February 2008 Sales: GM (down 13%)

[VCDJ]

Originally Posted by GMC-70

Keep saying blah blah all you want but, each month i am proven to be correct. Last mont i told you silverado sales will go down alot not because of slow down in truck sales but because it is ugly and it uses four speed. and everybody here was saying looks are subjectiv. nobody cares that it uses four speed consumers do not know difference between 6 and 4 speed. well they all have internet and they all find out. Silverado had 6k rebate and still down almost 30% while old ford f15o about same rebate only down 6%. Pick up truck market did not decline by 30%. and maybe you should ask your self why tundra is up 43% again? Maybe you should ask your self why silverado is down almost 30% That tells you everything. and tundra is up again. keeps sayin blah blah all you want but until you people wake up. we will keep getting news like this all the time.

[Olds88]

Originally Posted by bangstudios

With all due respect, I just cross-shopped the big three's truck offerings, each with the small V8 (Ford 4.6, Dodge 4.7 and GM 4.8), highway gears and short box / reg. cab (or as close to regular cab as offered) with 4x4. It really wasn't a contest: even with the four-speed transmission (which, although tough, isn't the slickest unit on the planet), the Silverado simply destroyed the others. Perhaps Ford can play catch-up next year with the new F-150 (and long-awaited new powertrains), but the Silverado simply provided the best combination of interior style / usability, fuel economy and overall ability. Yes, I bought the Chev. (and am so impressed with the build quality that I'll be heading back to my local dealer to check out a C6 in the next few days).

Technically the 5.3L competes with those motors. With that motor the comparison is even more lopsided with the 5.3L's incredible economy. I found the 4sp GM trans to be smoother than Ford, Dodge, Toyota or Nissan trannies.

[Olds88]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

Keep saying blah blah all you want but, each month i am proven to be correct. Last mont i told you silverado sales will go down alot not because of slow down in truck sales but because it is ugly and it uses four speed. and everybody here was saying looks are subjectiv. nobody cares that it uses four speed consumers do not know difference between 6 and 4 speed. well they all have internet and they all find out. Silverado had 6k rebate and still down 20% while old ford f15o about same rebate only down 6%. That tells you everything. and tundra is up again. keeps sayin blah blah all you want but until you people wake up. we will keep getting news like this all the time.

If people read internet reviews they'd read the Silverado winning nearly all comparisons.

[GMC-70]

GM's January sales increase had alot to do with amazing incentives (GM card round-up, loyalty rebate, + std rebates) It's not rocket science that Feb sales would be down in comparison as they pulled a few sales ahead.

[Stéphane Dumas]

Originally Posted by dindak

GM is in for a rough year. That said, nice to see some bright spots.

We did our part, took delivery of a new Montana SV6 last week for my wife.

I wonder how Ford and Chrysler will handle the situation? It could be more rough for them especially Chrysler despite being chaporoned by Cerberus

[igor]

Originally Posted by Stéphane Dumas

I wonder how Ford and Chrysler will handle the situation? It could be more rough for them especially Chrysler despite being chaporoned by Cerberus

February 2008 Sales: Ford Motor Company (down 6.9%)

Ford is down 7% (some retail highlights), and is cutting productions on the Taurus/Sable/TaurusX/MKS plant to 1 shift - the same for the Explorer/Sport Trac/Mountaineer plant. A V6 engine plant will remain idled for extra 6 months.

Ford is paying close attention and adjusting their model.

Igor

[VibenPontiac]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

This is what happens when you make a ugly trucks and, use four speed trans. Ofcours sales will be down 20%. Just think what is going to happen when new f150 and ram are out. GM is in big trouble. IF stupid rick and lutz did not invest all money in truck and suvs. they would not have this problem now. But as lutz keeps saying. People want big powerfull cars not small fuel efficient. When are these two going to quiet or be fired. First we lose billions, then gm market cap is almost nothing. We get rid of thousands of employees close plants and what we get from rick and lutz? Sales decline, more money being lost. It is time for those two to go. sooner the better.

Yada yada yada...please, for now on just copy your response every time you post. That way I don't have to read your posts in the vain hope you actually contributed some rational argument or even a new point. If GM listened to you they would still have the 800s on the road and getting their clocks cleaned by the current crop of full size SUVs from Ford, Toyota, and co. When will you realize the GM is a full range automobile manufacturer. Not having full size SUVs or Trucks in their lineup would cost them a lot more marketshare and, more importantly, cash than if they didn't. A full product turnaround has not been completed yet.

One month down does not make a trend - and before you reply, neither does one month up. GM have been up and down like a spas-matic yoyo for the last 12 months - an indication that the free fall of market share is slowing and probably beginning to flatten out (i.e. the bottom of the trough is close at hand). Lets not forget the overall shape of the market. Yes a 13% decline is higher than 'Yota's 6.6% decline, and Ford's but remember GM still have a ton of their older products out on the market (G6, Trailblazers, Lucerne, LaCrosse, DTS, etc...) that are no where near the quality of the models from the last 18-24 months.

[bangstudios]

Originally Posted by Olds88

Technically the 5.3L competes with those motors. With that motor the comparison is even more lopsided with the 5.3L's incredible economy. I found the 4sp GM trans to be smoother than Ford, Dodge, Toyota or Nissan trannies.

Personally, I'm bloody impressed with the 4.8: very decent economy (there's 2000 miles on the truck now: I did a Vancouver Island -> Edmonton -> Vancouver Island run last week) and got ~17.5 MPG with a box-full of office equipment, and this is on mountain highways. Plus, it didn't balk once while towing or more importantly >> launching << my boat. The ol' Dodge Ram could get herky-jerky when descending the rather steep launch ramp at the marina I use, but the Chev. was smooth as silk. Very nice!

[logansowner]

Originally Posted by igor

one bit of worry: so retail G6 sales are up 6% - but overall, its sales are up 50%(!) that means - all the rest went to fleets.

Sign of good times: Retail Malibu up 62% - overall up 6% - Man how many fleet sales did Malibu have!?!? - and it seems it is finally shedding them (passing them over to G6)

Igor

THat doesnt suprise me, the G6 is overpriced and has nothing going for it. Fleet is the only place it belongs.

ONly good G6 is a GXP or the hard top version.

[artrix]

Originally Posted by mtndrew1

That would be a 2.1% decrease, which is not nice to see.

-Drew

Well i meant car sales or to be more exact CTS sales, and yea it isn't nice to see overall sales down 2.1 %

[CmicasatheGreat]

Anyone else find it irresponsible of GM to kill the STS instead of simply improving it under the same name, to S-class levels when... as we can see it is selling better for almost 6 consecutive months since the update?

For February it outsold the Lexus GS 1421 to 1,436. That's including all three variants of the GS (350, 460, Hybrid)

The CTS outsold the ES350 and IS

[HoosierRon]

Does anyone know if the total retail sales were up or down?

[VCDJ]

Originally Posted by VibenPontiac

Yada yada yada...please, for now on just copy your response every time you post. That way I don't have to read your posts in the vain hope you actually contributed some rational argument or even a new point. If GM listened to you they would still have the 800s on the road and getting their clocks cleaned by the current crop of full size SUVs from Ford, Toyota, and co. When will you realize the GM is a full range automobile manufacturer. Not having full size SUVs or Trucks in their lineup would cost them a lot more marketshare and, more importantly, cash than if they didn't. A full product turnaround has not been completed yet.

One month down does not make a trend - and before you reply, neither does one month up. GM have been up and down like a spas-matic yoyo for the last 12 months - an indication that the free fall of market share is slowing and probably beginning to flatten out (i.e. the bottom of the trough is close at hand). Lets not forget the overall shape of the market. Yes a 13% decline is higher than 'Yota's 6.6% decline, and Ford's but remember GM still have a ton of their older products out on the market (G6, Trailblazers, Lucerne, LaCross etc...) that are no where near the quality of the models from the last 18-24 months.

Well i am sure if gm kept 800s they would still be down 30% like they are with 900s, but at least they would not push back zeta and epII because of it. Now we would have new impala but since rick and lutz decided that 900 is more importatnt, it looks like we will not be seeing rwd impala because of it. And when will we get epII? if gm had both of these available last year i do not think gm would have any problems now. Gm pushed back both of those great platforms so that they could speed up development of trucks and suvs and now they are paying for it. and this is why those two morons rick and lutz need to go. They will blame sales decline on everybody but them selfs. They will say it is employees fault, its cafe, health care, currency, american consumers( as lutz said they do not apreciate gm quality). See it is everybody else but those two morons.

[nadepalma]

A mixed bag then -- so be it.

[coaster.n3rd]

yay for Aura.

Booo for Vue.