Straightline

Unfortunately, I do agree. As much as I'd like to see a good Saab lineup, its latest offerings and plans for the future seem as lame duck as ever. And the statements De Lorenzo makes about Buick also make a good deal of sense, but it would be a shame to lose that nameplate from the American automotive scene...or would it? Really the only good car it has currently is the Enclave,and that's not enough to justify a brand. Saturn...meh, they've been irrelevent. The only thing they do these days is import Opels anyhow. Pontiac's absence worries me though. My "dream Pontiac" was always a division devoted solely to rear drive and performance: no plebian models at all. Case in point, there doesn't need to be a G8 with a v6. There should be the GT and the forthcoming GXP. That's how every model sold by Pontiac should be; hot and hotter, and only rear wheel drive. If they only focussed on those two factors, they could be the world's first "affordable" sporty brand, buoyed by the successes of a leaner, meaner GM. Stripper interiors should be an option, with weight kept at a medium. It's possible to do this, but it's not likely. Still, the alure of a small, rear wheel drive car you can afford that isn't a 6-year-old 3 series would be a welcome change.

His thinking's great and I understand why he wants to get rid of Saturn. It makes sense. But I believe there's a place for Saturn out there as a boutique manufacturer. The Astra/Sky/Vue lineup would not fit well into Chevrolet's mission statement; furthermore, those buyers probably wouldn't buy a Chevrolet. If GM keeps this whole import from Europe thing going for Saturn, then they could have the double benefit of attracting VW/Mazda/Volvo/off-brand kind of people while keeping European factories churning out cars. Remember, those factories are EXPENSIVE to keep open, nevermind run.

"The Astra/Sky/Vue lineup would not fit well into Chevrolet's mission statement"
 
Maybe the mission statement should change.

I would keep Pontiac and Saturn, but definitely kill Buick and sell or kill Saab. GMC is pretty redundant, but they look better than the Chevys!

This seems to be conventional wisdom, but we should consider what happened in the past.
 
When Plymouth was eliminated, for instance, minivan sales took a huge hit even though Chrysler still offered a Voyager.
 
So they can save money, sure, but it will definitely come at the expense of some sales.
 
This strategy will work if and only if GM actually plans to become a smaller automaker, leaner and meaner. And profitable.
 
Big if.

Well if we're talking ideal worlds here, then you can keep the brands but just focus on each mission statement and niche to avoid overlap. Although Consumer Reports and the government insist otherwise, there are still people who like affordable performance cars, and if Pontiac was the division to focus on that while the other mainstream brands focused on fuel economy we could have our performance cars and meet CAFE as well. If dealership channel consolidations continue at a good pace, I prefer GM's stated plan, with the modification of killing GMC and Saturn, and selling Saab. Position Chevy as the volume seller, the Buick/Pontiac channel as mid-range upscale with emphasis on comfort and sophistication (Buick) and performance (Pontiac). Then of course the Cadillac and Hummer channel competes in the full luxury line. Chevy is definitely broad enough to cover the bottom level by itself, and the two brands at each of the other levels are broad enough combined as well. You could even make the argument for keeping GMC so long as it focused on providing trucks and SUVs at the mid-range level, which it currently does pretty well.

I see a few people here justifying keeping brands on for various reasoning, but honestly, GM would be better with two or three brands, and bickering about what to keep is trivial. Every major car manufacturer in the world has a two tiered strategy except Toyota with their failing Scion brand (Honda/Acura, Vw/Audi, Nissan/Infiniti....) why on earth does GM need seven? These other brands' advertising is more focused, and product development significantly faster and cheaper because of less redundancy, and they need fewer dealers to service the same customer base. They aren't selling toothpaste. Having more on the shelf just makes for confused buyers, who already know what a Camry is but don't know the differences between the G6, Aura and Malibu, and aren't willing to drive around town to find out.
 
Torrent, Sky, Equinox, and now GMC Terrain, all the money spent to badge engineer that car to each brand would have been better spent making one model competitive. That's the real problem here.

Completly agree and I think I wrote plenty about this subject. Also, there was some inside news that GM is going to put some brands on the chopping block or consolidation in the future. GMC is redundant when you have Chevy. Buick and Pontiac have no future. You have Cadillac and Chevy that can take care of all those three brands (GMC, Buick & Pontiac). Saab for sale! Saturn you can keep it with imports from Australia and Germany. Hummer? The price of gas will put it to rest.

While I agree that trimming GM's brands is a very good thing, I'm hesitant to trim it to only two or three brands. I side with bepperb on the fact that GM has dug itself a massive hole by cloning every vehicle they design and badging it under every brand they own. That IS the real problem. But that problem can be remedied by focusing each line towards a different consumer (as stovt001 pointed out).
 
It'd be a complete shame to spend untold millions of dollars to kill off four or five brands when they could be used to reach a broader range of customers. GM has the capacity to do it; they're just not utilizing those resources like they should.
 
IMO, Chevy and Cadillac should be the staple of the company (as they are now). Chevy needs to emphasize itself as an every-man's-car (more than it is) and continue to progress in the areas of fuel economy and affordability. Cadillac needs to just keep on doing what they're doing.
 
Bbechtel16 is right that GMC's look better than Chevy's, but those trucks could either be all consolidated under the Chevy badge or GMC could move into exclusively commercial vehicles (as was rumored awhile back).
 
Saturn is the perfect import brand from the European market, but they have to stay cheap.
 
Pontiac has the best opportunity to finally position itself as THE quintessential performance brand. It's beating a dead horse, but it's true.
 
Those are the only five brands (four if you want to exclude GMC if they moved commercial-only) that GM needs. They would each be targeting a very different demographic and I think they'd each be very successful at doing so. But they NEED to each develop very different vehicles from one another. No more Aura/Malibu cloning. Make them each unique.
 
Saab can be sold. With Saturn as the import brand with the Euro flare, there's no need for a quirky European company in GM.
 
Hummer (as Kirk Kerkorian always said) does nothing for GM because it doesn't get consumers to buy other GM products. That along with rising fuel prices is enough to justify killing it.
 
Buick... well, we all know Buick is a redundant marquee and it should've been taken out back and shot when they did the same to Oldsmobile. They wanna keep it around? Then only offer it in China.
 
My two cents...

Given the current economic situation and the loss of competitiveness of the US automakers, I suspect that GM will end up with Cheverolet and Cadillac brands as the only surviviors. Buick sells well in China but for how long? For a good laugh, and plenty of mixed metaphors, check out the following story in the Chinese press: http://en.ce.cn/Insight/200804/08/t20080408_15082909.shtml

That guy is an idiot if he thinks GM should keep Hummer and kill Saturn. Let's see, $5.00 gallon gas...do I want an Astra or a H2? Hmmmm...
 
Also, I found a post in a recent forum discussion by someone looking for a new small SUV which went like this: "I'm looking for a cute ute, and here's what I'm considering: Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, Saturn Vue, and Nissan Rouge. But I don't want to consider any domestic cars!" So there you have it, another reason Saturn needs to stay.
 
As for Buick and Pontiac, I'm neutral. GMC should be killed. It is redundant and keeps Chevrolet from winning the "best selling truck" title over the F-150. I like Saab, but I'm not sure where they fit in.

I see a place for for Pontiac-Buick-GMC, Chevrolet, Cadillac and Saturn. No place for Saab at the GM dinner table.
 
Pontiac = performance and more agressive styling.
Saturn = imports or very import influenced.
Cadillac = luxury performance
Buick = entry refinement and luxury. Not as performance oriented as Cadillac, lower cost than Cadillac and narrower market niche. The Enclave is an example of the future of Buick IMHO.
GMC- It duplicates Chevy trucks, fine with me. Want to make it unique, then eliminate Hummer and market "rugged" as GMC or sub-brand of GMC much as AMG is to Mercedes or SRT is to Chrysler.
 
Oldsmobile closing was handled poorly IMO. Resulted in lost market share for GM, very high cost to settle with the dealerships. There was no easy way to eliminate Olds with current franchise laws.

I have to say I agree for the most part, but have a few quibbles. I do agree with him that GM needs to lose some brands (as much as it pains me to say). However, which brands to keep and lose that is where I lightly differ.
 
Keep: Chevy, Cadillac, Pontiac, (possibly HUMMER and Saab)
 
Kill: Buick (only in US), GMC, Saturn
 
Sell: Possibly SAAB and Hummer
 
I would keep Pontiac only if they actually become the Performance Division that they claim to be. This lineup would include RWD Large Sedan, RWD Small Sedan, RWD Roadster and Coupe. Without RWD the brand does not have purpose as it would sell the same vehicles as Chevy. Basically Poncho would be budget Bimmer.
 
Buick doesn't have a purpose. With Cadillac wanting to move downmarket from the CTS, it will be playing squarely in Buick's supposed price point. If people want a semi-luxury they could either go to SAAB or Chevy and Cadillac.
 
I agree with keeping Hummer because of the H4, because there will continue to be a market for off road vehicles, but it will be a niche brand like Land Rover. I however, wouldn't be 100% opposed to selling the brand like SAAB (which pains me to say because I really think it is a neat brand). But with Buick out of the way, SAAB could be able to seal itself as a stepping stool between Chevy and Cadillac Sedans.
 
GMC doesn't have one single unique product, no need for them! Saturn revitilization (although they have good product now) hasn't resonanted with the public who still don't have a clue that the brand no longer sells crappy cars.
 
One thing is for sure, GM must realize this is no longer the 1950's and 60's. They no longer control 50% of the market and will be lucky to hold on to 20%. They're killing themselves because their is not enough milk to go around to all the children, slowly killing all brands.

If you really think about it, he's right. That's how Toyota does it (Honda too, but with less succes on the Acura end). But I feel Pontiac could be factored in, as they could have a chance at making it, and who needs an Impala SS when you can have a BM-er-G8. And why Hummer? I understand it's kind of an exotic, but gas is skyroketing, and Hummers sales drop in the same increments.

Chevy: Bread n' butter
 
Pontiac: RWD performance
 
Cadillac: Luxury performance
 
Saturn: Direct import fighter, but positioned higher than Chevy. Maybe similar to VW in execution but not upscale enough to step on Cadillacs toes.
 
Hummer: Axe!
 
Buick: I hate to say it but.....axe. I just dont see where a whole line of Buicks can fit in GM's portfolio.
 
Saab: If Saab could somehow return to its roots and become successful I could justify the brands existence.
 
GMC: Ive really never seen the point.

I would do the following if I was in charge of GM.
  
1. Merge Buick and Pontiac under GMC. G5, G6 and G8 would be only sport models as the LaCrosse,Lucerne(with name changes)and Enclave as entry level luxury models Acadia would be discontinued.
  
2. Keep Saturn as an Opel rebadged division
  
3. Sell SAAB
  
4. Sell HUMMER

GM should start building true world cars! their cost structure is so high becaus they build too many different cars... and not selling enough to male it work...
 
small cars designed in eruope/US/asia... sold as opel/vauxhall/saturn, bigger cars sold as chevrolet and pontiac, the move in europe to sell small cars under the chevrolet name is just plain stupid... but since opel is selling those cars for GM they have no cars to offer in europe besides the HHR...
 
luxury cars under the cadillac nameplate, with gasoline/diesel and hybrids... and they have to start selling the same engines worldwide, ASAP...
 
as for SAAB, it has huge potential, but not with the strategy that GM is applying the last years since they bought saab... saab used to be on the same level as bmw and mercedes, not anymore! opel underpinnings are not on the same level as the german luxury barands... SAAB need to be on the same level as cadillac, or higher!
 
and hummer should build trucks, not vehicles that have one of the worst carbon footprint on the planet...
 
a hummer should be a good affordable truck that can haul and be configured for work...
 
i doubt hummer is making any money for GM!!!
 
and i'm amazed that ford/GM have not countered the mercedes effort into the workhorse big work van category... mercedes is hugely successful with their sprinter in the US...
 
on the other side the US banrds don't sell/offer their huge work pickup offerings in europe nor africa nor asia...
 
a good truck with a good diesel sells everywhere...
 
they left that market to the eurpeans completly... and those are not more durable or anything... and much more ugly!!!
 
i love those huge trucks that for example power companies use for line maintenance... if you look at the europeans they're even bigger and look worse and cost much more than the US brands... a good euro truck that does that job costs like double... especially with the dollar this low right now...
 
but the US brands wuld have to build dealer/maintenance infrastructure...

I have an alternate solution for Saab. Why not turn Saab into a Subaru/Jeep fighter? Saab has a rich and successful rally background and has actually worked with Subaru before on product development. The drivetrains could easily be used for serious offroad CUVs/SUVs.
 
Hummer: Trash it and give the H4 platform to Saab (see above). Hummer might be profitable this week, but wait until gas hits $5.
 
Between Buick, Pontiac, and Saturn, one of these needs to produce Euro-/Australian-styled cars. If Saturn is dropped, get Opel over here. Just because a few Saturn SUV/CUVs aren't selling doesn't mean you need to drop the entire brand.

For those who don't think Buick has a purpose I ask you, do BMW and Mercedes have the same purpose, do MINI and BMW have different purpose, do Acura and Honda have the same purpose, do Lexus and Infiniti have the same purpose?
 
There is more than one segment of the luxury/premium market and Cadillac can not serve all segments of the luxury/premium market by itself for GM.

I would say many of the things others have said.
Chevy- only sell sub-compact, compact, and mid-size sedans
 
GMC- Just trucks, real SUVS, and a crossover (Acadia?)
 
Buick-near luxury mid-size sedans and crossovers
 
Pontiac- RWD SPORTY (w/ quality, not plastic) cars and crossovers. I've always thought Pontiac styling was better than Chevy any day.
 
Saturn- Keep selling european imports, but market as more bread and butter with class, not stepping on Buick. ala VW. They can take much of Chevy's market
 
Saab- sell off but only to a buyer that will return it to its Swedish heritage
 
Hummer-only time will tell either gas prices will suffocate it or it will stay as a niche offroading brand
 
To be honest I love GM and have grown up with GM Factory workers, but I HATE Chevy, they're always ugly styling and just steal everything from all the other brands (ex Traverse?!, SS models, all the trucks)