HUMMER: The Best of GM’s Brands on the Cusp of Being Thrown Away

[derrado]

Granted, sales could be found if they invested in overseas markets. It's a matter of finding the money to invest in Hummer and even then, is there a guarantee that with rising oil prices throughout the world, Hummer can succeed?

Think of the markets where Hummer is sold.
Australia? For decades, the off-roader of choice has been the Toyota Landcruiser. They pretty much own the market, and to try and topple them would involve extensive investment in dealer networks and supply chains. Toyota is a massive presence, and you couldn't just knock them over in one day. Unless you go for a niche market (like they're doing now with the H3) and does that guarantee a return on the Hummer investment?

What about Japan? I highly, highly doubt that Hummer could become anything more than an amusing novelty there.

The UAE? Well, they'll buy anything big and trucky. It's almost as though they are the US, five years ago. They'll buy petrol Hummers just as much as they would diesel Hummers. Is the investment into a range of diesel Hummers then warranted for the strongest of the overseas Hummer markets? Would they buy a small H4?

I don't think the overseas outlook for Hummer is as promising as you think it is. And at the end of the day, the majority of Hummers are sold in the US. Sales are free-falling, GM has a perception problem, gas prices will never go back to those of the 'good old days'.

[dav305z]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

Baloney too. A trade doesn't always benefit both teams. The expectation is that it will benefit both teams, but it almost never always turns out that way.

Sure. That doesn't mean GM shouldn't be considering what to do with the brand.

When GM is dealing with an image problem? And when HUMMER has great appeal outside the US in markets that GM doesn't usually have success in?

Hummer is part of that image problem. And what is this "great appeal" you're talking about? Sure, the general manager of the brand said they're selling better. What is he supposed to say? "We're cooked"?

There is little evidence that Hummer has potential to really do well abroad, especially when you consider just how much most Europeans HATE SUV's. They've done well in S. Africa and the Middle East. Are these countries enough to support the brand even when it's tanking at home? And what guarantee is there that the novelty won't wear off abroad as it did here?

You can be reactive to the market. You need to get ahead.
GM, thus far, not only has been reactive, but they're slow to react.
By the time GM figures out what to do with HUMMER, the market will have progressed beyond their initial expectations. And once they sell HUMMER, they'll probably try to duplicate HUMMER within GMC or CHevy.
What you'll eventually end up with are a bunch of semi-offroadable rebadges. And of course a Denali version to replace the luxury HUMMERs.
Good job GM.


What they need to do is hold that line at HUMMER. Launch the H3T and the H4. Launch them with diesel systems.
What they need to do is learn how to manage a niche brand like a niche brand and keep their grubby corporate fingers out of the mechanics; otherwise, there is no hope for Saab or Cadillac.


I don't believe that. Land Rover sales remain quite high and are at record levels. Land Cruiser is also quite respected. There's certainly more room for HUMMER.

I think the crux of our difference of opinion here relates to how serious and permanent you thinkthe market is. I agree with you that GM often reacts to harshly to events, and chops product rather than improve it (Camaro and Bonneville come to mind).

But I just look at the numbers, look at GM's cash on hand, look at the direction the economy is going, and think GM needs to make some really tough decisions, and make them quickly. At the end of the day, I don't think Hummer is a mortally damaged brand, although it's not as strong as you think it is. Given the right product and marketing, it might succeed - hell you can sell anything if you try hard enough. But what's the point? And how much time can GM really afford nurturing a truck brand when people are growing more and more disenchanted with the vehicles. What's the point of it all?

At this point - and I'm not saying this to placate you - GM would be MUCH better off bolstering Saab. It's amazing when you think about how much more valuable its products and its engineering could be in the current market. It's the only brand in GM's entire portfolio with a real reputation for efficiency. My guess is that its long stay in the GM doghouse is over.

[ctsmo]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

I want GM to sell Saab because I'm quite tired of watching them **** around with it. They have no clue what to do with Saab.

totally agree. they are soo unsure of saab and just seem lost with the brand.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by dav305z

Hummer is part of that image problem. And what is this "great appeal" you're talking about? Sure, the general manager of the brand said they're selling better. What is he supposed to say? "We're cooked"?

There is little evidence that Hummer has potential to really do well abroad, especially when you consider just how much most Europeans HATE SUV's. They've done well in S. Africa and the Middle East. Are these countries enough to support the brand even when it's tanking at home? And what guarantee is there that the novelty won't wear off abroad as it did here?

Novelty? You continue to strengthen the brand and you establish a core buyer. You can't continue to sell an H2 forever and expect people to just come. HUMMER's a new brand. They're also quite a recognizable brand.
You're thinking like GM.
Just because the market says otherwise.... you react and hack away....

If GM did that for every single brand, they'd have to start from scratch at each model cycle. Oh wait... GM already ****ed that up with Cadillac!!!!!! Perhaps this is standard operating procedure at GM!!??

Originally Posted by dav305z

I think the crux of our difference of opinion here relates to how serious and permanent you thinkthe market is. I agree with you that GM often reacts to harshly to events, and chops product rather than improve it (Camaro and Bonneville come to mind).

What permanence? Apparently you believe people are going to go offroading in Priuses or something?

Hummer is a niche market. Highly off road capable.... mid-level luxury capable... Hummer can sell to that market quite effectively with the proper lineup. And you can still sell to the urban set, thought that might be diminished.

Originally Posted by dav305z

At this point - and I'm not saying this to placate you - GM would be MUCH better off bolstering Saab. It's amazing when you think about how much more valuable its products and its engineering could be in the current market. It's the only brand in GM's entire portfolio with a real reputation for efficiency. My guess is that its long stay in the GM doghouse is over.

Saab would be better off sold off from GM.
I think GM has ultimatley been quite detrimental to the brand. GM has failed to provide necessary product, and when the product has been provided it has been terribly late and ineffectual and quite generic as to dilute the style and presence of the Saab brand. Saab's ENTIRE lineup now is a joke. Anyone who buys a current Saab is a fool.

Saab would have been perfect 5 years ago. But you know what? GM didn't give a rats ass about Saab. In a world where a high output turbo would provide power and efficiency, GM no longer has that type of engine available. GM believed Saab would be better off with a V6. Saab was given a terrible Japanese rebadge. Saab was given a rehashed Bravada with sport suspension and a terrible set of antiquated engines and compromised safety features. Saab is a complete mess!!!

I also believe Cadillac would be better off broken off or spun off from GM.

At this point, I believe the entire GM hierarchy of product development up the line to the CEO just doesn't move fast enough, nor do they fully understand what a niche brand needs and requires to succeed.
Lutz is too old and quickly becoming irrelevant and out of touch with the market.

[jameskz28]

Originally Posted by MisterMe

If the Good Ole Days for you were the 1990s, then you are probably right. For those of us who were not born yesterday, you are wrong raised to a power.

Read a little Fisher Body history.

Again- you (and everyone else) it seems are basing your opinion on your own knowledge. Would consider yourself a "layperson" on this subject? I mean, you are posting me links to Fisher history for pete's sake.

Ask a LAYPERSON (someone off the street) what "Body by Fisher" means- without mentioning anything about cars or GM... they will probably guess that it's some workout video.

A large population of people can't even name the 50 states, much less the capitol of thier own state.

Only 69% know who the Vice President is:
http://people-press.org/report/319/p...on-revolutions

-63 percent cannot find Iraq or Saudi Arabia on a map, and 75 percent cannot point out Iran or Israel.
-Inside the United States, "half or fewer of young men and women 18-24 can identify the states of New York or Ohio on a map [50 percent and 43 percent, respectively]"
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/05...est/index.html

That's just what I could find in a couple minutes of looking. So you really think most people have even heard of Fisher? I beg to differ.

Commendably you give too much credit to the average American's knowledge, most people could care less about these things.

ASK PEOPLE OFF THE STREET.

[Saturn69]

Man, someone on here seriously needs a hummer, alright. The witchiness with a 'B' factor has increased 75% in the last 5 posts.

[TruckMan]

Originally Posted by jameskz28

A large population of people can't even name the 50 states, much less the capitol of thier own state.

Only 69% know who the Vice President is:
http://people-press.org/report/319/p...on-revolutions

-63 percent cannot find Iraq or Saudi Arabia on a map, and 75 percent cannot point out Iran or Israel.
-Inside the United States, "half or fewer of young men and women 18-24 can identify the states of New York or Ohio on a map [50 percent and 43 percent, respectively]"
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/05...est/index.html

That's just what I could find in a couple minutes of looking. So you really think most people have even heard of Fisher? I beg to differ.

Commendably you give too much credit to the average American's knowledge, most people could care less about these things.

ASK PEOPLE OFF THE STREET.

Those are some interesting statistics... and dav305z thinks everybody in the world knows that GM owns Hummer! RIGHT!

[dav305z]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

Novelty? You continue to strengthen the brand and you establish a core buyer. You can't continue to sell an H2 forever and expect people to just come. HUMMER's a new brand. They're also quite a recognizable brand.
You're thinking like GM.
Just because the market says otherwise.... you react and hack away....

If GM did that for every single brand, they'd have to start from scratch at each model cycle. Oh wait... GM already ****ed that up with Cadillac!!!!!! Perhaps this is standard operating procedure at GM!!??

Again, you have to look at the brand, and what you can realistically do with it. GM can start from scratch with Cadillac because it's a major brand that can sell vehicles in multiple segments. When trucks were the rage, Cadillac was able to sell lots of trucks. Now they can focus on cars and sell those too. If the crisis keeps going, they'll likely have n problem selling an even smaller 1 Series sized car (Alpha). Hummer is in one segment. That segment is on life support.

What permanence? Apparently you believe people are going to go offroading in Priuses or something?

Hummer is a niche market. Highly off road capable.... mid-level luxury capable... Hummer can sell to that market quite effectively with the proper lineup. And you can still sell to the urban set, thought that might be diminished.

Apparently you believe people are off-roading in their H2's and H3's? The niche of people who actually buy SUV's to go off-roading is tiny and getting smaller. The rest of the Hummer owning subset -wealthy city-dwellers and suburbanites - will find something else.

Saab would be better off sold off from GM.
I think GM has ultimatley been quite detrimental to the brand. GM has failed to provide necessary product, and when the product has been provided it has been terribly late and ineffectual and quite generic as to dilute the style and presence of the Saab brand. Saab's ENTIRE lineup now is a joke. Anyone who buys a current Saab is a fool.

Saab would have been perfect 5 years ago. But you know what? GM didn't give a rats ass about Saab. In a world where a high output turbo would provide power and efficiency, GM no longer has that type of engine available. GM believed Saab would be better off with a V6. Saab was given a terrible Japanese rebadge. Saab was given a rehashed Bravada with sport suspension and a terrible set of antiquated engines and compromised safety features. Saab is a complete mess!!!

I also believe Cadillac would be better off broken off or spun off from GM.

At this point, I believe the entire GM hierarchy of product development up the line to the CEO just doesn't move fast enough, nor do they fully understand what a niche brand needs and requires to succeed.
Lutz is too old and quickly becoming irrelevant and out of touch with the market.

I don't want to derail your thread by discussing this again (I believe we already have a five-pager addressing this one). But to be brief, you are right in calling out GM's gaffes with Saab. They didn't understand it. But there is also another factor: they didn't need it. Sure, they liked Saab's engineering prowess (I bet that's why they bought it), and were tempted by its global appeal, but really, Saab did not have much to offer them. What does a quirky maker of smallish 4-banger sedans do for GM when everyone is snapping up their oh-so-cheap-to-build SUV's?

They should have had foresight, and realized this wouldn't last, but when has GM really had foresight (certainly not when they promised to fund health care and retirement for all its employees after World War II)? And more honestly, could you or I or anyone else have really predicted what has happened in the past six months?

The point is that Saab employees are going to get a whole lot more respect when they walk around RenCen now. As I said before, there is one brand in GM's entire organization that has a reputation for fuel economy, and that's Saab. Products are already in the pipeline, and I bet they're getting a lot more interest and attention right now. Whether they're "Saabish" enough for Saabophiles is another question, but I'm willing to bet they will be damn good cars.

[TruckMan]

Originally Posted by dav305z

The point is that Saab employees are going to get a whole lot more respect when they walk around RenCen now. As I said before, there is one brand in GM's entire organization that has a reputation for fuel economy, and that's Saab. Products are already in the pipeline, and I bet they're getting a lot more interest and attention right now. Whether they're "Saabish" enough for Saabophiles is another question, but I'm willing to bet they will be damn good cars.

I'd have to disagree with this. When I think Saab, I think 3 things:
-Key in the center console
-Started by Swedish aircraft engineers
-Uses small turbos

I've never heard of Saab being described as fuel efficient. The 9-7x is surely not fuel efficient. I've always associated Saturn as the fuel efficient GM brand.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by dav305z

Again, you have to look at the brand, and what you can realistically do with it. GM can start from scratch with Cadillac because it's a major brand that can sell vehicles in multiple segments. When trucks were the rage, Cadillac was able to sell lots of trucks. Now they can focus on cars and sell those too. If the crisis keeps going, they'll likely have n problem selling an even smaller 1 Series sized car (Alpha). Hummer is in one segment. That segment is on life support.

Sorry, but I don't believe Cadillac can weather a reboot.... though GM is going to try. Every year Cadillac continues with this reboot is a year Cadillac falls further and further behind the curve -- and they were well behind already.

No. Hummer's segment is not on life support. Hummer's products are on life support. So the solution is to create product that better slot into its segment. You don't see Land Rover running for the hills, do you? You don't see Land Rover making wagons or cars? You don't see Jeep doing the same? (Though the creation of a non-trail rated Jeep is a fatal mistake.)
The solution isn't to dump the brand or "reimagine it." HOwever, if GM has the cockamamie idea of creating a Subaru-style wagon and an "H5" Lambda AWD crossover.... GM might as well kill it.

Originally Posted by dav305z

Apparently you believe people are off-roading in their H2's and H3's? The niche of people who actually buy SUV's to go off-roading is tiny and getting smaller. The rest of the Hummer owning subset -wealthy city-dwellers and suburbanites - will find something else.

No, it's not getting smaller. The niche is there. THe city dwellers will not find something else. If the image is there, they will still buy for the image. HUmmer just needs to change it up a bit. No one's going to buy a Hommer wagon for the sheer joy of fuel economy.

Originally Posted by dav305z

I don't want to derail your thread by discussing this again (I believe we already have a five-pager addressing this one). But to be brief, you are right in calling out GM's gaffes with Saab. They didn't understand it. But there is also another factor: they didn't need it.

No. GM needs Saab. Saab provided engineering that wasn't in house. It also provided an internationl footprint that wasn't at GM. But GM mismanaged Saab to death because GM's incompetency factor.

GM remains one of the most incompetently run American companies. And they move too slow in comparison to the market.
Most other car companies would have seen the strengths of Saab long ago.

Originally Posted by dav305z

And more honestly, could you or I or anyone else have really predicted what has happened in the past six months?

In terms of the market collapse? Yes. Flag were going up for a year prior.

Originally Posted by dav305z

As I said before, there is one brand in GM's entire organization that has a reputation for fuel economy, and that's Saab.

Reputation and actuality no longer match.
BioPower was supposed to have been in the US in 2005 too.
THe market really could give a rats ass about Saab at this point, and there are Saab owners such as myself who echo that.

Saab might have had a green aura, but the addition of a V6 and the clunky V8's closed the door on that era. Saab innovation went out the door in favor of becoming a corporate lemming. And Saab followed.... right over a cliff like a good little lemming.

Because, at this point in time, no matter what GM does to Saab... it is far too little and far too late.
Lutz spouted off 4-5 years about how his wife and daughter drove Saabs. Well, the product Lutz managed to put out in that time was a complete disgrace. 9-2 was abominable. 9-3 SportCombi was 3 years too late. 9-5 is went from 5-series competitor to a laughing stock. 9-7 is the answer to a question no one asked. And now the 9-3 is a complete design disaster area.

People are fools for buying anything Saab makes.

[nota]

"sales in the Asia and Pacific region shot up 345 percent as right-hand-drive versions arrived in Japan and Australia"

345 percent improvement puts out an impressive spin .. based on how many previous sales?

"Hummer H1 1996 Four Wheel Drive White, dual cab 6.5ltr 4sp automatic, 19000kms, One of about 20 original Hummers (H1’s) in Australia"

Local sales of H2 would be similarly miniscule

Originally Posted by dav305z

Hummer sells one kind of vehicle: a truck. A body on frame, squared off truck that looks like the HumVee currently in use by the U.S. army. People loved this kind of car when gas was $1.80 and the post-9/11 spirit had many people looking for the militaristic security offered by Hummers. It was a phenomenon, and GM rode it perfectly. The H2 was arguably the best vehicle GM produced at the time it came out.

But the times have changed. People don't want the type of vehicle that Hummer epitomizes. Everything that made Hummer valuable five years ago is now a detriment. Time to move on.

Glad to see someone has the nads to confront this aspect of the Hummer brand which, like it or not, is indelibly linked to US militarism abroad.

Undeniably the Hummer entity or 'badge personna' has evolved from and become permanently defined by conflict; first that dubious Gulf War and now continues on (and on) through this enduring fiasco in Iraq - a deeply unpopular and disaffecting international calamity which imho relatively few 'non Americans' would wish to so publicly celebrate or even associate with, via the purchase of such an overt political statement/rolling billboard as Hummer....

[nota]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

You don't see Land Rover running for the hills, do you? You don't see Land Rover making wagons or cars? You don't see Jeep doing the same? (Though the creation of a non-trail rated Jeep is a fatal mistake.)
The solution isn't to dump the brand or "reimagine it." HOwever, if GM has the cockamamie idea of creating a Subaru-style wagon and an "H5" Lambda AWD crossover.... GM might as well kill it.

I wouldn't describe Land Rover Freelander (LR2) as 'trail rated' yet isn't it their best selling model?

[jameskz28]

Originally Posted by nota

a deeply unpopular and disaffecting international calamity which imho relatively few 'non Americans' would wish to so publicly celebrate or even associate with, via the purchase of such an overt political statement/rolling billboard as Hummer....

How ironic then, that while sales of Hummer are down over 20% in 'America', they are conversely up over 20% in every 'non American' country the vehicle is sold in. Speaking of spin- seems sales figures and your opinion don't match up.

The Hummer is as much a status symbol now in every other part of the world as it was in the U.S. before the greenies and gas prices unpopularized it here.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by nota

I wouldn't describe Land Rover Freelander (LR2) as 'trail rated' yet isn't it their best selling model?

The LR2 has not Hummer equivalent, yet it also has all the features of a typical Land Rover, including steep approach/departure angles and hill descent control and terrain response systems.

[nota]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

The LR2 has not Hummer equivalent, yet it also has all the features of a typical Land Rover, including steep approach/departure angles and hill descent control and terrain response systems.

Freelander has some of the gizmos but few of the traditional L/R features, like an alloy body, dual-range transmission or h/d chassis etc etc

But you do get a dinky little set of wheels to go with not much ground clearance (see LR2 pic)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover_Freelander