Over a year now, the launch of Buick’s new LaCrosse gave us pause to consider the average age of Buick buyers, and the future of the brand’s demography. At the time, The Detroit New claimed the average age of Buick buyers was 63, a fact that gave the paper cause to celebrate Buick’s new lease on life. And considering that the brand once attracted buyers of an average age of 72, that wasn’t a bad trend at the time. Today’s DetN has a similar story, lauding Buick’s newfound youthful appeal with such quotes as this one from IHS Global Insight’s Aaron Bragman:
They are making definite improvements in the U.S. To kill Buick would have been crazy. It’s one of the most important brands in the Chinese market…. It’s still too soon to really come to a verdict on how Buick is doing in the U.S. But nobody can say those are old person’s cars anymore. Because they aren’t.
But this latest round of Buick-boosting is still based on the old reference point of a 72-year-old average buyer demographic. Compared to a year ago, Buick’s average buyer age appears to have crept back up again, as the Detroit News cites a current average demographic of 65.
The DetN’s Robert Snell claims “that figure is trending lower ahead of the launch of the Buick Regal midsize sport sedan this spring,” but it appears that the first year of Buick’s LaCrosse-led reinvention has kept the brand’s average buyer age stagnant at best. And Buick is still a long ways from making headway in the fat part of America’s population pyramid. Which means the new Opel Astra-based (Delta II), US-bound Buick compact sedan will either radically shift Buick’s image and demography, or it will be ignored by all but the most brand-dedicated of downsizing retirees. And you might as well hazard a guess in the comments section as to which scenario is most likely… after all, this gamble is being paid for with your tax dollars.
Like most things Buick here in the States, it will most likely be ignored by all but the most faithful Buick shoppers, regardless of whether it turns out to be a good car, or not. Buick has lost it’s way…why not provide the most solid vehicle for the over 55 crowd? They are the ones with the most disposable (read that as cash, not financing through 72-month payments) cash to begin with. But I suppose that’s what Toyota is for with various models of Lexus and the Avalon. Dithering between demographics to try to snag the “younger” crowd hasn’t done anything to help Buick’s bottom line.
I’m pretty sure all they need to do is convince people that there “once was a Scotsman named Buick”.
If the badge said “Chevrolet”, “Pontiac”, or “Saturn”, or any number of foreign nameplates, you’d instantly move the demographic southward and sell more cars. Of course, Pontiac and Saturn are gone.
The Buick name is poison at this point.
Given the success of GM’s past attempts at selling rebadged European cars under one of its domestic divisions, I doubt that this car will do much to lower the average age of Buick buyers.
I’ll consider Buick when shopping but sadly I can only afford used which won’t help their initial buyer age. I’d buy one cause they are quiet and comfortable and soft, not cause they’re a freaking sports car.
I really don’t understand people who say “We can’t kill the Buick brand as it is too valuable in China”
So just use it in China. Like they use Vauxhall in the UK and Opel everywhere else.
Mind you, considering that Buick was, until recently, was headed up by Susan Docherty, it’s no surprise that this brand is still floundering…
The Chinese would immediately scream “discrimination! You are foisting dead brands upon us!” Hush, don’t tell them that 75 year thing. At least couch it in “demographics similar to Mercedes in Germany.” The Chinese would eat it up.
Is it statistically significant that the average age has changed from 63 to 65? Or is it just within the error of the sample? It seems like those numbers are probably the same – just slightly different samples. Also, the Buick product line has been stagnant (Enclave, LaCrosse) over the past year.
I would wait until some new product (Regal) is actually selling.
Saic would love to buy Buick completely. If Buick isn’t sold anymore in the USA than it is easy to dissolve it from GM and with it GM would be on the road to be Chryslerized
@Bertel
Humour me because I’m humour-impaired: would the Chinese market really think that? Really? What do they think of Buick now, or have things like the Skylark, Terraza and W-Body Regal/Century not come onto their collective radar?
Least complaints about SUA despite the demographics.
Quality!
+1
Since every car marker wants to capture youthful buyers to hopefully lock those consumers into continuing to buy throughout their life…okay, so that means having a lot of middle and older buyers at some point, right?
All those 75 tear old Buick drivers are the successful captures GM snagged back when those folks were the randy 25 year olds buying a 1960 Biscayne or whatever.
Careful. At 25 I was driving A Corvette convertible with an L 76 small block. My wife had a Mustang. Both had four speeds.
Today? An AMG Mercedes and an Accord for the groceries.
I have a question – it’s not rhetorical, but I realize that the data may not be available to answer them;
1. What was the average age of a Buick buyer in say 1975? 1960? 1939? 1928?
I’m wondering if Buick’s traditional place in the now dead Alfred P. Sloan hierarchy (I mean that the hierarchy is dead as well as Mr. Sloan) made it more or less always an old person’s car? I’m guessing (and maybe some of the B&B auto historians can help me out) but I bet few young people (under 40, even under 50) could have had a Buick anytime in the 20s/30s/40s. Even in the ’50s when Buick went downmarket with their Special, I bet it still sold mostly to older people.
I’m old enough to remember when doctors made house calls, and I recall that our Dr. drove a Buick (I think it was a law?) even though he was probably only in his 40s – but he was a doctor. Buick traditionally symbolized reaching a certain financial position. Doctors could reach it fairly young. Others not until they were old. Working class folks, never.
Is there any sense trying to capture a younger market? People age (hate to break it to some of you) and as they do their desires change. What’s wrong with being the car for the retirement years? Everyone’s going to be retirement age some day.
If GM could exercise some brand discipline Buick could again be a car the denotes a certain level of economic status. But this means being satisfied with a niche. It’s not possible to sell as many Buicks as Chevies and still have a reason to have both brands.
It’s not just whether a brand sells largely to older people. It’s whether younger people still aspire to own it, even if they don’t have the money to buy it.
Given its price, I would bet that most people who bought a Cadillac in the early 1950s were at least on the far side of 40.
Younger people – even most professionals – probably didn’t make enough money to afford one, given that they were also saving money for a house and raising children.
My father graduated from high school in 1953. In one section of the 1953 yearbook, all of his classmates listed one of their main goals in life. Quite a few said that one of their goals was “to own a Cadillac”.
So even if Cadillacs were sold mostly to older people – because they were the ones with the financial wherewithal to buy one – younger people still aspired to own one.
I’ll bet that DeSotos and Pontiacs of the early 1950s sold largely to older people, too, but no one from the class of 1953 said that their dream was to own a Firedome or a Chieftain. At least, not in my father’s graduating class.
When I was at GM in the late 60s, Buick A Bodies were a step up for young salaried employes (sic). I stuck with Olds, but there was not much difference.
In the thirties, people who were 75 years old were probably dead.
The age demographic for Buicks, and every other car, I suspect, will rise along woth the avberage life expectancy or longevity (not the same thing) in the US.
Bob
Is there ANY reason, other than mollifying an ossified and inefficient dealer network, that Buick and GMC still exist? Why can’t GM use a two-tiered brand strategy like everyone else?
I saw a LaCrosse at the local auto show and it’s a very nice car, albeit too many buttons, but the reviews have been quite positive overall.
Usually a re-badged car cribbed from Opel for the N/A market is crap – Cadillac Catera, L Series Saturn etc – so full credit to GM.
But for my demographic – the so called Gen X – I would never buy it simply because of the name.
Buick still reminds me of grandpa mobiles with floaty suspension and whitewall tires.
Exceptions being the 1963 Rivera, the 72 Skylark and the 87 Grand National.
It pushes all the right buttons – European design , handling etc – but that grille looks like a Lexus and that’s a turn off.
And yes I realize that’s a bit unfair.
GM should declare victory if they push the average age for Buick to 48-50, but I can’t see it going any lower IMHO.
If I’m not mistaken, I believe the average age for GM (all brands) is about 48.
But for my demographic – the so called Gen X – I would never buy it simply because of the name.
Meh, I’ve got a ’08GTI and when it’s time for something new I will totally test drive a magnetic ride equiped Lacrosse. I’m looking for quite and floaty – does that mean I’m getting old? Perhapse…
The new Regal is the rebadged Opel crap of which you speak. The LaCrosse is the rebodied Opel. At lease the new Skylark will have the REAL new Buick cues – portholes on the hood, the bent waterfal grill, unlike the regal that just gets a weak slapped on grill and a badge. Still, better a rebadged Opel than it be a rebadged Chevy. I know, I know…
As a young Buick fan from a very young age I can tell you all (and GM) that if they want people like me in Buick showrooms they have to have a real youth car back. Rebadging Opels is not going to do it, even as nice as the Insignia OPC looks wearing the TriShield.
The cars that got me into Buick originally were the turbo Regals of the 80s (I got a Grand National in the late 90s as a teen) and classic Buick muscle cars and Rivieras. Grand Nationals were sinister looking and performing cars, I loved every minute in mine.
The LaCrosse is a grandma car, there is nothing youthful about it at all. It’s the same with everything Buick makes. But reintroduce a proper RWD coupe or muscle car that is semi-affordable and styled right and that could be the ticket. I would be interested in a new turbo Regal emerge with RWD and styling that echos the Grand Nationals. Or a new Riveria with a V8 and RWD, plenty of performance, plenty of American panache. They can throw that Chinese Riviera concept in the garbage and start over with something much more American that looks like the best Rivieras of the 1960s.
We need to hear from Buickman. No one knows more about actually selling Buicks.
As for me, now that I’ve reached the age of–ahem, maturity–I’ve decided to reverse the aging process by buying a “young man’s car.” The ideal vehicle must have these characteristics:
–noisy
–rough riding
–bucket seats (15 inches wide) made of cast iron
–requires one to become a human pretzel to enter or exit
–no comfort and convenience items such as dual-zone A/C
–gun slit windows with the sills at eye level
–a roof so low occupants must remove heads as well as hats
–front and back glass at 20 degrees from horizontal, and
–a tiny trunk.
Really, when you think about it, ALL cars should be like that.
Best analysis I’ve seen around here in a while — that Buick is an older person’s car because it was intended to be something people traded up to. That’s not such a bad thing to be. You want to go after the younger folks, do what Mitsubishi did, offer easy credit to kids just out of school and wind up with a bunch of bad auto loans and repo’d Mirages on your hands.
At their peak, Buick and Oldsmobile were always comparable in price but addressed different clientele. Olds was flashier, first to get the latest GM innovations, and went for more of a nouveau-riche customer.
Buick was older money, maybe even rich enough for a Caddy but in a relatively conservative profession that engendered trust. Doctors, judges and accountants were Buick people. An aerospace engineer might have been more of an Oldsmobile person.
And interestingly enough, that’s what Buick’s brand position is in China right now.
You might ask where does this leave Cadillac? Caddy in Sloan’s hiearchy was exclusively upper-crust and was produced in low numbers. Buick and Olds were supposed to be for the working professional. Things got confused a bit after World War II when everybody went for the volume, but no one minded because when you had half the market, there were enough sales for five full-line car companies under the same GM banner. Having a more stratified product line might be the thing now, but the motivation then was to be all things to all people and make sure everybody had something to sell in a given segment.
I still believe that GM’s cardinal sin was to put all the plants under the control of the GM Assembly Division (happened in 1971, coincidence?) and strip the divisions of their independence. It might have saved in cost, but it killed their market share by homogenizing the product.
I don’t get all the Buick-bashing out there. If everybody remembers, Oldsmobile was hitting home runs throughout the 1980’s. It was only because GM let the product get homogenized and stale that led to Oldsmobile’s demise. Wasn’t the Cutlass the top-selling car (and Oldsmobile the number-3 nameplate) in the early-1980’s. The problem is not nameplate but has always been product and execution. Give people a “home run” product, in terms of style, refinement and value and Buick shouldn’t have any problem regaining its past glory.
Cars are fashion and if you think of this in terms of department store goods, Chevrolet is like Sears, Kohl’s or Penney’s; Cadillac is like Saks or Neiman Marcus; and Buick has a good chance of being successful as a Macy’s or Nordstrom’s, of sorts. Not everyone wants a Chevy-Toyota-Honda car experience, and not everyone wants to spend $50,000 and up on a car. If Buick can offer value and refinement at a reasonable price point (high-20’s to high-30’s), I don’t see why it wouldn’t be popular.
And one final reason not to write off Buick is that with the loss of Saturn, Oldsmobile and Pontiac, where else are these customers going to go if they are GM loyalists and don’t want an ugly Chevy or don’t have the deep pockets for a Caddy?
Historically (well, let’s say 1932/34 – on, as that’s what I know) Buick was always the ‘old money, but not too much money’ car. It was always aimed at the professional who’d made it but didn’t want the flash of a Cadillac. Even when something like the Century (Roadmaster engine in a Special body) was brought out, it was a ‘gentleman’s hot rod’ aimed for the mature adult who liked to go fast on the open road, not somebody who was into drag racing.
The Grand National and it’s ilk were extreme anomalies in the Buick lineup. They’re the last thing you want to go back to if you’re trying to redefine a Buick by the original definition.
I can still see a market for Buick, for people like me. Yeah, I’m about to turn 60, and there’s a Porsche in the garage, with four motorcycles, and I can still autocross, but there are times when I’d like to have a nice quiet (in attitude as well as appointments) automatic transmission driver’s car that doesn’t attract outside attention, or shows I’m desperately trying to be hip. Which immediately leaves out the three high-priced German marques. I’ve had Buicks in the past, when I was in my late 30’s, early 40’s. They were good cars, but what they represented (as much as anything was represented by GM back then) meant I got them a bit too soon.
At my age now – perfect. I’m watching the lineup very closely.
GM’s brand management has been so poor for decades that it’s going to take time, as in many years, for Buick to represent ANYTHING that a young person would aspire to…decades of producing rebadged Chevys with marshmallow suspensions ain’t gonna cature Lexus-intenders overnight. (Skylarks? Skyhawks? LeSabres? the last Century/Regal sedans? ugh! I’m nodding off just thinking of the blandness of those cars. That’s 10+ years of bad karma right there.)
If they continue to put out several good products over several years, then, yeah, they could be “back to where they were” a generation (or longer?) ago…premium, luxurious cars worthy of aspiration.
Not going to hold my breath on that though, as GM repeatedly shows it doesn’t have the stamina to “slog it out” for a decade or longer to repair the damage it dished out in the 70’s, 80’s 90’s and most of the 00’s…that’s A LOT of crap to clean up…they are bigger fools than even I thought possible if they think they can turn it around in a couple of years.
Agreed that Buick should have become a China-only brand…Pontiac would have been much easier to rehabilitate…and MUCH easier to sell to younger people.
Why not give Buick a reimagined GN? I guess one sad part about the CTS being Caddilac’s best known car is that they really can’t share that platform for fear of making it irrelevant. Still, a new GN on that chassis would give younger buyers something to aspire to. Heck, make it handle as well as ride well and you could have a really nice car. Since Pontiac’s dead they could stand to have another RWD vehicle around.
In my mind, this actually makes some sense but I could easily be wrong (I really liked the style and power of those GN’s from the 80’s).
Long time reader, first time poster. Had to jump in here as my 1996 Roadmaster wagon is about the greatest thing since the invention of car. Buick must reenter the body-on-frame full size segment to survive. Yes, that’s right…large, powerful, floaty, imminently comfortable. It simply is what a Buick should be.
I would argue the demise of the market for brands such as Mercury, Oldsmobile, and Buick has less to do with the product offered, and more to do with the market itself, or the economy that creates the demand. Think of how our economy has changed since the 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s. The middle class is being destroyed. The Schlage lock salesman that was my childhood friend’s dad, who put many, many miles on his Buick Estate Wagon, is no more. The job is gone.
My other childhood friend, whose lawyer father bought a new Buick Electra, every other year (with a Riviera thrown in for good measure), has retired, and the replacement lawyers are numerous enough, and poor enough, that they driving off-lease vehicles.
The plant managers who would purchase Regals for their wives, and Delta 88’s for themselves, are gone, and so are their employees and the jobs that paid them.
Let’s face it, in this country, you flip burgers, pour coffee, wait tables, have an international business/finance function, import something, sell something, deliver something, manage the above, or are illegal. But the days of making things, and all the various levels that managed or supported this function, are gone (for now). And the disappearance took a great portion of our American automobile demand with it.
Buick can offer whatever it wants, but the demographic that bought it, and the demographic that fed the future purchasers were killed by demise of the middle class.
the troubles at Buick have stemmed from the lack of understanding what a Buick is by the manufacturer. we went thru the phase of rebadging Trailblazers, Ventures, and Azteks. GM killed nameplates with tremendous brand equity…Century, LeSabre, Roadmaster, Riviera. they marketed products with distress merchandising, focusing on the “giveaways’ instead of the features and benefits that made Buicks desirable. now we are shifting away from our traditional demographic because someone upstairs supposes it’s where we need go. there is no coherent product plan, marketing strategy, or leadership.
importing the GTO from Australia was a complete blunder, as is trying to cash in on the Regal name with a car that doesn’t remotely approach the Buick brand promise of distinctive, powerful, substantial and mature. Buicks are supposed to be big with understated elegance, not rehashed European vehicles. I agree that this “radical shift” will be “ignored” and that GM has “lost it’s way” with “brand discipline”.
Scott Burgess today penned an article in the Free Press calling for the end to Lucerne. Oldsmobile quit offering column shift, introduced goofy taglines, changed their nameplates, and died a slow death. if it wasn’t for the strength of the Buick dealer body the same fate would have overcome Buick as well. it’s a crying shame that even today General Motors doesn’t understand the auto industry in it’s own backyard.
see “The Buickman” on Facebook.
When I was growing up in the 50’s, Buick was known as a doctor’s and lawyer’s car. Also in that period class consciousness began to creep into Sloan’s model. Each division of General Motors coveted the prestige of the division above it and the volume of the one below.
Buick was no different and in the 50’s began offering vehicles like the down market Special that blurred Buick’s traditional market segment. This model creep continued throughout the General Motors divisional lineup with so many models butting and overlapping that Sloan’s model had ceased to exist by the late sixties or early seventies.
Even today, I’m not sure if Buick knows what demographic-besides a vague notion of competing for Lexus buyers-it is supposed to appeal to.
Buick’s new vehicles, as good as they may be, aren’t likely to turn the brand around. At least not in North America. Seems like Buick is likely alienating their traditional customers, while trying to draw in new (younger) ones that won’t cross shop Buick with upscale import brands like Lexus and Acura. We’ve more or less been down this road before with Oldsmobile, and everyone knows how well that worked. The big difference this time is that Buick seems to be very successful in China, something Olds didn’t have.
Personally, I’m very much an exception to the rule: I’m only 36, and I love the old traditional Buicks, particularly the LeSabre, Park Avenue and Roadmaster. When I was 19, those were the cars that I aspired to own. Later, I had 2 LeSabres that I was very fond of. The new ones are just re-badged Opels, more or less, and they completely turn me off. There is no way in hell I’d even give one a second look, not because they’re bad-they may indeed live up to the positive reviews-but simply because I find them totally unappealing (I think the styling of both the new LaCrosse and Regal sucks). The only current Buick I’d consider would be the Lucerne. I never thought I’d say or write this, but here goes: I’d rather see Buick gone, or at least confined to China, rather than see it die a slow, lingering death in North America trying to sell re-badged Opels.
big_gms
I feel you. many feel the same way. GM just doesn’t get it. these new things aren’t Buicks just because they put an emblem on them. they ruined Olds, destroyed Pontiac, lost GMAC in the process and now are screwing up Buick. and Caddy? big Ed doesn’t realize the incompetency he is surrounded by when it comes to marketing. shame really since so many GM folks do such a fine job.
This link is talking about shoppers, but not buyers.
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2008/01/down-economy-mo.html
It seems to suggest that the economy is driving up the average age, but Buick’s age was coming down. The better products have brought down the age, but the bad economy will probably only let it go so far. It will be interesting to see how the new Regal will do, and then later the Delta II Astra based car.
Don’t expect us young people to have the money to buy nice cars like buicks.
Let the bankers and sports stars who make obscene amounts of money buy new cars. The rest of us are going to be working for minimum wage until we die.
As long as there are retirment communities, there will always be a need for Buicks. Not all of them can afford Cadillacs you know.