[paul8488]

Well this is one bit of good news.

----------------------------------
GM hangs on to its share of market
But Chrysler and Ford see first-quarter retail sales fall
BY SARAH A. WEBSTER • FREE PRESS BUSINESS WRITER • April 18, 2008


Despite the tough American economy, General Motors Corp. has started the year off right -- holding its share of the retail market in the first three months with a stable of strong new products such as the Chevy Malibu, Buick Enclave and Cadillac CTS.

GM captured 21.6% of retail sales in the U.S. market during the January-March period, according to the latest estimates provided exclusively to the Free Press by the Power Information Network, a subsidiary of J.D. Power and Associates.

Crosstown rivals Chrysler LLC and Ford Motor Co., meanwhile, performed poorly.

Chrysler lost 1.5 percentage points of share, ending with 9.8%. Ford dropped a little more than a half percentage point to 13.9%. Those are substantial declines when one considers that every percentage point of annual market share is about the equivalent of one assembly plant's full production for the year.



http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080418/BUSINESS01/804180399/1002/BUSINESS

 

[paul8488]

GM hangs on to its share of market
But Chrysler and Ford...

On a separate note, I learned in school that you were never to start a sentence with 'But'! If journalists in major news outlets can't use proper grammar, can we rag on kids (and adults for that matter) for not doing it either? Was I taught wrong... is 'But' acceptable?

 

[Rocket 88]

On a separate note, I learned in school that you were never to start a sentence with 'But'! If journalists in major news outlets can't use proper grammar, can we rag on kids (and adults for that matter) for not doing it either? Was I taught wrong... is 'But' acceptable?

I try never to give grammatical advice (because I'm not even sure grammatical is a real word) but you are correct. Journalists should know gooder. Kidding. Better.

And good job GM with that market share thing. Now that's bad writing but good news.

 

[CJ Thunder]

I try never to give grammatical advice (because I'm not even sure grammatical is a real word) but you are correct. Journalists should know gooder. Kidding. Better.

And good job GM with that market share thing. Now that's bad writing but good news.

Rules change and here is the definition of the word word:a unit of language that native speakers can identify; "words are the blocks from which sentences are made"

So if you understood the point then thats really all that matters.







http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...ine:word&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

 

[jasaero]

On a separate note, I learned in school that you were never to start a sentence with 'But'! If journalists in major news outlets can't use proper grammar, can we rag on kids (and adults for that matter) for not doing it either? Was I taught wrong... is 'But' acceptable?

I think that was a subtitle. Not sure grammar is ever used in titles or subtitles of articles??

 

[GeorgesBlazah]

Good news to hear!

 

[plane]

Is this the inflection point for GM?
GM products are the best they've been in 20 years.
GM has the mojo, the style, and the reliability.
It would not be too surprising to see GM take market share from the imports.
Especially if the newer GM vehicles return class-leading fuel economy.

 

[sepi]

Equal Time: Reality Check

GM is at least one full year ahead of Ford in turnaround plans and GM can only maintain retail market position? GM's leadership has been on duty SIX TIMES longer than Ford. Ole Wagoneer has been in his job SIX FREAKIN YEARS and his mutt, the resume and pants padding Bobby Putz has whined and moaned and blogged incessantly for over four years.

And all GM could do is to stay the same as the prior year?

Ford is half a percentage point down in retail sales and Ford's managment team has been in place ONE YEAR - and we are constantly reminded here that Ford is behind GM on its deployment of its turnaround plan.

So why is GM underperforming? It is not a good thing that GM can't gain marketshare at this point in their turnaround plan. If GM is merely remaining static, then GM is not doing well. GM rushed pickups to market. GM spent billions on full-sized SUV's and pickups that weren't all that different from before. GM then introduced full-sized CUV's that are redundant to that marketplace. GM has limited production of Solstice (sic) and Sky. GM could, if it wanted, build more Malibores but is holding back - the same for Enclaves. Yet it can't move Outlooks and Arcadias. G6's, Cobores, and G5's remain underperformers WITHOUT any corrective action taken. Chevrolet has redundant models now with Malibore and Impala. Buick remains moribund. GM plays marketing games with hybrids not offering one real one YET - despite even dumb Ford having multiple true hybrids.

If you were on the job and had left your weaknesses so unaddressed, you'd have lost your job after one or two years. GM has failed to address its weaknesses yet its management lingers like a cancer.

GM is not doing well. Spin static positioning in the marketplace all you want, but after half a decade of telling us things are better, products are better, and badge-engineering is stopped, nothing has changed except the excuses from management.

 

[VCDJ]

Is this the inflection point for GM?
GM products are the best they've been in 20 years.
GM has the mojo, the style, and the reliability.
It would not be too surprising to see GM take market share from the imports.
Especially if the newer GM vehicles return class-leading fuel economy.

Until GM Makes Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu and Impala to be class leading gm will not do good with retail sales. People want small fuel efficient cars. Not SUV or Trucks. This is why Honda and Toyota are doing so good but gm and chrysler and ford not so good. This is why Imports Control 55% of retail market share. They produce small fuel efficient and quality cars that keep their value. Detroit failed to do that. They went for big profit in suvs and trucks and now they are paying for it. This is what happens when you have idiots in control of a company

 

[vanshmack]

Until GM Makes Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu and Impala to be class leading gm will not do good with retail sales. People want small fuel efficient cars. Not SUV or Trucks. This is why Honda and Toyota are doing so good but gm and chrysler and ford not so good. This is why Imports Control 55% of retail market share. They produce small fuel efficient and quality cars that keep their value. Detroit failed to do that. They went for big profit in suvs and trucks and now they are paying for it. This is what happens when you have idiots in control of a company

Agree that GM needs it's entry level stuff to improve, but as always, you are COMPLETELY off-base when you said they should not have gone for the big profits in trucks and SUVs.

The reality is, GM is a for-profit, publically held company. Their purpose in this world is to build what people want to drive and (try) do it profitably. Now, you'll get no argument from me when you that GM was shortsighted when it came to small cars, but it's assinine of you to suggest that they should just concede the truck and SUV market, especially since they were selling so well up until the last year or so.

In short, GM shouldn't stop selling trucks and SUV just because you hate them.

 

[dindak]

I wonder if GM can ever get back up to the 25% mark. It's a tuff slug out there in the world of $3.50 gas and cheap import cars.

 

[chakis24]

good for gm. keep it up. it just sucks that theyre not gaining anything from the other big 2- all the ford and chrysler guys are going import. theyre associating gm with the crappiness they exerience with ford and chrysler. all america is bad mentality is killing gm.

Until GM Makes Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu and Impala to be class leading gm will not do good with retail sales. People want small fuel efficient cars. Not SUV or Trucks. This is why Honda and Toyota are doing so good but gm and chrysler and ford not so good. This is why Imports Control 55% of retail market share. They produce small fuel efficient and quality cars that keep their value. Detroit failed to do that. They went for big profit in suvs and trucks and now they are paying for it. This is what happens when you have idiots in control of a company

the cobalt matches corolla's mpg. both get 35. the new focus also gets 35. civic gets 36. im pretty sure thats competitive, 1 mpg seperates them?

theres nothing gm can do yet about resale value- thats all perception. until the word spreads on the new stuff, that wont change. the new silverado is already projected to have the highest resale value among competitors. that wont change overnight.

i think gm is doing good to hold 22% when three companies combined own 55.

you cant blame gm for investing in its trucks, they do sell over a million a year. you have to keep whats good good, otherwise then what? you have nothing.

so youre saying they shouldve ditched theyre money makers and made cars that people wont buy? perception is a huge thing that needs to be conquered- and that doesnt happen in one model year, that takes awhile.

 

[tama z71]

On a separate note, I learned in school that you were never to start a sentence with 'But'! If journalists in major news outlets can't use proper grammar, can we rag on kids (and adults for that matter) for not doing it either? Was I taught wrong... is 'But' acceptable?

Technically you're not supposed to begin the sentence with it, but if phonetically it seems to sound good, people will just use it nonetheless. I've pulled that off in a few papers this year and haven't been marked for it once.

 

[VCDJ]

Agree that GM needs it's entry level stuff to improve, but as always, you are COMPLETELY off-base when you said they should not have gone for the big profits in trucks and SUVs.

The reality is, GM is a for-profit, publically held company. Their purpose in this world is to build what people want to drive and (try) do it profitably. Now, you'll get no argument from me when you that GM was shortsighted when it came to small cars, but it's assinine of you to suggest that they should just concede the truck and SUV market, especially since they were selling so well up until the last year or so.

In short, GM shouldn't stop selling trucks and SUV just because you hate them.

I am not saying that gm should of stop selling trucks and suvs. They should sell them. Because of them. GM pushed back EPII, Zeta, DeltaII. This is why GM is not doing good with retail customers. If they did not igonre these products They would have market share of at least 25%. Maybe they should of just updated silverado and tahoe. This trucks are losing 20% in sales each month. How much worst woudl they do if they just updated those trucks. Let say that gm just updated trucks and sales went down 40%. But if they Made EpII, DeltaII and zeta platform on time sales would go up and offset decline in trucks. Gm would not lose any market share. Again this is part of bad leadership at gm. They are to blame. NOt American Consumer. Consumers are going to buy best product out there. (LIke GMT 900) and they will not buy (Cobalt, IMpala(impala is a fleet king)and aveo). Everybody on this site is blaming consumers for mess that gm is in. Well its not their falult it is GM leaders fault.

 

[vanshmack]

I am not saying that gm should of stop selling trucks and suvs. They should sell them. Because of them. GM pushed back EPII, Zeta, DeltaII. This is why GM is not doing good with retail customers. If they did not igonre these products They would have market share of at least 25%. Maybe they should of just updated silverado and tahoe. This trucks are losing 20% in sales each month. How much worst woudl they do if they just updated those trucks. Let say that gm just updated trucks and sales went down 40%. But if they Made EpII, DeltaII and zeta platform on time sales would go up and offset decline in trucks. Gm would not lose any market share. Again this is part of bad leadership at gm. They are to blame. NOt American Consumer. Consumers are going to buy best product out there. (LIke GMT 900) and they will not buy (Cobalt, IMpala(impala is a fleet king)and aveo). Everybody on this site is blaming consumers for mess that gm is in. Well its not their falult it is GM leaders fault.

The GMT-800 trucks would have celebrated their 10th birthday this year. A simple "update" would have left you and other critics complaining that GM didn't do enough to keep them competitive. With you and others like you, GM will never win. You clamor for world class vehicles, yet you suggest they should just put a band-aid on their biggest sellers.

I'm glad you don't run my company.

 

[VCDJ]

so youre saying they shouldve ditched theyre money makers and made cars that people wont buy? perception is a huge thing that needs to be conquered- and that doesnt happen in one model year, that takes awhile.[/QUOTE]

People will not buy cars???? What planet do you live on. Last time i Checked fastest growing market is in small cars. Car sales are going Up. Suv and truck sales have collapesed.
People will not buy cars like lacrosse, cobalt and aveo. They buy cars like Civic, accord, camry, fit, yaris corrola. That is what they buy

 

[unkillsam]

I am not saying that gm should of stop selling trucks and suvs. They should sell them. Because of them. GM pushed back EPII, Zeta, DeltaII. This is why GM is not doing good with retail customers. If they did not igonre these products They would have market share of at least 25%. Maybe they should of just updated silverado and tahoe. This trucks are losing 20% in sales each month. How much worst woudl they do if they just updated those trucks. Let say that gm just updated trucks and sales went down 40%. But if they Made EpII, DeltaII and zeta platform on time sales would go up and offset decline in trucks. Gm would not lose any market share. Again this is part of bad leadership at gm. They are to blame. NOt American Consumer. Consumers are going to buy best product out there. (LIke GMT 900) and they will not buy (Cobalt, IMpala(impala is a fleet king)and aveo). Everybody on this site is blaming consumers for mess that gm is in. Well its not their falult it is GM leaders fault.

Why don't you get your fact's straight.

Cobalt and Impala have improved their retail/fleet ratio and I have never seen 1 Aveo in a fleet in SE Pennsylvania.

Do you know how long it takes to develop a new platform? My guess is no. The GMT-800 platform lasted from 1998-2007 GM had their truck on the same platform, basic engine design, and the same transmissions for 9 years. They had to update because of the 04 F150 and they knew the Tundra was coming.

By pushing up the GMT-900 program, GM prevented itself from loosing further sales to Ford and Toyota and made a lot of profitable sales in 2006 before the collapse of truck sales.

 

[VCDJ]

The GMT-800 trucks would have celebrated their 10th birthday this year. A simple "update" would have left you and other critics complaining that GM didn't do enough to keep them competitive. With you and others like you, GM will never win. You clamor for world class vehicles, yet you suggest they should just put a band-aid on their biggest sellers.

I'm glad you don't run my company.

Trucks and Suvs are finished. Most people would not care if silverado and tahoe was not compettive. Price of gas will just go up and suv and truck sales will go down. SO why did they ignore market for small and midsize cars?????
I am glad that rick is running company and losing billions each year and lost 10% of market share in 10 years . I am glad that he is running this company, I am glad that he lost 50 billion in Share holders value. What a great leader to have. I do not think that you could find better one.

 

[unkillsam]

so youre saying they shouldve ditched theyre money makers and made cars that people wont buy? perception is a huge thing that needs to be conquered- and that doesnt happen in one model year, that takes awhile.

People will not buy cars???? What planet do you live on. Last time i Checked fastest growing market is in small cars. Car sales are going Up. Suv and truck sales have collapesed.
People will not buy cars like lacrosse, cobalt and aveo. They buy cars like Civic, accord, camry, fit, yaris corrola. That is what they buy[/quote]

If cars are that important please explain the Tundra, and then compare that effort to the effort that Toyota put into the 2009 Corolla.

Clearly Toyota thought that the Tundra was more important.

 

[unkillsam]

Trucks and Suvs are finished. Most people would not care if silverado and tahoe was not compettive. Price of gas will just go up and suv and truck sales will go down. SO why did they ignore market for small and midsize cars?????
I am glad that rick is running company and losing billions each year and lost 10% of market share in 10 years . I am glad that he is running this company

Like I said Toyota pushed back the Corolla for the Tundra launch. And you complain about GM????