GM brands were much differently aligned in the 80's when the GNX was around, my cousin bought a new Regal right out of H.S. it was most teens 'dream car' back in the day.I liked the Regal GS and would've bought one in 2013 had the ATS not come out. But, how is discontinuing a vehicle almost no one bought ruining the brand? As much as I liked the Regal GS, performance isn't Buick's thing and hasn't been for decades. Even the awesome GNX was a poor fit for Buick way back when.
And today, Buick is just an "ole-people" CUV brand, at best you can add in a few middle-aged women to its target market.Maybe just because it was there and made a statement even if very few actually bought it, so it being gone diminished the brand sort of. But I would differ because they've done similar things which came and went and the brand still holds on to a semi old persons 🤔vehicle mostly.
They went from Grandma/Rental Cars to Grandma CUV's..........Yes, Buick isn't a "gotta have it brand"... I'm not sure what the right answer is for Buick.
GM (GMC) kind of needs Buick to give those dealerships some balance, but as GM continues to expand GMC's line-up and with both offering a lot of overlapping CUV's less and less so.One thought with Buick, it may not be so dire. Buick USA requires little time or money from GM, similar to what GMC used to be. Could be that due to the low investment needs it is more profitable than we think.
Personally, my biggest turn-off is COO, the new Envision, which rides on the same platform as the XT4, seems like a decent vehicle, much better than the Gen I version; just make it here........ Fairfax Plant has been idled since the first week of February people!