Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation84
ACBarnett & nadeplama : My post wasn't to denigrate Saab in any way and I hope that no one took it in that fashion.
|
Not at all my friend. You are just passionate about the GMC nameplate. No worries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation84
And as far as I can tell, the handwriting is already on the wall for Saturn: No Outlook replacement planned when the next Gen comes out, Insignia is not the new Aura, the current one will continue till.....?????, Sky discontinued and losing $10,000 a unit, Astra planned as a stop gap, imported at a loss for 2 years, then what ? That leaves the VUE as Saturn's only real volume product. And it has never outsold the ION, except perhaps in 07. The Aura has been a sales disappointment regardless how one wants to parse the #s between fleet and retail. So has the Astra. It's simply over for Saturn.
|
I would think so, but others on GMI - and GM - may diagree.
To me, it makes no sense to continue to blow more money on Saturn. After $18 Billion in investment since the 1980s and a small bump in sales, it just isn't worth it to me.
But GM will do what the corporate masters will do - and that doens't mean their decision will have to make a whole lot of sense. If they made sense, then Saturn never would have been created to begin with - those dollars could have gone to shore up the other domestic brands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation84
GM squandered the potential of Saturn and Saab. But if the S Series was the best GM could do with a clean sheet of paper and it's best and brightest with a brand new plant.... well that's pretty scary. The money would have been better spent on it's core brands in the first place. For all the energy and good intentions poured into the experiment, all that they could come up with once again was "competitive" in it's class for a couple of years. What was the bloody point ?
|
Absolutely. I would have loved to have seen how well the S-Series would have sold as a replacement for the Cavalier instead of soldiering on with the same platform for 23 years -- wouldn't you?
Imagine where that money could have gone!?!
Stupid strategy and even dumber planning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation84
You made a good case to keep Pontiac, but the G3 is a perfect example of what's going to kill it. They won't learn.
|
Well, if we stick to the "traditional" idea of what Pontiac is, it will not help the brand.
But if we look to a new definition of "performance" I think it can work.
Consider that that products like the Mazda3, Mini Cooper, Fiat 500 and others are both small and sporty. The Mazda3 is a compact that is fun to drive and handles well. Both are essential "performance" credentials. The Mini Cooper and Fiat 500 are each sub-compacts (or perhaps even "super minis") that are equally fun to drive and sporty for what they are. Yes, they wont be confused with a BMW 1-Series, but still handle well and will put a smile on your face. Again, could be defined as sporty or even performance oriented.
When it comes to the G3, Pontiac could have an opportunity to do the same. What if we got a G3 that was fun to drive, handled well, got a spunky turbo engine and was designed well? Yeah, does it jive with Pontiacs traditional version of performance - but it may do well to compliment what the modern interpretation of performance that more and more customers are embracing.
But again, that's just me.