CaddyXLR-V

GM continues to defy logic Where is the logic in shutting down your brand with the lowest buyer age, then taking your brand with the highest buyer age, and trying to get younger customers? Hey GM, get rid rid of GMC too, then rebadge a Silverado as a Buick while you're at it.

Well I had tranny problems with my Grand Prix, and I had it rebuilt to handle more power. But the transmission shop I went to recommended changing the fluid once a year.

Our tax dollars will most likely be thrown away regardless. It's not like our government has ever been efficient with our tax money.

Well since Pontiac is gone, I probably won't consider buying any GM vehicles. I am more likely to consider a Chrysler than a GM vehicle now.

I believe i read somewhere that Wagoner was directly responsible for bringing Lutz on board.

I think it always came down to the bean counters. They would probably always say it costs too much money, lets cheapen it by X amount. Personally, I think they should have paid more attention to detail, and used higher quality parts, better interiors, better engines, and if they had to be sold at a loss to meet the market price, then so be it. Their reputation and sales would pick up after a while, and GM could have started raising the prices so they wouldn't have to rely on rebates to sell their vehicles.

Well if there were no Wagoner, there would be no Bob Lutz either.

Just because it is marketed, doesn't mean people remember it. I hear GM vehicles names confused ALL the time, including the Cobalt. Which name isn't confused? Impala, and to a lesser extent Malibu. People know those. Cobalt? Not really.

Pontiac would probably still be around.

Pontiac was once the 3rd largest brand in the US, and when it was killed, it was still GM's 3rd best selling brand. And Packard wasn't just killed this year. Pontiac still had a ton of potential that went to waste.

Chances are, people don't even know what a Cobalt is, never mind thinking it's cheap. If they don't know what it is, then obviously there can't be any negative baggage attached to the name. But by changing the name now, they probably will lose some sales from people who currently own a Cobalt now. Why start new, when what you have now is practically new?

I don't see anything wrong with the Cobalt name either. The Cobalt, while it looks cheap, doesn't have a bad reputation, because it's only been around 1 generation. It's not like the Cavalier name, which was multiple generations of crap. Buick and Pontiac would have done much better without switching names.

But GM will still have 4 brands to market in the US whether they kept Buick or Pontiac. And Buick in China will be advertised separately from Buick in the US. Pontiacs were cheap to convert from Holdens anyway.

Well what happens when it is discovered that American tastes are different from Chinese tastes? Buicks will still need to be built here, I don't see them importing them from China. And I don't believe GM will be exporting US built Buicks to China. So where do the savings come from?

It's not about what the name is, it's about name recognition. People know the Accord, and Civic, and Camry. They know Chevy's small car as, that small Chevy, whatever it's called. They confuse G6, with G8, with GTO. They do not know cars like we do. GM needs to stop changing the names of cars with every new generation, because then non car people might actually remember the name.

Buicks in China are Buicks in name only. They share nothing with Buicks in the US.

That argument doesn't make sense to me. No one is saying to get rid of Buick in China. Buick losing billions here, is the same as Pontiac losing billions here, there is no difference. Buick profits in China might make it up either way. Pontiac had a bigger upside though. Younger buyers, better image, better sales. Just because Buick sells in China doesn't mean Buick will sell here. As an example, what is better. Buick US losing $3 billion, and Buick China making $3 billion, or Pontiac US losing $1 billion and Buick China making $3 billion In one scenario GM has a $2 billion profit, the other it breaks even.

I haven't seen an Enclave in weeks. I've been seeing about 2-3 G8s per day though...

No, but I have logged on from my work and home computers, and also my phone a few times.

Well my browser settings have never been changed, and it never used to do that to me on any computer I use until a couple weeks ago, and now it does it on any computer I use.

Why do I need to constantly log back in? Most of the time, I open this site, log in, click view new posts, read a couple, then try to reply to one, and when I click submit post, it says I can't because I need to log in. I log in again, and I'm taken back to the front page, with my reply not being posted. It's getting very annoying.

I think Pontiac had the best chance of not tanking. There was a debate long ago whether Saturn or Pontiac should get rebuilt. Well GM decided to rebuilt Saturn, and it failed. Sales never picked up, even though it was decided that Saturn was a safer bet. What happens now if the volume in BPG dealerships drop so low that both GM and Buick are hurt by it? I wouldn't want to be stuck with a Buick/GMC dealership. All GM had to do was keep real Pontiac names instead of all the dumb G names, and give Pontiac good product, and sales would have picked up.

GM needs to bring in buyers not loyal to GM, because it has chased away all the buyers who were loyal to GM. GM certainly has a mountain to climb, and I don't really see it happening.

It no longer has GM's high fixed costs to deal with, like having to pay for hundeds of thousands of pensions for retired workers. I'm sure that cost was divided evenly between every GM vehicle sold.

The whole left lower dash panel pulls off. My brother had a 2000 Impala, and I helped him install a new radio in it.