Oh my God. You blew it up! You really did it. Damn you all to hell! Well, actually, I don’t think anyone is THAT bothered about Buick’s future these days, as the sales charts indicate. Still, it’s a shame, isn’t it, that the once-mighty doctor’s brand has become the dictionary definition of amorphous. I mean, a compact Buick? Why? During her live webchat in the FastLane, Buick/Pontiac/GMC supremo Susan Docherty offered no explanation for the company’s plans to introduce not one but two models below the LaCrosse, in both size and price. Chevy overlap? Well I never. Nor would the Old GM vet answer the question “will future production vehicles will be designed for Buick and not simply rebadges from other brands?” But the badge engineering question simply refuses to go away, for some reason. csmcars asks “Susan, GM has eliminated a lot of redundant models in its recent restructuring. Why continue to have both GMC and Chevrolet versions of so many truck models? Will GMC trucks be further distinguished from Chevy trucks? Or will Chevrolet become more of a car-focused brand?”
Chevrolet and GMC have two very different sets of buyers. GMC buyers want a more premium offering with higher levels of equipment and are willing to pay for that. Chevrolet our great foundational brand appeals to a wide variety of consumers in all segments of the market who want great everyday value in the products they buy. In terms of further differentiation between Chev vs. GMC, the best example is Equinox and Terrain, both with very different buyers, different levels of equipments where they only share a front windshield and roof.
What’s with the treble spacing between sentences? Amateur psychologists would suggest something to do with excessive caution and a fear of commitment. Anyway, at least Susan apologizes for killing Pontiac: “Sorry!” As for the future, Docherty nixes the idea of the now-dead Pontiac G8 becoming a Buick Grand National, but sees a Voltuick in Buick’s future. No badge engineering there, obviously.
And now, the REAL NEWS: portholes are here to stay!
Frank, Ventiports or Portholes are a key design element for Buick, just like the Waterfall grill is. According to my peers at design, they are here to stay – however we need to make sure we keep them modern and up to date.
Yeah, wouldn’t want any of them old-fashioned portholes, would we?
They just don’t get it, do they? I imagine that if the government didn’t force them to, they wouldn’t have offloaded any of their redundant brands. As per Chevrolet and GMC, Susan, most people choose between Chevrolet and GMC by who has the highest rebates.
Chevrolet and GMC have two very different sets of buyers
Yes, one set lives near a Chevy dealership and the other near a GMC one.
I mean, a compact Buick?
Well, with Pontiac gone, the eventual Cruze rebadge was either going to be a GMC or a Buick. I was actually betting we’d see a GMC-badged Cruze with square wheel wells and some black plastic cladding on the wheel wells and door sills.
GM can’t say “No” to it’s dealers when it comes to brand-destroying volume. What is happening to Buick is exactly what happened to Pontiac, Olds and Saturn: they’re getting “exciting new product” so that GM has somewhere to make up the volume.
Ventiports or Portholes are a key design element for Buick, just like the Waterfall grill is.
Yes, just like cladding and a split-grille at Pontiac or tailfin analogues at Caddy. This is what happens when your “brand differentiation” amounts to styling gimmicks: you get Chevrolets with portholes, fins, cladding and/or square wheel wells.
Mark my words: in three years, Buick will consist of waterfall’ed-and-portholed Chevrolets that aren’t selling and Bob Lutz will pull the plug, mystified (or blaming the perception gap) over how Buick failed to set the world on fire despite being given a stable of competitive products.
I’m amazed that GM keeps trying this. They’ve killed three brands (Olds, Pontiac and Saturn) exactly the same way. Are they figuring “fourth time’s a charm” or something?
One of Buicks most successful nameplates, before it was destroyed by mediocrity, was the Skylark. I think that was originally a compact. This could good work IF the product is desirable…
Hahaha, that picture is from Texas Direct Auto. They used to have the Grand National depicted for around $100,000 if I remember correctly. It was still brand new and had never been titled. Still had original tires and battery and only something like 8 miles on the ODO. The pic made me laugh when I saw it. The article and the GM corporate lines made me laugh harder.
“What, us badge engineer? Impossible.”
psarhjinian,
You’re almost right, except for Lutz pulling the plug. They won’t do that except in a return trip to bankruptcy court.
—
Susan Docherty writes, “One thing we are really excited about is that our Dealers are telling us that the buyers are trading in Acura TL’s, Infinitis, and Lexus ES350s, which we think is pretty cool.”
Sure. I believe it. And people were falling all over themselves trading Camrys and Accords for the new Malibu last year, powering its sales all the way to mediocre.
wow, that’s a nice buick grand national…not like they’d ever bring that back, eh?
Anyway, it looks like GM’s still up to its old tricks. Didn’t someone say that trying to do the same thing with the same results over and over again is insanity?
I am truely embarrassed that I was once a Buick man…
I don’t think anyone is THAT enervated about Buick’s future
Is “enervated” really the word you’re looking for?
en·er·vate (ěn’ər-vāt’)
tr.v. en·er·vat·ed, en·er·vat·ing, en·er·vates
(1) To weaken or destroy the strength or vitality of: “the luxury which enervates and destroys nations” (Henry David Thoreau). See Synonyms at deplete.
(2) Medicine: To remove a nerve or part of a nerve.
adj. (ĭ-nûr’vĭt)
(1) Deprived of strength; debilitated.
The truth maybe GM did not think they did anything wrong. They blame the perception gap for GM’s current and past woes. The perception gap has been used to absolve blame.
The cruze is the next skyhawk.
Another angel dies every time Susan Docherty speaks to the public.
I got to channel my inner Dr Phil on this one…
“The best indicator of future behavior is past behaviour.”
And, as we all know, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
Speaking of Darth Buicks, Ateupwithmotors have a new article out on the Grand Nationals:
http://ateupwithmotor.com/
The Chevy/GMC truck situation is a no-brainer. You make Chevy the proletarian, weekend warrior truck, and GMC is focused more on commercial/work needs. That’s how I’ve always thought of them, due to GMC’s history in the big rig market back in the day. Their two-stroke diesel and the old “Crackerbox” cab-over-engine truck were famous and are still recognizable from a mile away in both sound and appearance.
And Commando:
“I am truely embarrassed that I was once a Buick man…”
There once was a user here named Buickman. I assume he’s still a “Buick man.”
A compact Buick is just a bad idea. Skylark Somerset, anyone?
GM needs a premium compact sedan but as a RWD Caddy like the ATS is supposed to be. Inevitably this Buick will wind up being a badge engineered FWD job with leather seats aimed at appeasing dealer demands for volume.
GM will probably benchmark against the TSX and not even try to go bunion to toe with the 3-series. To gain market share, GM has to win over some 3-Series buyers as the 3-Series dominates that segment.
Unless GM makes a big effort, this will fail.
I thought the new GM’s Buick was their “family” brand. Why would family want a compact?
Chevrolet and GMC have two very different sets of buyers
Yes, one set lives near a Chevy dealership and the other near a GMC one.
Rolled on the floor laughing at this one.
John
They won’t do that except in a return trip to bankruptcy court.
They killed Olds and Saturn outside of court. They’ll do it again. GM can’t make the decision to kill a brand outright: they have to spend millions (billions) trying to save it, and when they don’t get results in six months then they can kill it.
That way they can say they tried and no one is really at fault.
The Chevy/GMC truck situation is a no-brainer. You make Chevy the proletarian, weekend warrior truck, and GMC is focused more on commercial/work needs.
Yet Ford has been selling trucks under one brand for, what, a hundred years? GMC exists solely because GM was, at one time, so big as to make self-competition a non-issue. That was forty years ago.
The question they need to ask vis-a-vis GMC is this: would GMC buyers really defect to Ford, Dodge or Toyota? Personally, I can’t see that happening, save for mouth-breathers who buy the first thing they see at the nearest dealer. Such buyers are really thin on the ground.
Finally someone has explained why GM has failed and why the Asian manufacturers are so successful – GM rebadges cars and sells them under different names – Honda, Toyota, et al would NEVER do something like that – imagine the out-cry if say, a Lexus owner discovered that his car was nothing more than a rebadged Toyota Camry. I bet if we dig deep enough we’d discover that Ford also rebadges. Fraud leads to failure – GM & Ford need to look at Toyota to learn how to market vehicles.
psarhjinian:
“Yet Ford has been selling trucks under one brand for, what, a hundred years? GMC exists solely because GM was, at one time, so big as to make self-competition a non-issue. That was forty years ago.”
I can appreciate that. However, GMC’s very foundation has been on commercial-intended trucks from the beginning. I think the General would do well to capitalize on that history and re-focus GMC on commercial uses, while Chevrolet is there to appease the everyman buyer who has an occasional weekend building project or pulls the occasional camping trailer.
If they don’t do that, then what you suggest makes perfect sense. As it stands now, there is very little substantive difference between GMC and Chevrolet trucks, thus the case for keeping both truck divisions alive is nil, save for the occasional legacy buyer who has always had GMCs and clings to the brand for that reason. But chances are good most of those buyers will be dead in a decade or less.
To me, GMCs smaller trucks (Chevy re-badges up to 1.5 ton, maybe) should be de-contented work trucks with a few options focused on making work easier– data ports, fleet management systems, ability to integrate a laptop/printer, upfitter capabilities, etc. Then, their larger trucks could cover the spread from work truck to site foreman, much like many semi-trucks come in “fleet” trim and “owner-operator” trim options.
GMC would need to get back in the Class 6, 7 and 8 game if they wanted to make a serious commercial fleet effort. I can see them moving into dump truck chassis to test their capabilities, slowly breaking into full-fledged Class 8 work trucks.
I know Ford got out of the semi business (sold to Sterling) and probably for good reason, but I really don’t think GMC would have anything to lose from a move like this. If they don’t make a move back into commercial-focused trucks, their entire brand is needless duplication of Chevy trucks and will eventually go the way of Oldsmobile and Pontiac. If they do make the move and it subsequently fails, it’s at least more noble than the path they’re on now.
GMC exists for two reasons.
It keeps the B-(P)-G sales channel viable, as the volume (P) is gone and those dealers will scream if they have no trucks/SUV’s (i.e. profitable vehicles in decent volume) to sell.
It pleases the truck buyers who don’t like Chevy for whatever reason but want to buy GM.
This is similar to Ford keeping Mercury. The Lincoln dealers wouldn’t make it on their own, and there are those people who buy “Ford” but don’t like Fords themselves.
It’s supposedly a “premium” over the other but you are just getting a spiffied up rebadge.
To be the Devil’s advocate here…Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc. ALL sell compact sedans and few people bitch and moan that those compacts are destroying each of those respective brands. If Buick is going after the ‘near’ luxury market, it’s a vehicle class they should be in.
The issue is not whether a compact, luxurious Buick would be a valid addition to the line-up, but rather, the understandable fear that GM will do this on the cheap and just do another brand-destroying rebadge of an inferior product.
A premium, well-engineered compact Buick would be a good thing, and possibly extend the brand into new territory…it remains to be seen whether the ‘new’ GM can actually learn from it’s past mistakes, and actually pull this off.
However, GMC’s very foundation has been on commercial-intended trucks from the beginning.
I’d say that’s kind of pointless, what with Chevy-branded medium-duty models fairly commonly available and GMC in the retail space selling medium-trim Chevy trucks and crossovers with a different grille.
I just don’t see the point the same product with a different badge. The Chevy medium-duty products are particularly redundant, though it probably doesn’t cost much to slap the badge on.
Again, Ford sells Fords pretty much across the line (let’s try and forget the MKT/Blackwood). Toyota does play this kind of silliness with Hino versus it’s own brand, but generally they sell one or the other in a given country and they’re not hocking Highlanders or RAVs under the Hino name.
I agree that GMC should focus on work trucks, and try to get back into the commercial-rig game, but this means a 180 from what GMC is now. GMC is all about extra LUXURY and TECHNOLOGY over the Chevy versions of GM trucks.
How would GMC intenders take the news that GMC will now become spartan, durable (i.e. plasticky), workhorses? Would they be willing to go “downmarket” to Chevy’s top-line trucks? That’s a big gamble for GM.
If they insist on keeping GMC as top-trim Chevys, then they’ll need to remove a trim or two from Chevy’s trucks. No navigation, no top-tier leather, no special OnStar services, etc.
I thought that the point of hanging on to Buick was that Buick sells big in China. I expect that a compact Buick would do well there, even if it’s a re-badge.
mattstairs :
September 1st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
GMC exists for two reasons.
It keeps the B-(P)-G sales channel viable, as the volume (P) is gone and those dealers will scream if they have no trucks/SUV’s (i.e. profitable vehicles in decent volume) to sell.
It pleases the truck buyers who don’t like Chevy for whatever reason but want to buy GM.
This is similar to Ford keeping Mercury. The Lincoln dealers wouldn’t make it on their own, and there are those people who buy “Ford” but don’t like Fords themselves.
It’s supposedly a “premium” over the other but you are just getting a spiffied up rebadge.
Why does GM need two sales channels? Why not just amalgamate everything under one roof? It sure would eliminate the need for so much duplication, both in vehicles and support services.
Fricken’ GM, just can’t do anything logically.
I hear you Monty, if I were GM I would have eliminated Buick, Pontiac, and GMC.
I think you could have made a case for Chevy (traditional American), Saturn (import intenders, imported Opels, etc.) and Cadillac. Three sales channels, two of which would be small.
Or just Chevy and Cadillac, basic and premium, and be done with it.
psarhjinian:
“I’d say that’s kind of pointless, what with Chevy-branded medium-duty models fairly commonly available and GMC in the retail space selling medium-trim Chevy trucks and crossovers with a different grille.
The point is, Chevy shouldn’t be duplicating GMC in the medium-duty market (if GM ever decides to go back into it) because they shouldn’t even be in it in the first place. That’s the market GMC needs to have all to itself, to capitalize on their commercial truck history that dates back to 1901.
Meanwhile, GMC shouldn’t be duplicating Chevy in the light-duty market. De-content Chevy light-duty trucks for GMC commercial duty, but give them more powertrain options– different rear ends, different transmissions, more engine options, better rated suspensions, etc. You might share the basic shell of the body and frame for the lighter-duty trucks, just because they already do it and it CAN, in some way, make sense.
But even if they do that, there should not be a GMC work truck that approaches the Chevy trucks’ luxury appointments. Carpet floors? Leather seats? Six-disc in-dash CD changer with Sirius/XM subscription free for the first year? Fughettaboutit.
Though the GMCs are currently marketed as the “premium” product over the Chevys, I really don’t see it that way. There’s a lot of common ground between them, and you can spec out several Chevy options just the same as you can on a GMC, coming out with very similar trucks at the end of the day. This is self-competing, as you acknowledge. Needless duplication that is only hurting the General. As akitadog said, if they really want this strategy to work, they’ve got to de-content Chevy Trucks’ option codes so that you have to go to GMC to get the leather, satnav, XM radio, etc.
GMCH7:
T minus 1 year, 9 months, 29 days, 4 hours, 28 minutes and 52 seconds….
FUTURE OBAMA NATIONAL ADDRESS: My fellow Americans, I regret to inform you that going forward, we as a nation cannot continue to fund the New General Motors. It has become apparent that the company is incapable of a turn-around, even with government financial assistance. The problems are too entrenched. The corporate structure, too inflexible. The brand, too damaged. In 2009, when we rescued both General Motors and Chrysler, it was amidst the most harrowing economic period since the Great Depression, and our national economy simply could not sustain losing either company at that time. Today, it is all too apparent that despite our best efforts, General Motors is not sustainable even in these improved times. Therefore, it is the recommendation of my panel of automotive advisors to allow the company to file for Chapter 7 liquidation at 10:00 am tomorrow….
Or something like that. Take note, Susan.
A small Buick is as dumb as the Cadillac Converj; neither fits the brand image.
I thought that the point of hanging on to Buick was that Buick sells big in China. I expect that a compact Buick would do well there, even if it’s a re-badge
Because, you know, Buick selling in China is predicated on the existence of the moribund American brand and it’s stable of “meh” products.
Jerry Lewis might still be big in France. David Hasselhoff is big in Germany. Neither need to keep pumping out material in North America for that to happen.
psarhjinian :
Because, you know, Buick selling in China is predicated on the existence of the moribund American brand and it’s stable of “meh” products.
Jerry Lewis might still be big in France. David Hasselhoff is big in Germany. Neither need to keep pumping out material in North America for that to happen.
But isn’t it the American cachet that makes Buick popular in China? It certainly isn’t the styling or technology. France doesn’t love Lewis because he’s American (tho for the life of me, I have no idea why they do), therefore product for NA is not necessary. A purely Chinese Buick probably wouldn’t be as popular.
sfdennis1 :
September 1st, 2009 at 1:02 pm
To be the Devil’s advocate here…Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc. ALL sell compact sedans and few people bitch and moan that those compacts are destroying each of those respective brands. If Buick is going after the ‘near’ luxury market, it’s a vehicle class they should be in.
———————————————
Your evidence counters your own conclusion. The three brands are all in financial trouble now and will all go bankrupt, unless there is a fast economic recovery or bailout or parent company helping out.
ClutchCarGo :
September 1st, 2009 at 2:32 pm
I thought that the point of hanging on to Buick was that Buick sells big in China. I expect that a compact Buick would do well there, even if it’s a re-badge.
———————————————-
1) Buick China has a different set of models (names). Adding a compact there doesn’t require anything added to the NA market.
2) Buick is supposed to be a near luxury brand in China. At the same time, GM is marketing Chevy as a more affordable brand. If they do the compact re-badge for Buick there, they are just repeating the same mistake that they didn’t learn here. No, Chinese consumers are not dumb, they will find out.
Susan Docherty… Now there’s an oxygen thief of the worst ilk.
Hey Susan, VW seems to be doing okay. Why don’t you jump on board and sink that boat?
But isn’t it the American cachet that makes Buick popular in China?
I wonder about that. I mean, yes, Cadillac could swing that, as could Chevy, but Buick? Really?
I have some trouble with this. I think that Buick is successful in China on it’s own merit, and that assuming that it’s the existence of the American Buick amounts to hubris (or wishful thinking) on the part of GMNA. I feel that the “Buick is Big In China, So We Have To Keep It Around” meme has more to do with making GM feel better.
It’s either that, or something got lost in translation. It’s not credible that the Chinese could have misinterpreted Buick’s brand worth.
@WSN
“your evidence counters your own conclusion”…
“the three brands are all in financial trouble and will all go bankrupt…”
What are you talking about?? Are you saying that Mercedes, BMW and Audi are facing financial difficulty because they sell premium compact cars? Or that those luxury brands have been severely devalued by doing such, and they are in trouble as a result? Your post makes absolutely no sense to me.
The volume of C-Class, 1 and 3-series, and A3/A4 sales has only HELPED each of those companies’ bottom lines, and prevented them from being in even worse financial shape than they already are.
Um, most automakers are in dire straights right now…losing huge money and having many challenges… From Toyota to GM to the Europeans, most everyone’s suffering.
My point was that the premium compact segment is a valid market, with hundreds of thousands of such vehicles sold worldwide each year, and if done properly (a BIG “if”), a premium compact (not a cheap rebadge) could serve Buick well in an attempt to bring in new and/or younger buyers to the brand.
Every time I read a Susan Docherty livechat on GM:Fastlane my eyes start to bleed.
GMC died when Cadillac introduced the Escalade. Before that, GMC had a reason for being, being the upscale GM truck. After that, it was squeezed in between the upscale Chevy offerings and the Cadillac. It has lost its reason for being. The Tahoe/Suburban, the Yukon Denali and the Escalade is actually the same truck, with minor trim differences. Don’t come to me and say there are any fundamental differences between the ‘Slade and the Chevy trucks. GM killed the Hummer brand when they discontinued the H1. In the same sense, GM killed GMC with the Escalade.
Hahaha, that picture is from Texas Direct Auto. They used to have the Grand National depicted for around $100,000 if I remember correctly. It was still brand new and had never been titled. Still had original tires and battery and only something like 8 miles on the ODO. The pic made me laugh when I saw it. The article and the GM corporate lines made me laugh harder.
That’s not a run-of-the-mill Grand National. Look closely at the grille and you’ll see from the badging that it’s a very rare GNX, one of approx 500 GN’s that Buick sent to ASC/McLaren for enhancment. They were instant collector’s items and you won’t find many in this condition for much lower than what that dealer was asking.
To me, GM Fastlane/Livechat is weird. I don’t understand what is achieved by putting these GM people, who are so obviously out of their depth, in front of perceptive questioning.
Logic and common sense aren’t even visible.
It HAS to be embarrassing, yet the practice lives on.
i’ve been reading info for the past couple of years…GM IS STILL IN TROUBLE. i don’t think anything is going to change…because change is difficult for anyone especially a stubborn, arrogant, defiant, proud, powerful, humongous organization…(i’m sure there are more words.. just can’t think right now). i personally think chevrolet and cadillac should be left standing right now with separate dealerships, but i’m not a wall street financial guru, bean counter, salesman, mechanic, factory worker, car writer, etc. what do i know??? i’ll tell you this…GM like Amitsufiatdaimsler, F.ound O.n R.oad D.ead hasn’t learned anything in 40 YEARS…what makes you think they’re going to miraculously make up all that time in a few years.
sfdennis1 :
September 1st, 2009 at 1:02 pm
To be the Devil’s advocate here…Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc. ALL sell compact sedans and few people bitch and moan that those compacts are destroying each of those respective brands. If Buick is going after the ‘near’ luxury market, it’s a vehicle class they should be in.
Bingo.
Ingvar :
September 1st, 2009 at 4:47 pm
GMC died when Cadillac introduced the Escalade. Before that, GMC had a reason for being, being the upscale GM truck. After that, it was squeezed in between the upscale Chevy offerings and the Cadillac. It has lost its reason for being.
Perhaps this is a way for Caddy to get out of the truck biz and focus on cars…leave the upscale truck market to GMC. Wouldn’t surprise me.
mattstairs :
September 1st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
This is similar to Ford keeping Mercury. The Lincoln dealers wouldn’t make it on their own, and there are those people who buy “Ford” but don’t like Fords themselves.
Mercury’s a dead brand. Ford is just keeping it around until Lincoln can stand on its own.
Damn your black heart ttac! Showing a Grand National for a Buick compact post. For a second I thought I was going to read about GM turbocharging a G8 and selling it as a GNX or something but instead I got to read about another compact. *sigh*