Quote:
Originally Posted by mgescuro
Plus the investment in GMC is really minimal as it’s all rebadged anyways.
|
Exactly. GM's costs for GMC are mostly in advertising. But what would be GM's loss if GMC went away? You would have a lot of Buick and Pontiac dealers losing 1/3 to 1/4 of their volume. How many of them could survive that? What do you propose to replace it with?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgescuro
With the advent of $4 gas and in some regions of the US, $5 gas, what use is a brand that is All Truck and All SUV and All Rebadge? The answer is, “None.” It is completely useless.
|
It's not useless if it brings in more money than it costs. Anyone here got those figures? It's also useful in providing more sales and distribution points for GM manufactured trucks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgescuro
Establish a Hybrid “Collection.” All the same vehicles in Hybrid format. Create a “Sub Brand” similar to Denali. Let’s dub it the “Cascade Line,” in deference to the Denali Line. (e.g. Silverado Cascade)
|
Not a bad idea, but a terrible name. Cascade? You want to use a name of one of America's best selling dishwashing detergents that has been around for decades on a line of trucks that are supposed to be "Professional Grade"? Trust me. More people in the US think dishes than mountains when they hear that name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgescuro
With the expansion of Chevy Trucks in my scenario, one Chevy dealership, but the trucks should be sold separately from the Chevy cars. There should be 2 separate buildings. One for trucks; one for cars. But one dealership. Simple.
|
Nope, too cost prohibitive. Besides, it was just a few years ago that Chevrolet was complaining because people perceived them having a good image as far as trucks, but not their cars (remember "Like a Rock"?) If you want one image to rub off on the other, don't separate the two.