While GM CEO Rick Wagoner is telling the world that his administration has created "stronger brands" [look for the GM Death Watch on Wagoner's "turnaround report" later today], his marketing maven has announced that The General's fourth Lambda-based crossover will go on sale this fall. While Mark LaNeve didn't announce a price or exact specification for the Chevrolet Traverse, the Freep reports that he set a sales target: 80k to 100k units per year. If Chevy has enough parts for the job, that goal is bound to eat into the Saturn Outlook and GMC Acadia's share of the crossover pie. Combined, the two brand's vehicles Lambda danced their way to to 107,513 sales in '07. If you add their sister-under-the-skin, the short-supply Buick Enclave, the total ratchets-up to 136,799. So LaNeve is hoping for total Lambda crossover sales of 216,799 to 236,799 units across four GM brands in a down market. At least– as those Saturn, GMC and Buick numbers only represent part-year sales. What are the odds?
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Why make the same car and midly badge engineer it over (GMC), and over (Chevrolet), and over (Buick), and over (Pontiac), and over (Saturn), and over (Saab), and over (Suzuki), and over (Cadillac), and over again.
The economist in me tells me that it would be SMART for GM to focus on making only 2 versions which cuts tooling & die costs down, streamlines the assembly line process, reduces the # of plants needed as they run faster and able to be more efficient, cuts the millions wasted in marketing 5 versions rather than 2, and shows the public that GM now gets it. Instead every brand has to get the same thing. Even though many share the same retail space and create such competition between dealers – to roll over and give the cheapest price just to beat out a fellow dealer.
What jaje said is true. This poves in my mind GM still has WAY too many brands and needs to cut at LEAST one and maybe two. I say kill Saturn and at least Pontiac or Buick as well and let the rest survive. I still think and truly believe that GM should have killed Saturn and NOT OLDS. Every vehicle with the exception of the sky roadster could have been very successfully sold and marketed as an Oldsmobile. With the number of brands GM has they aren’t just taking customers(what few they still have) away from other auto companies but they are also taking customers away from their (GM) other divisions.
Saturn probably won’t do much worse, I see its clientele less likely to cross shop a Chevy dealer. This however, makes the picture quite bleak for the Acadia…first the Pontiac G8 does battle with the CTS, now the Acadia fights the Traverse.
Pontiac-GMC is the new Rodney Dangerfield of the industry.
Everyone knows they have too many brands but they cannot cut and kill any brand without big bucks to pay off the dealers. Its my understanding that both GMC draws a different much more upscale customer than Chevy.
I think Traverse should have been available from the get-go, instead of launching a competitive platform in three peripheral brands. Sales volume would have been higher, without any additional effort.
Saturn is the biggest loser here. The Outlook’s sales are most likely to savvy cross-shoppers who want a huge people hauler, rather than Saturn loyalists. The product is the biggest non sequitur ever offered under the brand, and Chevy marketing dollars will eclipse any unique marketing efforts.
Ironically, it should be possible to get a better equipped Outlook (for less than a Traverse) in a few months, as desperate Saturn dealers experience this for themselves.
There was rumored to be a Chevy Lambda minivan which got canceled due to declining minivan sales and problems with product development. The Traverse is the stopgap product Chevy gets instead, which makes GM’s master plan look half-assed.
Seems to me that this generation Outlook will be the last for Saturn & as it becomes a US marketing arm for Opel. As Pontiac has shown, Saturn has no ability to command a mainstream following anymore (Aura, G6) and doesn’t justify the investment for unique high volume vehicles. Pontiac will be reduced to niche vehicles such as imported, badge engineered Holdens and whatnot. For some reason, GMC will continue to survive as a boutique version of Chevy -maybe I’m missing how this high end connection came about here in the Northeast, but it seems to have some traction. This alignment minimizes GM’s expenditures on its admittedly too many brands without the fatal costs of trying to shut down a franchise & its attendant dealers. The dealer alignment will be:
a) Chevrolet
b) GMC, Pontiac, Buick, Hummer
c) Saturn
d) Cadillac
Seems right to me.
GM is addicted to badge-engineering. Why oh why oh why can’t it make one of its vehicles the very best in its class, AND LEAVE IT AT THAT? How are the goals of product excellence and marque differentiation served by taking every decent car and making it into five mediocre cousins? Wouldn’t those resources be better spent on making that one decent vehicle into one GREAT vehicle?
Those guys are just beyond hope. GM’s board should fire everyone.
Cicero, I think that GM seems to be doing just that by focusing it biggest effort on the Chevrolet brand. My gut is the marching orders for Chevy is to design the best vehicles it can and not too artificially pull back so as not to step on the other brands.
You got it wrong Cicero, Its the board that should be removed.
You know, instead of removing brands GM should create unique models for each brand and do away with badge engineering. You should not be able to cross-shop your sister brands for the same vehicle.
I know that’s common sense and the board doesn’t get it…but I suspect the UAW contracts mandate a certain amount of lines that force badge engineering too.
I think they have a good chance of sellings 250,000 ofGm these CUVs. After all, the Trailbaler, Envoy, Equinor, and Torrent will be history next year. I also suspect GM will wise up sooner( or maybe later?)and dump the Outlook. Its just too big for a Saturn. If Im counting right, GM will have less thaqn 40 models next model year so they may be able to more effectively market vehicles and not cannablize from each other’s divisions.
red dawg: Olds had its chance, with a solid line-up of products that the dealers failed to sell. I don’t think the brand could have remained even if the channel did. The name “Oldsmobile” simply sounds too old-fashioned.
starlighmica: I’m fairly certain this was the case.
sajeev: Pontiac is one hit away from regaining traction. I don’t think the G8 will be it, as it doesn’t have much Pontiac flavor. Just a big competetent mainstream sedan–much larger inside than a CTS, but also much less upscale. If they get a RWD replacement for the G5/G6 to market, that could do it, though.
GM is going to let their brands die on the vine just like they did with Oldsmobile. They are going to let market demand (or lack thereof) decide which brands will remain.
“hoping for total Lambda crossover sales of 216,799 to 236,799 units across four GM brands” Somewhere I’ve read that an assembly plant’s optimum production volume is in the range of 250,000 units per year. Could that be part of the logic for adding the Traverse badge?
As for cannibalization, GM’s primary objective should be selling more cars at a profit, not protecting Saturn dealers from competition. Anyway, Chevy dealers exist in a thousand smaller markets that lack a Saturn store.
Mikey, I agree. It seems every GM CEO is allowed a multi-billion dollar goof (e.g., Fiat) without penalty. Roger Smith survived several.
Looks like another vehicle for the rental car companies.
As for cannibalization, GM’s primary objective should be selling more cars at a profit, not protecting Saturn dealers from competition.
…from it’s sister brand??? What was the point of giving Saturn an all new vehicle if they’re just going to cut it off at the knees 18 months later? Last I heard, GM was going to price the Traverse “aggressively”. If that doesn’t get people to start wondering why you should pay $10,000 more for a Buick, I don’t know what will.
However you decide to look at it, the Traverse WILL cannibalize sales of GM’s other full-size CUVs. If Enclave supply problems continue, buyers could easily go get an Outlook or a Traverse when it comes out. Or an Acadia. Either way, cannibalization is bound to happen.
The Traverse is going to be built at a different plant (Spring Hill, TN) from the other Lambdas, so its not a plant capacity issue.
Chevrolet is the franchise for GM and should have had this core product first. Saturn and Buick probably got it because they didn’t have anything else and GMC would have always been part of the program.
The Saturn version should likely be the one to go, or replaced by a shorter wheelbase version with only two rows of seats and more aggressive styling to compete with the Murano.
The really scary part of the Lambda story is that even with four brands and more stores, GM is anticipating sales barely higher than Toyota’s Highlander/RX.
You know, instead of removing brands GM should create unique models for each brand and do away with badge engineering.
In a perfect world, I’d agree. But I just don’t think GM has the market share or the resources to make it happen—not with eight different brands. For instance, how do you create sedans for Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, Saturn, Saab, and Cadillac and manage to make them all unique and all worth buying without spending some really obscene amounts of cash? Wouldn’t it be better to go the Toyota route and focus on just a few distinct brands?
Brand engineering can be done well – look at Highlander and RX or the Pilot and MDX (complete interior / exterior redesign – but same platform and many times same engines/drivetrains. On the other hand, Chevy / Ford and Chrysler’s idea of brand engineering is very minimal – badge here (sometimes the only significant change), seats here, grill here, very small items. They fill the name of superficial rebadging. Why spend $4k more on a Buick version of a Chevy when it may only have $500 more in higher quality parts here and there (versus a MDX or RX where they cost $5-$10k more b/c they have $5-$10k more in improvements and appointments.
It is all boiled up on why GM cars are all the same when GM put that small GM badge on all of their cars. That is the only real brand and it shows and why all the other brands suffer.
The Saturn version should likely be the one to go, or replaced by a shorter wheelbase version with only two rows of seats and more aggressive styling to compete with the Murano.
or replaced by a shorter wheelbase version with only two rows of seats and more aggressive styling to compete with the Murano
If only those fools at GM could employ such simple common-sense.
Smaller
Lighter
Faster
Better handling
More efficient
Less expensive
No, no one in America is interested in such a vehicle. EVERYONE needs 7 seats! Haven’t you heard the average America family actually does have 4 to 5 children (NOT)!
Here in lies GM biggest problem! They want to sell 4 freakin versions of this thing yet they refuse to be serious about differencating between the 4. So if you like a Lambda but think it is bloated you are out of luck.
Oh, I forgot GM has a host of other smaller half-ass CUVs it need to dump onto the public. None would be as good as a smaller Lambda.
GM *had* to give this to Chevy dealers – the GMT360 platform won’t get a replacement or even a freshening now – it’s on its death march. It’s selling well now, but probably because of fire sale prices so they could claim victory over Ford Explorer ($18,990 for a decently equipped TrailBlazer LS with the inline 6 around here).
It’s never going to get better until they shed the dealers, and we saw how much it cost to get rid of Olds…
Lichtronamo:
The really scary part of the Lambda story is that even with four brands and more stores, GM is anticipating sales barely higher than Toyota’s Highlander/RX.
Scary indeed, that is for GM. In fact, the Highlander alone has a chance of outselling the Outlook, Acadia, and Enclave combined in 2008.
Highlander 2007 sales: 127,878
Combined Acadia, Outlook, Enclave 2007 sales: 136,799
*3* GM models barely outsold *1* Toyota model.
December 2007 sales for curiosity:
Highlander: 14,714
Combined Acadia, Outlook, Enclave: 15,276
jaje: What reason do you have to believe that the Buick Enclave probably only has about $500 in higher quality parts than the Chevy Traverse? I should add that I haven’t seen the Enclave up close, so I don’t know how nice it actually is.
What would happen if GM were split into two completely different companies?
Chevy Cadillac Hummer on one end….
Buick Pontiac GMC Saturn Saab Moe Larry Curly Shemp and Joe on the other…
……………………………………….
Or maybe make it into three American companies…
Chevy – Cadillac – Hummer
Buick – Pontiac – GMC
Saturn – Saab – maybe a joint venture with Opel
……………………………………….
Of course this wouldn’t be practical given their financial situation. But GM obviously needs to have it’s divisions reduced in the US one way or another. The recent debacle in the minivan market was a prime example of the impediments they will continue to face if badge engineering remains the company standard.
It’s interesting, if you compare GM’s sales over the years, how the different brands have different sales patterns:
Buick’s sales of 185k in 2007 was less than half of it’s recent peak of 445k in 1999.
Pontiac’s sales of 358k in 2007 was barely more than half of it’s recent peak of 616k, also in 1999.
Oldsmobile’s sold zero in 2007, compared it’s recent peak, again in 1999, of 352k.
Hummer’s down a bunch last year, but that’s to be expected and it’s not a core brand. Saab was down, too, although it sells even less and it’s sales are within historical averages.
Chevy sold 2,265k in 2007, down about 15-20% from it’s 2001 high of 2,689k.
GMC is treading water. Cadillac is actually up from the late 1990’s/early 2000’s. Saturn is also treading water, although only because they keep giving it new models (that is, they went from basically one vehicle (available in coupe, station wagon, and sedan forms, but one basic vehicle) to six without increasing sales)).
What does this all mean? It means the various brands all want any new vehicle to prevent falling further behind. Without the Enclave, Buick would be nothing at this point. Saturn is only being propped up because they keep giving it new shiny stuff (which then doesn’t sell worth a damn). GMC wanted something to replace the aging Envoy. Of course, Chevy can’t be neglected; it’s GM’s main brand.
So, everybody gets a version of this! Yeah!
(Except Pontiac, although it looks like Pontiac will no longer get any new SUVs or vans-cars only. Pontiac is CAR, remember?)
I’ve been wondering: if Buick and GMC form a single sales channel, why is there a Buick AND a GMC version in the same $30K-$40K price range? That’s badge engineering WITHIN the same channel?
Apparently, GM wants to have an abundance of models, in this case a boxy and a rounded version of the same vehicle.
Maybe somebody can post why spreading yourself thin like that is good.