|
Re: Pontiac Needs to Close
Really, Marc, I hope you've had a bad day...
1. You can shove everything into Chevrolet, but there are still people who might not like your "all kinds of everything" brand. Look at Toyota - an entirely new generation grows up fed up with their omnipresence and middle-of-the-road blandness.
Miss Shebrah Lay might turn around and start building really good cars, but those would be the cars in the mold of Malibu - VERY sensible choices, but somehow not bought on a heartbeat, but on very good consideration. Think of it as of VW in Europe - only that Chevrolet has to downprice the market, and will have to do so for quite some time.
2. Even with the current lamey-o lineup, Pontiac has consistently posted more conversion sales, younger average customer age, more women and other "minority/segment" customer shares than GM corporate average in North America.
3. While Chevrolet has a global presence, it's a GM DAT presence. And it's not a bad thing, but you won't convince people they should shell out big bucks and pay premium for "specialty" vehicles from a brand that offers you Aveos. An Aveo SS? Please...
4. The VE is the best product GM had in many years/decades, and while it is blowing against the monumentally stupid CAFE in the US, it's got all it takes to make it on a global scene. And I don't think it fits in the Opel lineup - for Chevrolet, see above.
5. Pontiac has a lot of brand recognition in both North America and beyond - that's equity one cannot ignore.
6. In North America, the brand is already thinned, streamlined and prepared to work in combined showrooms -> little overhead.
7. GM will need to come up with much better, enjoyable small cars, which do not necessairly have the utilitarian Chevrolet/Toyota feel. I believe Pontiac is the perfect brand for this. Why not Saturn? Check out all the "why I won't buy a Saturn" threads.
Really, no GM brand should go - they should start by reorganizing the company and trimming actual fat and costs behind the front line. The actual Pontiac badge is not responsible for any of those - low-quality human resources and organisation are.
|