GM Readies New Ads, Deep Discounts to Clear Remaining Saturn Inventory

[Citation84]

And no: wheninrome. Not a Danzition but referencing XRL's comments re: Cadillac and Buick. Go back and read it again. You're all over the map ascribing comments others have made to me.

GM is trying to change those marque's images. The public will decide whether there's any worth to them other than $4700.00 worth of tax payer money on the hood.

[WhenenRome]

Originally Posted by Citation84

That was absolutely unrelated to anything I said in this.Buicks still have an old man's image, but if you want to talk yourself into one, go ahead. I don't give a rip what you drive. I never said it mattered. It matters to GM what Buick's image is.

.....

Go ahead: put your money where your mouth is and buy a Buick if you want. But you won't.

....

You're all over the map ascribing comments others have made to me.

What I said, while following your comment, was directed at the thread conversation, not just you entirely - I was not ascribing the comments to you. I apoplogize for that not being clear.

It's a little bit of a reach for you to conclude that I "WON'T" ever purchase a Buick... My Aura has about three years left on it's bumper-to-bumper, and from there I usually drive a car until it starts experiencing a small level of mechanical grief. THEN I know it's time... So it depends on what's available then. If it were today or next year, a LaCrosse - and probably the Regal - would be of interest to me...

[XRL]

Originally Posted by WhenenRome

Maybe you're asking a lot of questions that you incorrectly assume that I don't already know the answers to?

They own the house. It's not a temporary thing. They bought it several years ago from the original owner, who built it in the 1960's. They don't care about the interior. They haven't done anything to improve it. They're not looking into moving, and they're in no financial position to do so. As a matter of fact, they started renting out a room (illegally - they need a permit) because they needed more money. But yes, they still had bought a brand new Lexus and an Escalade. THAT was what was important to them.

Parking on the lawn may be alright in your area, and in other areas... For all I know, you could live on a sprawling meadow or something. But here, it's a code violation; it's considered trashy - and it's not the norm at all. (We even got a newsletter with our electric bill earlier this year, thats headline explicitly stated this ordinance.) By the way, not that this is an excuse either, but it's not about having to shuffle cars... they have a driveway three cars wide and two cars deep. It's just not right next to the front door. They're lazy, and they don't care... These neighbors just take advantage of the fact that we live on a secluded, culdesac drive that Code Enforcement officers won't normally drive by... and the luck that no one's called on them yet. It's just especially ironic that the cars doing it are rather expensive ones...

As a homeowner myself, I think I have a responsibility to take care of my house and be a good neighbor. What I do here and how I maintain things DOES have an effect on the quality of life of the neighborhood. I think most responsible homeowners will put their home's importance over what they drive. Okay... drifting off topic... back to cars.

I don't begrudge people's choices to buy upmarket vehicles. In my case, I could afford a more expensive car. But I tend to purchase my cars outright. To me, not having a car payment to think about each month is better than having the so-called status of an uber-expensive ride.

My mis-prioritized neighbors are definitely not a reflection on Escalade or Lexus owners. They're just an example of how driving an expensive vehicle doesn't necessarily mean you have an abundance of disposable income - or class. That's exactly my point.

Well then it sounds like they're just jerkoffs :P

How could your Aura have 3 years left on its bumper to bumper? The B2B on Saturns is always 3 years unless you purchase an extended one (in which case you could theoretically pro rate it out).

So here's the strangest part of the whole SUV thing to me. Old people HATE them. I barely ever see an old/retire person driving an SUV or crossover. Always big sedans or little sports cars. I think it's because the height makes it hard for them to get into with bad hips, knees, backs, etc.

In any case, Personally I hope people don't buy the Buick not being old people cars thing, because I want to see GM fail liquidated. But people already changed their conceptions about Caddy, so it's possible for Buick.

[Citation84]

Originally Posted by WhenenRome

What I said, while following your comment, was directed at the thread conversation, not just you entirely - I was not ascribing the comments to you. I apoplogize for that not being clear.

It's a little bit of a reach for you to conclude that I "WON'T" ever purchase a Buick... My Aura has about three years left on it's bumper-to-bumper, and from there I usually drive a car until it starts experiencing a small level of mechanical grief. THEN I know it's time... So it depends on what's available then. If it were today or next year, a LaCrosse - and probably the Regal - would be of interest to me...

I am sure you will make the best decision available to you depending on what suits your needs.

I am also not of the same mind who do not consider anything but an S series a Saturn. Like you I am a love what I've got type. Some don't think the ION qualifies as a "real" Saturn either. The Aura is a beautiful car and I have been partial to Olds and Chrysler for many years.

Spending money to impress the neighbors is not something I am interested in either. Could have had a "bigger" house, a "better" car, but not willing to give up the time and energy and money to chase a "lifestyle".

And as you wisely pointed out, people who drive flashy cars and live in the largest house do not necessarily have money in the bank. [Read "The Millionaire Next Door" for more on that one]. The leasing/housing collapse made that pretty obvious. All hat no cattle?

My apologies for taking things way more seriously than I needed to. If I wanted to be "cool" I wouldn't be driving a Saturn in the first place.

Point being, I think it was in the 50s , the head of Pontiac made the statement:"You can sell an old man a young man's car, but you can't sell a young man an old man's car". This about the time GM was preparing to take Pontiac out of the maiden aunt segment. It's still true.

And I think GM has an uphill battle with Buick's image and not enough time to turn it around. Maybe these cars are game changers. I have my doubts. I find them attractive, but I am so pissed at GM right now for so many reasons, I am not willing to give them the benefit of even hoping they'll succeed.

Hyundai took years. That took dedication and focus. Something in short supply when it comes to GM. They just can't resist the rebadge urge.

As to the Escalade: I still don't get it and I guess I went overboard with my description of it's target market. It's just so cynical of GM to thinly disguise a Chevrolet [truck, no less], throw some extra bling on it and call it a Cadillac. It's insulting to the brand and it's legacy. I don't don't understand how people are willing to pretend that the thing is somehow "better" than a garden variety Chevy, built with any more care or carries with it an ounce more "prestige" other than GM says it does because it's got a Cadillac crest on it. Especially for the price premium. I*just*don't* get* it.

XRL: didn't mean to come off as a snatch to you either. We all operate in our own spheres. Just because I can't see the sense in something, doesn't mean that others are free to indulge in an Escalade. Or a Relay. Or a Topaz. Or G3. Kidding.

[Citation84]

Originally Posted by XRL

Well then it sounds like they're just jerkoffs :P

How could your Aura have 3 years left on its bumper to bumper? The B2B on Saturns is always 3 years unless you purchase an extended one (in which case you could theoretically pro rate it out).

So here's the strangest part of the whole SUV thing to me. Old people HATE them. I barely ever see an old/retire person driving an SUV or crossover. Always big sedans or little sports cars. I think it's because the height makes it hard for them to get into with bad hips, knees, backs, etc.

In any case, Personally I hope people don't buy the Buick not being old people cars thing, because I want to see GM fail liquidated. But people already changed their conceptions about Caddy, so it's possible for Buick.

I think you hit on it: Popular cars for old people: Mercury Marquis, Buick Lucerne, Avalon: big and familiar and comfortable. And the hip thing is dead on. They're also more brand loyal than the younger generations have been and many are hard core GM & Ford fans. Those brands still have meaning and value and a legacy to them.

Not so with their sons and daughters and grandchildren. They saw that those names were being exploited and cheapened with clones and badge engineering. Yes, an Acura is a Honda underneath, but they seem to have done a far better job of differentiating between the two than say Chevrolet and Pontiac or Ford and Mercury.

Our domestics squandered their own brand's equity trying to chase volume, and attempting to market the cars like Proctor & Gamble sells tooth paste.

Sad.

I saw a Studebaker Lark chugging onto the Hollywood Freeway today. Maybe I have had it with new cars from any maker for good. Maybe that guy in the Lark will be me in 30 years. In my ION.

[WhenenRome]

Originally Posted by XRL

How could your Aura have 3 years left on its bumper to bumper? The B2B on Saturns is always 3 years unless you purchase an extended one (in which case you could theoretically pro rate it out)..

I negotiated it as part of the deal. I understood that there were still very few exceptions regarding price at that time; that what was on the sticker was what you pay. But I had also heard that you could negotiate "perks" in purchasing a Saturn vehicle.

So I did start off by telling the dealer that we were disregarding their "markup" (something like $1500!) if we wanted to continue... A thousand dollar manufacturer's rebate then came off. Then I ended things with insisting on the 5-year/60K GM Major Guard warranty with $0 deductible. At first they said they couldn't... I started to walk, and then they agreed to it. Hey, I think it was a reasonable request.

I don't think it was the best deal I ever got on a car. But it was the best deal I was going to get on the car I wanted, this car, at the time in the fall of '07.

And Citation, thanks... and no worries. Besides, an Escalade is not my thing, either!

[05SaturnRL]

Originally Posted by XRL

In any case, Personally I hope people don't buy the Buick not being old people cars thing, because I want to see GM fail liquidated. But people already changed their conceptions about Caddy, so it's possible for Buick.

Yeah that's a genius way to think. After the governement has given them billions of dollars, why not hope they go under and not pay back a single cent they borrowed?

Originally Posted by Citation84

As to the Escalade: I still don't get it and I guess I went overboard with my description of it's target market. It's just so cynical of GM to thinly disguise a Chevrolet [truck, no less], throw some extra bling on it and call it a Cadillac. It's insulting to the brand and it's legacy. I don't don't understand how people are willing to pretend that the thing is somehow "better" than a garden variety Chevy, built with any more care or carries with it an ounce more "prestige" other than GM says it does because it's got a Cadillac crest on it. Especially for the price premium. I*just*don't* get* it.

Having been in both new sytle Tahoes and Escalades, the Escalade is better IMO in areas. The interior is a lot nicer looking, the seats seem to be more comfortable and plush, and it seems to have a few more items not available on the Tahoe. Do I think that these few things are worth the extra price over the Tahoe? Not at all. Then again I am not a full size SUV person

[XRL]

Originally Posted by 05SaturnRL

Yeah that's a genius way to think. After the governement has given them billions of dollars, why not hope they go under and not pay back a single cent they borrowed?

Because we're not ever going to see it come back to us anyways? And because doing what we did undermines the free market system? And because GM *still* is burdened by what brought them down in the first place? And now, instead of kicking the UAW out for contributing to the problem, they own partly? That's almost like if they had given a portion of GM to a slow moving bureaucratic decision making process that never actually went ahead with anything, and only followed into markets after they had been fully exploited.

[05SaturnRL]

Originally Posted by XRL

Because we're not ever going to see it come back to us anyways? And because doing what we did undermines the free market system? And because GM *still* is burdened by what brought them down in the first place? And now, instead of kicking the UAW out for contributing to the problem, they own partly? That's almost like if they had given a portion of GM to a slow moving bureaucratic decision making process that never actually went ahead with anything, and only followed into markets after they had been fully exploited.

We had no choice in any of it if I recall. I don't think that they are going to get off easy enough by not repaying anything, especially if they eventually want to get Omoron and the gubbamit out as part ownership

[davidsky]

And here I am, a current Aura owner, who used to own an Olds Alero, Aurora, and currently owns a Bravada. I'm not an Olds loyalist or anything - I just liked those cars when I shopped them against others, just as I did with the Aura.

GM is hoping you'll shop Buick or Cadillac next.

But what's done is done, and it is what it is. I used to own a Chrysler, and they changed in a direction that I didn't receive so well. I looked somewhere else.

How far back? I remember when a Chrysler was a huge luxury car with a big engine. The 300C brought that back some.

[davidsky]

Originally Posted by XRL

So here's the strangest part of the whole SUV thing to me. Old people HATE them. I barely ever see an old/retire person driving an SUV or crossover. Always big sedans or little sports cars. I think it's because the height makes it hard for them to get into with bad hips, knees, backs, etc.

I think that's because you're only seeing the people who are either really old (75 plus) or unhealthy. The 60 year old or healthy person would be OK with a S/CUV.
I'm going with a big sedan when I'm old though. Maybe a Lincoln or a Buick.

[davidsky]

Originally Posted by WhenenRome

from there I usually drive a car until it starts experiencing a small level of mechanical grief. THEN I know it's time...

What's a "small level of mechanical grief"?
I can go pretty far before I'd give up on a car but I probably won't rebuild a front suspension like I did on my Audi.

[Citation84]

Originally Posted by 05SaturnRL

Yeah that's a genius way to think. After the governement has given them billions of dollars, why not hope they go under and not pay back a single cent they borrowed?


Having been in both new sytle Tahoes and Escalades, the Escalade is better IMO in areas. The interior is a lot nicer looking, the seats seem to be more comfortable and plush, and it seems to have a few more items not available on the Tahoe. Do I think that these few things are worth the extra price over the Tahoe? Not at all. Then again I am not a full size SUV person

I am sure there are areas.

But this is GM's premiere brand, their supposed [what used to be known as] "Standard Of The World". I just don't think GM can reach that again using down market Chevrolets as the basis for their products and expect a premiuim price for them. Not with any credibility anyway.

Strive for better than just "something to sell" in the segment, GM. While not a total Cimarron make over, it's pretty much what Lincoln did to the Granada to get the Versailles...........

[XRL]

GM doesn't have the resources to put all the Caddys on their own platforms and not share components with normal GMs. It's just not a part of the question, between higher wages here, and all their other overhead costs, it won't happen. Furthermore, I can't think of any of the Japanese luxury utes that have their OWN platform. The MDX is on the same one as the Pilot. The RX is a Camry, the LX is a Land Cruiser, and the GX is actually just a rebadged Toyota from where there is no Lexus (and probably built on the Land Cruiser platform). The QX56 is an Armada even to a blind man.

Caddy can't be the standard of the world,because they can't afford it. They need to be more of the "adequate luxury vehicle at a good price" of the world, because THAT is something they can attain. And they better start getting ready, because Hyundai is coming out swinging with its luxury offerings. Wait until they come out with a Genesis SUV using that Borrego.

[GR898SL2]

Originally Posted by l57

VWCarcrazy.......What was to be the new "Aura" for 2011 will be the new mid sized "Regal" next year...I guess you haven't heard.

It really doesn't look that bad as a Buick. However, there won't be a V6 right away and only one trim will be available at launch: the leather-upholstered, mid-level CXL.

[piney]

Today's full page ads show such barn-burner bonanza deals such as $4,000 off an Outlook XE, fwd for only 27k and change (after the rebate). With deals like this, they will be on the lot till the 2011 models are out from the competition.

[s3nfo]

Yep, got that here in todays paper too. Hummm, I can get a "great deal" whopping $4,000 off on an orphaned Outlook that'll really take a hit on depreciation due to it's orphan status, or, for just about the same money, in the ad right next to it I can get $10,000 off a Ford F-150 Supercrew from a company that's making a good comeback without gubmint money...........
More proof that GM just doesn't get it!

[davidsky]

Originally Posted by s3nfo

Yep, got that here in todays paper too. Hummm, I can get a "great deal" whopping $4,000 off on an orphaned Outlook that'll really take a hit on depreciation due to it's orphan status, or, for just about the same money, in the ad right next to it I can get $10,000 off a Ford F-150 Supercrew from a company that's making a good comeback without gubmint money...........
More proof that GM just doesn't get it!

Just try to get that F-150 for $10K "off"
Plus Ford is losing money just as quickly as everyone else is, they just borrowed 20 billion back in 2007 to prop themselves up this long.
The Outlook won't depreciate that much because it's exactly the same as an Acadia or Traverse.

[VUEmaniac]

Originally Posted by davidsky

Just try to get that F-150 for $10K "off"
Plus Ford is losing money just as quickly as everyone else is, they just borrowed 20 billion back in 2007 to prop themselves up this long.
The Outlook won't depreciate that much because it's exactly the same as an Acadia or Traverse.

Ford borrowed money from the capital markets just like any normal corporation would. One could argue that they were simply more clever than GM and Chrysler and did so before the economic poo-storm hit in 2008. Hapless GM waited until the capital markets were paralyzed and by then nobody wanted to extend them any additional credit, effectively forcing the company into bankruptcy. Injection of capital from the government allowed GM to delay this inevitable outcome for a few months, but it eventually happened. In stark contrast, Ford posted a PROFIT in their 2 most recent quarters and didn't take any government bailout money when GM and Chrysler were crying about going under last year.

I think anything with a Saturn badge is going to take a bit of a depreciation hit due to the division's demise. You're deluding yourself if you think that isn't happening. That might make for some good deals once the fire sale goes into full swing, but taking comfort in future service availability because it's a GM auto doesn't give me the warm fuzzies at all.

[piney]

Originally Posted by davidsky

Just try to get that F-150 for $10K "off"
Plus Ford is losing money just as quickly as everyone else is, they just borrowed 20 billion back in 2007 to prop themselves up this long.
The Outlook won't depreciate that much because it's exactly the same as an Acadia or Traverse.

I'll take losses like this any day.

Ford turns a profit, reaping rewards of turnaround
By DEE-ANN DURBIN and TOM KRISHER, AP Auto Writers Dee-ann Durbin And Tom Krisher, Ap Auto Writers Mon Nov 2, 6:32 pm ET


DEARBORN, Mich. – One of the troubled Detroit Three automakers, Ford, is making money again and looking for better times in no more than two years.

Emerging from a three-year makeover with popular cars and trucks, Ford said Monday it earned nearly $1 billion in the third quarter and will be solidly profitable by 2011, a more optimistic forecast than earlier.

While heavy debt and lean times for American car shoppers threaten the comeback, the report puts Ford in a far better position than General Motors or Chrysler, which are still finding their bearings after emerging from bankruptcy.

Ford's cars are winning popular and critical acclaim, like the Fusion midsize sedan and more gas-efficient Focus compact. And years of painful cost-cutting, which have halved its work force, have looked prophetic since the recession struck, hurting demand.

Even in North America, the company's biggest market, Ford turned a profit after losing money there for four years.

GM and Chrysler, meanwhile, are still trying to cut jobs and win back customers, many of whom are steering toward their healthier rival.<snip>