GM Reports July Sales, Down 18.5%

[boblutzfan]

GM needs to fast track the EPII and Theta/EPII CUV platforms. Nearly every platform they have save for the Lambda and Sigma are outclassed. Even the GMT-900 is missing key features that are needed to be class leading - like more than a four speed transmission and IRS on the SUVs.

I am glad to see that retail sales are up - but unless GM starts putting out cars and trucks with the same quality as the CTS and Enclave - their days are numbered.

The best proof that GM still doesn't have a clue is that for 2008 Saturn is going to sell an Aura XE with the 2.4L and the old archaic four speed auto while the lower branded Malibu will offer the same engine with an available 6A transmission. The Aura should only have a six speed auto available, should have available DVD based navigation and a fold down center rear arm rest. But it doesn't. There are reasons beyond being American - that GM is loosing market share.

[Raskolnikov]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

I agree with you toyota sold 25k tundra. Up more then 100%. But dont tell that to people here on GMI. They will tell you that you are wrong and that lutz and rick are gods.

R u just trolling?

[TahoeMikeZ71]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

Prefer them over other makes. They are down 27% this month. Last month they were down Another 20%. And for the year they are down. Look at toyota up more then 100%. And people perfer gmt 900 over others. That explains why tundra is up more then 100% and it outsells siera.

They still do. Some people are waiting for features like 6-Speeds to come in for the 900s. Don't hate because GM knows what to do with the GMT900s.

[VCDJ]

Originally Posted by boblutzfan

GM needs to fast track the EPII and Theta/EPII CUV platforms. Nearly every platform they have save for the Lambda and Sigma are outclassed. Even the GMT-900 is missing key features that are needed to be class leading - like more than a four speed transmission and IRS on the SUVs.

I am glad to see that retail sales are up - but unless GM starts putting out cars and trucks with the same quality as the CTS and Enclave - their days are numbered.

The best proof that GM still doesn't have a clue is that for 2008 Saturn is going to sell an Aura XE with the 2.4L and the old archaic four speed auto while the lower branded Malibu will offer the same engine with an available 6A transmission. The Aura should only have a six speed auto available, should have available DVD based navigation and a fold down center rear arm rest. But it doesn't. There are reasons beyond being American - that GM is loosing market share.

I agree with you 100% this is what i have been saying for so long. Why does Aura have 3.5l and 4 speed. How about if they put that 3.5l with 6 speed, make it flex fuel like impala and have that dod like 3.9. Aura would sale alot better. Why are they using 2.4l and 4 speed in aura? Like you said lutz and rick are clue less. Why does 3.6 produce 252 hp? When in outlook it produces 275hp. Aura should have that kind of hp. and Why is gm not using that 2.0l turbo engine from saturn sky. It is a great engine. 260hp and very good fuel economy. How about if they put that in aura and vue.

[VCDJ]

Originally Posted by TahoeMikeZ71

They still do. Some people are waiting for features like 6-Speeds to come in for the 900s. Don't hate because GM knows what to do with the GMT900s.

And some people just do not want to wait and they go and buy toyota. LOL GM knows what to do with gmt900 i hope that this is a joke. If they did know what they were doing with gmt900 they would not be down more then 20% for two straight months. Is your buddy lutz? do you drink coffe with him and listen to his lies?

[zete]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

I agree with you toyota sold 25k tundra. Up more then 100%. But dont tell that to people here on GMI. They will tell you that you are wrong and that lutz and rick are gods.

Even the journalists admitted Toyota moved Tundras solely on an incentive basis. Before the incentives, they weren't moving. Now GM will have to respond.

As to a prior comment re: the Cobalt vs. the trucks, the trucks required an update. If the old 800s were compared against the Tundra the Tundra wouldn't require ANY incentives to move. Compared to the 900s Toyota finds itself in GM's shoes, requiring massive incentives to move iron. The newer the iron at GM, the easier the sale. However, GM remains short of cash and development times remain 2 - 3 years, minimum. That means, we're still seeing cars designed & engineered 3 or so years ago. Unfortunately, that also means if the small cars are on the slate now they won't appear until 2009/10. Some things you just can't rush, and with small cars GM can't afford to rush them anyway, since a crappy little car will ruin new buyers' perceptions of GM or reinforce existing ones.

Ultimately, getting folks out of Civics and Corollas is hard. I think the focus GM seemst to be putting on the Volt is correct. The Volt and the new Cobalt will probably be out at the same time, MY2010. A long cycle for the Cobalt, to be sure, but the Corolla's long in the tooth, too. What the Cobalt needs is a more efficient engine. I doubt GM can raise prices on the Cobalt anytime soon. Their reputation simply stinks in small cars and to rebuild it you have to sell more car for less, even at a loss. It sucks but it's the price they'll have to pay. The Astra probably won't fit that mold, but Saturn has always been an exception at GM and their tie-in to Opel is brilliant. I do hope they bring over the diesel engines for Saturn, those would move a lot of iron.

Furthermore, the overall market is obviously in flux. The economy is in a bit of a panic due to the continued reporting of the mortgage crisis. Bad news makes people cautious, which results in lower sales. Plus, with oil prices high they are a bit more sensitive to mileage. Will that play a part in how the truck wars go later this year? It'll be interesting. A hybrid transmission would make a world of difference, me thinks, and can't come out soon enough for GM.

[KUZCO]

agreed gm knows the lack of a 6 speed tranny is killing sales, from what i understand that plant is working wayyyyy too much O.T. as it is, very frustrating regardless

[TahoeMikeZ71]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

And some people just do not want to wait and they go and buy toyota. LOL GM knows what to do with gmt900 i hope that this is a joke. If they did know what they were doing with gmt900 they would not be down more then 20% for two straight months. Is your buddy lutz? do you drink coffe with him and listen to his lies?

Or is it because the GMT900s were selling a lot and they finally slowed down. GM is not pushing people to buy the GMT900s like Toyota is.

[Coloradokid]

Originally Posted by TahoeMikeZ71

Or is it because the GMT900s were selling a lot and they finally slowed down. GM is not pushing people to buy the GMT900s like Toyota is.

I think at this point in time, GM has to pull out all the stops to defend its key product. A sale for GM is a lot better than a sale for Toyota. GM needs to match Toyota dollar per dollar. Heck- they would still be making a ton of money on each truck even with the incentives. At this point in time GM cannot simply close more plants to react to its lost market share; this is a revenue-based business and there comes a point where GM will not have enough revenue to finance its legacy costs and product development.

[Perian]

People, the world is not ending!

Look at the remarkable progress GM has made in the last 12 months.

With new models and a beneficial UAW contract, the next 12 months could be even better.

Of course it all depends on the housing industry

[zete]

Originally Posted by TahoeMikeZ71

Or is it because the GMT900s were selling a lot and they finally slowed down. GM is not pushing people to buy the GMT900s like Toyota is.

In the end, Toyota can't afford to have the Tundra fail. The way it started off 2007 it was headed for "failure" status. The rags beat up on it, hated everything save the engine, and then that had issues. They weren't moving Tundras and Toyota's management wanted to sell 200,000+. What to do? Simple. Incentives. It caught GM offguard. They didn't expect Toyota to dump incentives on the hood of the very new Tundra. It's seriously boosted sales, that's obvious. But once the cheapskates our out of the picture and we're back to real truck buyers will the Tundras failings, inferior frame, less than stellar crashworthiness, ugly interior/exterior, etc., result in a plunge in sales? And if GM dumps money on the hoods of the 900s and finally gets the six-speeds into them, what will that do to the picture? Especially considering the fact everyone figures the mileage numbers will increase, and any positive addition to mileage is like a recurring rebate on a truck.

[JackDye]

In an attempt for a little balance.

It is not all doom and gloom. Believe it or not, July is the highest market share month for GM for 2007. Also, ATP (avg transaction prices) were up roughly 8% yr/yr in July.

Just listened to the sales conference call.

[zete]

BTW, I still think GM's solution to all this is simply a longer warranty. If you look at the cost of the extended warranty GM offers for purchase, something around $2k, they could easily add the warranty to their vehicles, lower the incentives, and win customers due to standard six & eight year warranties (depending on vehicle) warranties. Imagine the sales of the Cobalt or T900s if the warranties were six years long, bumper-to-bumper. If they're wary of 6 years, do 5 for the regular vehicles and 7 for Buick & Cadillac.

[zete]

Originally Posted by JackDye

In an attempt for a little balance.

It is not all doom and gloom. Believe it or not, July is the highest market share month for GM for 2007. Also, ATP (avg transaction prices) were up roughly 8% yr/yr in July.

Just listened to the sales conference call.

Ultimately, it'll all be about money and profit. Selling more than the competition and losing your shirt is what GM used to do. They're now aiming in the other direction: profitability. And with sustained profitability they can inject that cash into new, improved vehicles. But it all takes time.

[VCDJ]

Originally Posted by zete

BTW, I still think GM's solution to all this is simply a longer warranty. If you look at the cost of the extended warranty GM offers for purchase, something around $2k, they could easily add the warranty to their vehicles, lower the incentives, and win customers due to standard six & eight year warranties (depending on vehicle) warranties. Imagine the sales of the Cobalt or T900s if the warranties were six years long, bumper-to-bumper. If they're wary of 6 years, do 5 for the regular vehicles and 7 for Buick & Cadillac.

I agree with you. If gm offered 8 years 150 000 miles bumper to bumper warrantie on all of their cars. They would not need any incentives to move cars. They would sell very well.