The USA Today newspaper has a lengthy article today on the front page of its financial section entitled "GM's generous incentives fail to rev sales in the US". Gm's share of market of new car sales has dropped to all time low of 25.1%. In the late 1970's GM's SOM was nearly 50%. In 1992 it was 33.9%. GM's chief executive Rick Waggoner states, "North America, simply put, is our 800 lb. gorilla". Industry avg. for decrease in sales over previous yr. is 3.6%, GM's is 9.9%. Bob Lutz, who came over to GM in 2001 to lead product development, made this statement, "General Motors cars were never bad, and the styling was never bad. They were just a bit lackluster in DETAIL FINISH, PRECISION OF SHEET METAL EXECUTION, INTERIORS, AND SO FORTH". Gosh Bob, do you think GM customers expect and pay for a quality built vehicle and won't settle for lackluster built products? One of the people on this site, Boosted, has a new SSR a couple months old, and is seeking relief under the Lemon Law for the numerous problems he's experiencing. Marc, a couple months back you and I entertained the thought of GM offering an extended warranty to 2003 and 2004 SSR owners that had been fighting problems that were common on the early SSR's. I think you even submitted it as a suggestion through your position as a GM employee. Have you heard any feedback on the potential of GM giving relief to SSR owners via an extended warranty type program? Mr. Lutz seems to be aware of the quality problems at GM and maybe this awareness will help in our requesting some type of assistance from GM in solving those problems. I certainly hope so. One thing GM doesn't need is more disgruntled customers. The SOM numbers speak for themselves.
GM Share of Market Drops to 25.1%.
-
Submissions now being accepted for AUGUST SSR OF THE MONTH
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
share price
GM share price closed today at $28.30; I think I read that this level has not been seen since early nineties. The company had drastically reduced projected profit earnings for 2005.
GM has been doing all they can(new products,incentives,better quality etc) to hold market share, but to no avail. Erosion still continues.
GM share price closed today at $28.30; I think I read that this level has not been seen since early nineties. The company had drastically reduced projected profit earnings for 2005.
GM has been doing all they can(new products,incentives,better quality etc) to hold market share, but to no avail. Erosion still continues.
Products Just Not Attractive
I think the problem is that most of their products are just too lack-luster. They just don't have an exciting product like the 300C. Why don't the SSR's fly out of the dealers? Lack of advertizement? Maybe, beforeI went to the autoshow I'd forgotten about the SSR. However, I did know about the 350Z and 300C. Lack of interest? Definitely not. Look on Ebay. Many of the vehicles have bids. Also look at the public reaction when we drive the vehicles. There is no lack of interest. Overpriced? Not the 03's and 04's. You can get one for a very reasonable price. Quality? Maybe, but when you check the Web and look at the SSR. It's quality is not rated bad. We have our problems, but most of them annoying with few being worthy of a recall.
I think that it is that the vehicles are lack-luster. Sure the Vette is great, but not priced for mass buying. The Cadillac's have been greatly re-designed and look fantastic ( I would own one), but they just don't have that "Must Have" quality (like the PT Cruiser, 350Z, 300C's, and 05 Mustang). Unfortunately, I think that most of the vehicles look ordinary.
Also, the SSR is not for everybody. Even if people gather around an SSR and think what a fantastic vehicle it is. If they can't afford one they are not going to say, "oh well, I think I will buy the Malibu". Now speaking specifically about Chevy I do not think that the SSR along can carry Chevy.
They need a series of vehicles that people think are affordable, and appeal to the masses. How many of GM's cars or Chevy's have been Motor Trend's car of the year in recent years? Chevy needs to get with it and take the styling gloves off.
Just my opinion (as if it would be anyone else's opinion)
:seeya E :seeya E
I think the problem is that most of their products are just too lack-luster. They just don't have an exciting product like the 300C. Why don't the SSR's fly out of the dealers? Lack of advertizement? Maybe, beforeI went to the autoshow I'd forgotten about the SSR. However, I did know about the 350Z and 300C. Lack of interest? Definitely not. Look on Ebay. Many of the vehicles have bids. Also look at the public reaction when we drive the vehicles. There is no lack of interest. Overpriced? Not the 03's and 04's. You can get one for a very reasonable price. Quality? Maybe, but when you check the Web and look at the SSR. It's quality is not rated bad. We have our problems, but most of them annoying with few being worthy of a recall.
I think that it is that the vehicles are lack-luster. Sure the Vette is great, but not priced for mass buying. The Cadillac's have been greatly re-designed and look fantastic ( I would own one), but they just don't have that "Must Have" quality (like the PT Cruiser, 350Z, 300C's, and 05 Mustang). Unfortunately, I think that most of the vehicles look ordinary.
Also, the SSR is not for everybody. Even if people gather around an SSR and think what a fantastic vehicle it is. If they can't afford one they are not going to say, "oh well, I think I will buy the Malibu". Now speaking specifically about Chevy I do not think that the SSR along can carry Chevy.
They need a series of vehicles that people think are affordable, and appeal to the masses. How many of GM's cars or Chevy's have been Motor Trend's car of the year in recent years? Chevy needs to get with it and take the styling gloves off.
Just my opinion (as if it would be anyone else's opinion)
:seeya E :seeya E
Levi Phenomena ???
For decades Levi Strauss dominated the jean market. I n the early nineties they were about 75% if I recall.They would be lucky to have half that now. Levi operated with arrogancy in dealing with retailers because of their dominance in the market place. But they are no longer "apple pie" with young people over the past 15 years. Other brands and private labels have made enormous progress. Example, the GAP stores no longer need Levi and do their own label at much better margins. Maybe, there are still diehard Levi fans my age (not me though), but they are fading in numbers.
Just musing here, but, I can't help but think there are some (GM)similarities ;particuliarly, that the younger crowd does not have the same loyalties as the older generation; or, they have placed those else where. It is no longer a cradle to the grave loyalty. But, having said that , what about beer, wine etc
Thanks for letting me ramble.......MHO
For decades Levi Strauss dominated the jean market. I n the early nineties they were about 75% if I recall.They would be lucky to have half that now. Levi operated with arrogancy in dealing with retailers because of their dominance in the market place. But they are no longer "apple pie" with young people over the past 15 years. Other brands and private labels have made enormous progress. Example, the GAP stores no longer need Levi and do their own label at much better margins. Maybe, there are still diehard Levi fans my age (not me though), but they are fading in numbers.
Just musing here, but, I can't help but think there are some (GM)similarities ;particuliarly, that the younger crowd does not have the same loyalties as the older generation; or, they have placed those else where. It is no longer a cradle to the grave loyalty. But, having said that , what about beer, wine etc
Thanks for letting me ramble.......MHO
Joined
·
96 Posts
With energy prices high and going higher, GM better start building some hybrids & high efficiency diesels. Instead they keep trying to sell Yukons, Hummers and Tahoes.
Joined
·
705 Posts
I bought GM at 38 in Jan 05 to keep for a few months to sell for a short profit. Last week I sold it with a loss at 34, enough was enough. Took my 10% loss and a yelling from my wife and went on. When it dropped a few days ago, I was quite happy I sold.
Do you guys think this may force GM to discontinue SSR?
Do you guys think this may force GM to discontinue SSR?
Joined
·
6,471 Posts
I guess anything is possible, but the SSR brings a lot of traffic into the showroom's as stated on another post. My own opinion is that GM has other issues that are more of a concern to the bussiness then to stop making the SSR!
Scott 0168 :banghead
Scott 0168 :banghead
Yes Red, you and I have had some active discussions and I really enjoyed them. I will try to answer your question here... yes I did get some feed back and the answer I got at that time was there wasn't a huge desire to increase warranty coverage’s to i.e. 5/60. However since then I have seen more and more TV ads where GM has started to offer longer warranties but not enough of them in my opinion. I feel that the Big Three's buying market as a whole is suffering. There are way too many car manufactures flooding their products in the US markets and most of them have great products and they will continue to do so.RedTn.SSR said:
There always has been urgency within GM to refresh their product lines especially in today's highly competitive marketplace. I believe GM will have to continue to realign its pricing strategies and continue to lower costs even more on many of their models. I know GM will continue with their mission for "superior" quality products and will keep introducing great designs or as the General would say the "Got-To-Have" products.
However, will it be quick enough to help regain market share?. ... just my 2 cents
Ramblings on sales
Here's my take, for what little it is worth.
The manufacturers need to set a more realistic price in the first place. Why set a too high price, then offer rebates, discounts and low interest to get the cars sold. Why not just sell at the right price in the first place?
It's called MARKETING.
There is no such thing as a car sale! The price you pay "on sale" is a price you could get any day of the week, if you negotiate right.
Last, they have sold a new car to everyone who needs one in the last few years with all the rebates and discounts and low interest. Cars last longer, look better than ever before. In a twisted sort of way, they are "quality-ing" themselves out of sales! Trade-in values are down, because of the incentives to buy new. What's the incentive to trade? NONE.
And they can't figure out why cars are not selling? Duh!!
I'll never forget when my dad bought me a 56 Chev Bel Aire 2 door post in 1969. It had 39K miles. It was worn out at 69K miles. Nowdays cars can reasonably expect to live for 150k to 300K with proper care. Paint jobs stay shiney, engines don't need even a tune-up, styles don't change that much. So, in order to get people to buy, there has to be some hook. The best hook is style. All those Billy Goats (I mean Dodge) trucks that are driving around setting the standard for everyone else to copy, is a perfect example. The SSR is another example of STYLE and shows that GM has what it takes, but the top brass has to allow the style guys to make the kind of stylish cars that will make people want to trade. I'd bet that most people don't trade because their car is worn out, but because they want something newer and better, prettier and flashier.
FWIW
Joe
Here's my take, for what little it is worth.
The manufacturers need to set a more realistic price in the first place. Why set a too high price, then offer rebates, discounts and low interest to get the cars sold. Why not just sell at the right price in the first place?
It's called MARKETING.
There is no such thing as a car sale! The price you pay "on sale" is a price you could get any day of the week, if you negotiate right.
Last, they have sold a new car to everyone who needs one in the last few years with all the rebates and discounts and low interest. Cars last longer, look better than ever before. In a twisted sort of way, they are "quality-ing" themselves out of sales! Trade-in values are down, because of the incentives to buy new. What's the incentive to trade? NONE.
And they can't figure out why cars are not selling? Duh!!
I'll never forget when my dad bought me a 56 Chev Bel Aire 2 door post in 1969. It had 39K miles. It was worn out at 69K miles. Nowdays cars can reasonably expect to live for 150k to 300K with proper care. Paint jobs stay shiney, engines don't need even a tune-up, styles don't change that much. So, in order to get people to buy, there has to be some hook. The best hook is style. All those Billy Goats (I mean Dodge) trucks that are driving around setting the standard for everyone else to copy, is a perfect example. The SSR is another example of STYLE and shows that GM has what it takes, but the top brass has to allow the style guys to make the kind of stylish cars that will make people want to trade. I'd bet that most people don't trade because their car is worn out, but because they want something newer and better, prettier and flashier.
FWIW
Joe
I have to agree to. I have been a GMgr at a Chevrolet dealership for 20 years and I must say we have great products for the most part on the reliability side, that said GM has made a habbit of following trinds instead of making them for years, and having their head up their A-- in the marketing field. For example- Pt Cruisers have been out for 4-5 years, now we get the HHR-Duh that fad has gone. There is a big trend starting to build with all wheel drive in cars, Ford 500, Dodge 300 & Magnum etc. we don't even have one to beseen in the near future- maybe in 4-5 years. We have great trucks, but they changed the front end to look like a PO'd cat, and we have a bad selection of colors with tu-tone paints done away with all together. Not everyone is a fan of tu-tones but it does help to make some variations. I had a delivery company drop off a frame here the other day with a 2002 2500hd 6.0 engine with 426,000 plus miles on the odo and had had no engine work done. That proves we have a tough product, just poor marketing to get it to the people
Joined
·
10,950 Posts
warranties
I am very puzzled by the fact that GM is giving us 3yr/36k warranties when EVERYONE else is giving better ones. And the cheapest cars get the 10yr/100k? How can this be?
What GM is saying to me is buy a GM product and maybe it will work for 5 years, but buy someone else's product and you'll have it for 12. The only reason 4 out of 5 of my cars have been Chevys is that I liked the Camaro (owned 3) and I really like the SSR. (So then I guess it is the styling that got me to buy GM )
I was very on the fence about getting one of the first SSRs because of the warranty and the fact that first year models ALWAYS have problems, but since I was able to purchase a 100k warranty for a little over $1600, it doesn't matter now.
I am very puzzled by the fact that GM is giving us 3yr/36k warranties when EVERYONE else is giving better ones. And the cheapest cars get the 10yr/100k? How can this be?
What GM is saying to me is buy a GM product and maybe it will work for 5 years, but buy someone else's product and you'll have it for 12. The only reason 4 out of 5 of my cars have been Chevys is that I liked the Camaro (owned 3) and I really like the SSR. (So then I guess it is the styling that got me to buy GM )
I was very on the fence about getting one of the first SSRs because of the warranty and the fact that first year models ALWAYS have problems, but since I was able to purchase a 100k warranty for a little over $1600, it doesn't matter now.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Join the discussion
