And we love our Pilot. We’ll probably drive Hondas for the rest of our lives. And while that’s good — it’s also too bad.
DH: WRONG!!! The first generation Saturns looked cool, and the Sx2s were quite sporty, with excellent handling. (The engines were pretty bad tho–I had a new one installed at 65k). They dumbed them down in ‘96, with bland styling, and crummy handling. I’m one of those first generation owners who, as the Mr. Liekanger says, will never look back.
Quasimondo: Their competition (namely the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Acura Integra, and Toyota Celica) was much sportier with better handling, though.
DH: the only one of these cars that was among their competition–that is, a sedan or coupe that seats four and is fairly economical–was the Integra. That was the main car I was shopping the Saturn against. The SL2 (the higher end Saturn) handled better than the Integra RS, which was the integra that was equivalent in price.
I will begrudgingly admit that they did have the advantage of cultivating a ‘feel-good’ atmosphere among their owners, but when was the last time they’ve organized a nationwide gathering at their Spring Hill plant?
I didn’t give a damn about the feel-good thing. There was a wonderful “Zippy cartoon that I had pasted to my dashboard, where you see the Saturn owners with that glazed, cultsh look in their eyes, saying, “why don’t you join us for a meeting tonight at your local Saturn dealer,” and the last line is Zippy, saying “At least we know what planet they’re coming from.
KixStart:
Quasimodo, On reading your post, I had to wonder, did I overlook an exceptional unknown value?
I checked against the Toyota and the JDPower long term numbers for the Malibu are, surprisingly, very similar for the Toyota I bought and, in fact, the Malibu ranks better in one category.
So, still thinking I’d made a big mistake, I checked the owner reviews on Edmunds.com (I love reading these, anyway). The first 3 titles for the ‘00 Rav4 are:
“Love my Rav4!”
“Couldn’t be Happier”
“love em”
The first 3 titles for the Malibu reviews are:
“I don’t think I will buy another Chevy”
“Below Average”
“Agree w/Good Frosting, Bad Cake”
I think the owner reviefws are extremely helpful, because they give detail. I used them when I helped my girlfriend buy a car recently.
I've owned several Opels and own one now (Astra 1.9 CDTI 150). I've driven many a car (Audi A4/A3/A6, Golfs in many variants, BMW 1, 3 & 5 Series, Lots of Mercs including the new S500, AMG63 and more). For some reason it's "accepted" that VW Golf and A3/A4 and BMW 1&3 are of great quality, certainly they are better than Opel. All VAG owners pay a premium here and look down on those who buy Opels. Thats how they "defend" their choice of buying a car that is no better but 20/30 % more expensive. Same or better quality, as good or better driving, much more standard equipment and the Opels usually cost a lot less (when comparing Engine and equipment). The morale of many in Europe being; The more You pay for less car the better it must be.
On the Clarkson video:
Clarkson talks derogatory of any and all Vauxhalls/Opels, no matter how good it is. The exeption being the “Speedster” wich he insisted on being a “Lotus” because it was built by Lotus. The car was of course 100% Opel, Design, Chassis, Interior, Engine, Gearbox etc.
Lotus built it because they had the expertise in mass-producing a small, lightweight sportscar.
The Video above is of the “1998” Vectra. Not really relevant anymore. And he has also shown many a time (“The Stig” as well) that he is not competent in driving front-wheel powered cars. This is one of his other hang-ups. If isn’t Rear-wheel driven and British its got to be crap.
I don’t object to GM importing and selling Opels here. If they are as decent as some people seem to think, they might make better chievies than chevy, and certainly much better than that goddam Aveo. Good grief. But as far as I’m concdrned, GM killed the Saturn brand when they dragged it back into the Mother Company, into the “small car division,” or wahtever they call it. Believe it or not, Saturn was once cool. When I bought my ’93, I bragged about it. (And on several occasions women complemented me about the car.) Then, after they dumbed them down in ’96, I became embarrassed to admit I drove a Saturn, and I always apologized for it, explaining that the first gen was cool.
My favorite Deathwatch in ages, in no small part due to the fact that it does not tread the familiar doom & gloom path that the last 15 or so in the series have.
Saturn was originally an experiment, with the goal of building and selling cars in a very different way from what GM was accustomed to. And, like anything new and strange and potentially threatening to the status quo, GM’s other divisions did not take to this experiment too kindly. It is my belief that it was the fault of the other GM brands (mostly Chevrolet) that Saturn was starved and left to rot for the latter half of the ’90’s.
I have to wonder what GM’s plan C is for Saturn. Plan B was to import Opels in lieu of developing new product for the brand. But, if this idea proves to be a failure, what then? This plan has got late ’90’s Oldsmobile written all over it, and we all know how well that turned out.
dkvello:
The car in the video I linked was the current Vectra – same headlights as the Aura. (the copyright police have gotten to it as they’re ruining YouTube – I need my Top Gear!).
Clarkson is right, the Speedster was a rebodied Lotus Elise. As for his driving, he’s doing pretty good 1:15 into this video of an M5 here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVz_iPW_WAU
As for The Stig. He’s rumored to be a Formula 1 driver. Yeah, he sucks too.
Anyway, I just like to hear JC say “Maseratti Quattroporte”
“It is my belief that it was the fault of the other GM brands (mostly Chevrolet) that Saturn was starved and left to rot for the latter half of the ’90’s.”
You could also say that the investment which was made to start up Saturn starved the breadwinner GM brands of much needed reinvestment.
The whole idea that the way to fix GM was by starting an entirely new independent division while at the very same time gutting the original divisions of their independence was idiotic from day 1. Roger Smith set GM down the path to disaster and the folks who have come along since him have not done much better.
Of course the rest of GM fought against having their entrails pulled out and fed to the new kid!
Opel doesn’t need to have “glamour to bestow upon Saturn” just a couple of decent small or midsize cars, something GM is sadly lacking in NorthAmerica at the moment. The Corsa and Astra at least are good cars and compete well in Europe in the toughest segments.
At this point just having a car that gets people into the showroom is an achievement for GM. The rusty Kadetts and Rekords of 25 years ago aren’t relevant for Saturn buyers now (or Opel/Vauxhall buyers). It seems plausible to me that some sort of “euro brand aura” will rub off on Saturn.
I wouldn’t worry too much about the hit GM and VW are taking exporting small cars from Europe to the US. Like VW GM will be looking to make big cost of production savings on the next generation of models and will be keeping their fingers crossed for a more favorable Euro/Dollar exchange rate. VW know they need to be in the world’s biggest car market no matter how tough things get, hopefully GM does too.
to Stein X, in reference to what brands to shuttle is very complicated. The real problems are with the state franchise laws. They are basically written to protect the dealers. The factories made all the rules in their favor, so we had to find our protection in state law. Does not sound much like a partnership. We were one of the largest GM dealers in the country and got no respect from Detroit.
Back to the brand thing, they really only have two that seem to be self-sustaining, Chev and cadillac, theycan take any new product and sell more through these two outlets. But they are stuck trying to prop of Pont-Buick_GMC, which in turn is diluding the whole pie.They should sell Saab, Hummer, and Saturn, as the volume of these three does not equal profits. This all could be argued forever, which seems to be the slow death method the board and RW have decided to follow. thanks
Yay. I rented a TDI Opel Astra in Spain and loved it. Flogged the hell out of it for two weeks. It never minded and never gave a bit of trouble – it also returned something like 50 mpg in fairly hard use. As long as its character is retained it is a car I would be delighted to buy in the US.
: Lichtronamo:
February 20th, 2007 at 12:45 am
“…..
Clarkson is right, the Speedster was a rebodied Lotus Elise. ”
Well, no. The Speedster came out well ahead of the current Elise, and it was definitely not a rebody of the old Elise.
There was nothing in the Speedster that had anything to do with the old Elise. It was merely built at Lotus because they had the capacity.
The new Elise, on the other hand, was a rebody of the Speedster. It does have an inferior Toyota engine (inferior compared to the 220bhp Opel Engine) for some reason though.
…and the Opel sedan – whatever it was called –
Opel Ascona
It outhandled a BMW 2002 and was cheaper.
With a few mods…
I don’t see the importation of Opels as a problem for Saturn in the short term, unless GM has no intentions of designing and building a high quality domestic version at some point.
Those Camry and Accord sales are piggy-backed off of old Corolla and Civic owners.
If there are no good, desirable, and affordable entry level cars at GM, they won’t be able to cultivate customers to sell them their high margin sedans.
The Astra, while a little on the old side, still is a good looker with decent performance and build quality, a much better proposition than the ION or the Cobalt. With so few hatchbacks and with the demise of the hatchback Focus, the Astra has a small field in which to compete.
Ladies and gentlemen, the Aura is a sales disaster. What in the world makes you think the Astra will do any better? Is it a better car than a Fit or Yaris or Versa?
The Aura is a sales disaster primarily because it doesn’t offer a 4 cylinder engine in a market where 70% of sales are 4 cylinder versions of the vehicle. By the time GM offers the Aura with a 4 cylinder and a 6 speed automatic (late 2007), it will be competing against the new Honda Accord.
Can the Astra do better? I don’t know, but they gotta do something. What is clear is that GM will not invest to design and build a new, high quality, small car just for sale here. That may be their biggest blunder.
@David Holzman
You note that you owned a first-gen Saturn vehicle but as the brand deteriorated you mentioned that you had to apologize for owning such a vehicle due to the reputation the brand was acquiring.
For some strange reason, I thought long and hard about your comment, because it triggered a visceral response in me where I thought “no one should have to apologize for the vehicle they drive”. While I’m certainly not trying to pick a bone with you on this matter, I wanted to get some thoughts on this, for in my view I would never dream of apologizing to anybody for the vehicle I own. In my case, I have owned an 86 Silverado and currently own a 00 Dakota. While the Chev was a hand-me-down from my dad, the Dakota I paid for with my hard-earned money.
I recall having some reservations about buying the Dodge due to reliability concerns of Chrysler products in general, but in the end I bought the truck because I wanted to, plain and simple. If anyone were to give me their negative input on what they thought of my truck or me owning such a vehicle, they’d be told where to go and how to get there in a big hurry.
It could just be a product of my environment and upbringing, where people don’t comment and question others’ vehicle purchases, but it always strikes me as odd when I hear about people “apologizing” for owning a particular vehicle.
The Astra is a bad idea all around that looks like a good one at first glance. It’s a cute little hatchback! It’s European! It’s perfect for Saturn! Well, um, no.
Here are the problems:
1. It’s a hatchback, not a sedan or coupe. Hatchbacks sell worse than sedans/coupes in the US.
2. Saturn will not longer have a compact sedan or coupe, the vehicles that have always defined the brand.
3. Because of #1 and #2, GM is replacing a vehicle (the Ion) that sells 100,000 units a year with one that they predict will sell between 20,000 and 40,000.
4. But the low sales in #3 is a good thing, because they will lose money on every European-built Astra they sell, mainly due to the weak dollar. If they sold more, they would lose more money.
5. Of course, Saturn has always lost money for GM since it was founded, so why break with tradition?
86er: Interesting question. When the Saturn first came oiut, it was billed as the practical person’s sporty car. It looked cool, and handled very nicely. I could easily identify with all that.
Then, in ’96, they dumbed it down, both in appearance and handling, so that you couldn’t tell whether it was a Tercel or a Hyundai whehter you were looking at it or driving it. All that was left to distinguish it were the warm and fuzzy dealer experience, and the plastic panels. There was no longer anything cool about it. And by ’98 or so, that’s how people saw Saturn. I didn’t identify at all with the second (or later) gen saturns and theiur image, and so when people asked me–usually knowing I was a car nut–what I drove, I felt obliged to explain that the first gen Saturns had been practical yet sporty, and that’s why I bought the thing, and I certainly didn’t identify with what Saturn had become. Yet, I didn’t feel it was worth changing cars over this, so I ran the thing for a bit more than 11 years.
Petra: Saturn was originally an experiment, with the goal of building and selling cars in a very different way from what GM was accustomed to. And, like anything new and strange and potentially threatening to the status quo, GM’s other divisions did not take to this experiment too kindly. It is my belief that it was the fault of the other GM brands (mostly Chevrolet) that Saturn was starved and left to rot for the latter half of the ’90s.
My only disagreement with the above is that I think the villain was Pontiac, which felt threatened because it saw itself as the sporty division. The thing that makes me feel strongly that that is the case is that the ’96 Pontiac Sunfire has exactly the same shape as the first gen Saturns, and looks like they simply tweaked the Saturn. The ’96 Saturn really didn’t look like a Saturn at all, except in the most superficial way. Other than that, Petra is right on.
jthorner:
You could also say that the investment which was made to start up Saturn starved the breadwinner GM brands of much needed reinvestment.
The whole idea that the way to fix GM was by starting an entirely new independent division while at the very same time gutting the original divisions of their independence was idiotic from day 1. Roger Smith set GM down the path to disaster and the folks who have come along since him have not done much better.
But GM was not exactly a big success, prior to Saturn. And the original Saturns — one basic model — reached peak sales of nearly 300,000 in ’94 or ’95. That was a big success, and had GM allowed Satrn to hold to the original vision, and simply improve it, they’d probably be doing great. I would certainly still be driving one. But between tghe fact the fact that there are so many more compelling cars out there, and my having been totally soured on the brand due to their dumbing down, it’ll be a cold day in Hell…
Smith’s idea was to try something new–and something new included employee empowerment (for more on this, see this past weekend’s NYT Mag on Toyota’s success)–and let the rest of the company learn from it. In this, Smith was probably more visionary than any head of GM has been in the past half century.
Stein,
The disconnect I see in all of these “Opel can’t save Saturn” opinions is this: the vast majority of US consumers do not know or care one whit about Opel and its “brand cachet”. The fact is, Saturn has a compeling line of cars for the first time since its inception. They “appear” different from other stablemates, have an interesting and consistent stying language, and even offer a few alternatives (some pending) for the Green crowd to induce warm fuzzies.
OK, you grew up around Opel and understand it to be the Chevrolet of Europe. I didn’t grow up with Opel, but I do know them fairly well (once coveting a Calibre), and still have some (perhaps misguided) sense that Opel is at minimum a reasonably high quality alternative to VW. Not a bad comparison in my mind, despite VW’s recent US bumblings.
Badge engineering on a global scale makes a ton of sense for GM, and gives us consumers truly unique product. I’m betting Opel WILL save Saturn, and by extension, Saturn will show that GM can build cars that people actualy want.
And just think, when those Saturn folks are ready to upgrade, as your father did, there’s a Buick or Cadillac dealer just waiting to help them…
for years enthusiasts cried to gm “Bring in some of your imports!!” Now they’re doing it and y’all are gonna complain about that TOO?