bzcat Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 I was referring to US sales. US market is largely irrelevant when discussing the fate of any Buick model except for Enclave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 I think you're confused. Regal is typically near the bottom of their sales figures. These days, it's Encore and Enclave that are carrying the weight for them. The Cruze-based Verano has been discontinued. No it has not http://www.buick.com.cn/verano/ http://www.buick.com.cn/veranogs/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 No it has not http://www.buick.com.cn/verano/ http://www.buick.com.cn/veranogs/ Again, he's referring to US sales. And yes, Verano has been discontinued here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlRozzi Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 I made the comment earlier that GM should discontinue Regal sales if they acquire FCA and I also meant US sales only. Regal sales in 2016 were just under 20,000 yet Corvette was near 28,000 (US). In my post I also said GM should also discontinue Fiat and Alfa US sales. I say this primarily because car sales in general are diverting to utilities. I would bet we see more car models disappear until there is another market shift. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 So Buick is basically GMC CUVs and a sedan that doesn't sell worth a hoot? And they're keeping it around stateside? Yeah. They're planning on merging w/FIAT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 So Buick is basically GMC CUVs and a sedan that doesn't sell worth a hoot? And they're keeping it around stateside? Yeah. They're planning on merging w/FIAT. Why? So they can acquire Chysler and Dodge cars that dont sell worth a hoot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Why? So they can acquire Chysler and Dodge cars that dont sell worth a hoot? I think he was being sarcastic... But then again, GM has done some loopy things in the past...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlRozzi Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 So Buick is basically GMC CUVs and a sedan that doesn't sell worth a hoot? And they're keeping it around stateside? Yeah. They're planning on merging w/FIAT. I think you may have exposed GM's brand strategy. Now they want Dodge, which is basically Jeep CUVs and a sedan that doesn't sell worth a hoot. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 If you got rid of Buick...what would be the point of keeping GMC around? You could possibly sell it as sub-brand at a Chevy dealership, but there would be no point in having Buick-GMC dealers around, which would be another headache. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 GMC is the second best-selling GM division. If I recall correctly, GMC sells about 600,000 vehicles annually. That should be enough to keep the dealers afloat. Buick sedans are almost dead in the water, and buyers of Buick crossovers could probably be sold a GMC version in its place, so Buick going away in this country wouldn't necessarily hurt the dealers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 You'd have to wonder though, if there was no GMC could all those extra sales be covered by a better Chevrolet range. But then that's me applying "One Ford" thinking to GM's multi branding strategy, perhaps those separate brands justifies the effort n higher sales and transaction prices. It's much trickier when you've go four brands to feed and care for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 People said Mercury buyers won't buy Fords if they kill Mercury. But that was proven wrong. I don't think GM would suffer at all in the U.S. by killing GMC and Buick and selling the same vehicles as Chevys or Caddys, but it really comes down to the dealer network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 All GMC and Buick really do at this point is hold Chevy back. You could easily do with the Chevy brand what Ford has done with their eponymous brand and offer more luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Why? So they can acquire Chysler and Dodge cars that dont sell worth a hoot? Exactly. This is not a company that is making good decisions about its US product range. Yes, their dealership network makes it rather difficult for them to completely eliminate Buick & GMC. But the decision to double-down on the overlap between Buick and GMC is not necessary to support dealers, that's 100% corporate myopia. The kind of institutional non-sequitur-ing that would fit perfectly with selling Opel & merging with Fiat. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlRozzi Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 All GMC and Buick really do at this point is hold Chevy back. You could easily do with the Chevy brand what Ford has done with their eponymous brand and offer more luxury. That is so true. I recall before GM brought out the Saturn brand Chevrolet had been the best selling U.S. brand for decades. During the '80s their tag line was" USA 1." With Saturn GM had to move a good deal of small car sales out of Chevy and then all of a sudden Ford was the USA's number one selling brand. If GMC sales were moved to Chevy I don't want to even think about the sales bragging rights such a combination would garner for the brand. I won't even go there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) Exactly. This is not a company that is making good decisions about its US product range. Yes, their dealership network makes it rather difficult for them to completely eliminate Buick & GMC. But the decision to double-down on the overlap between Buick and GMC is not necessary to support dealers, that's 100% corporate myopia. The kind of institutional non-sequitur-ing that would fit perfectly with selling Opel & merging with Fiat. It's strange that GM would gladly dump it own euro brands to go engage Fiat just to get a piece of Chrysler Nth America. I guess the logic of one decision doesn't really apply to the second scenario.. Could t simply be that GM is looking at the comparative strength of FCA being lesso f a risk than it's won operations in Europe? Is this just GM covering one mistake with an even bigger one? Edited February 23, 2017 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 That is so true. I recall before GM brought out the Saturn brand Chevrolet had been the best selling U.S. brand for decades. During the '80s their tag line was" USA 1." With Saturn GM had to move a good deal of small car sales out of Chevy and then all of a sudden Ford was the USA's number one selling brand. If GMC sales were moved to Chevy I don't want to even think about the sales bragging rights such a combination would garner for the brand. I won't even go there... In fact, it was the Taurus that displaced Chevy from the top sales spot, not adding the Saturn brand. http://www.autonews.com/article/20111031/CHEVY100/310319973/chevy-and-ford-have-waged-a-sales-battle-for-a-century The tide turned completely after 1986. Ford surged to the forefront in 1987 and stayed there for 18 years, through 2004. Chevy was on top in 2005, Ford in 2006 and Chevy again in 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 It's strange that GM would gladly dump it own euro brands to go engage Fiat just to get a piece of Chrysler Nth America. I look at it thus: If GM considered Europe a priority, they would have made turning a profit in Europe a priority. As it is, Fiat is profitable in Europe while Opel isn't, so that's an improvement, and GM would almost certainly consider acquisition of Jeep to be an improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 Saturn hurt Chevrolet by siphoning off funds that could have been used to keep various Chevrolet models more competitive. Chevrolet failed to respond effectively to the original Taurus, and it kept the doddering Chevette in production until the mid-1980s, while Ford kept improving the Escort. GM spread itself too thin in the 1980s, between Roger Smith's massive spending spree on automation and the money poured down the Saturn rat hole. The company was on the verge of bankruptcy by late 1992. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I look at it thus: If GM considered Europe a priority, they would have made turning a profit in Europe a priority. As it is, Fiat is profitable in Europe while Opel isn't, so that's an improvement, and GM would almost certainly consider acquisition of Jeep to be an improvement. Is Fiat really profitable in Europe? I have trouble visualizing a P&L composed of all of FCA's European operations (Fiat, Lancia, Fiat Professional, Alfa Romeo, Maserati) with a positive EBITDA. Also I don't think you can compare the two operations like that. Fiat doesn't have a full line of vehicles like Opel.The biggest Fiat car for sale is Fiat Tipo - which is B+ segment car while Opel has something from A-segment (Adam) to D-segment (Insignia) plus CUV of every size. Fiat is really a rather niche brand with limited appeal even in Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 Is Fiat really profitable in Europe? I have trouble visualizing a P&L composed of all of FCA's European operations (Fiat, Lancia, Fiat Professional, Alfa Romeo, Maserati) with a positive EBITDA. Also I don't think you can compare the two operations like that. Fiat doesn't have a full line of vehicles like Opel.The biggest Fiat car for sale is Fiat Tipo - which is B+ segment car while Opel has something from A-segment (Adam) to D-segment (Insignia) plus CUV of every size. Fiat is really a rather niche brand with limited appeal even in Europe. I took a look at the Lancia website and its like looking into an issue of Cosmo. With that said, I'm not sure how Fiat can make any money with its lineup of cars...it has tiny/small Passenger cars and luxury/performance cars with um,"Character" that it sells some how. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 Is Fiat really profitable in Europe? I have trouble visualizing a P&L composed of all of FCA's European operations (Fiat, Lancia, Fiat Professional, Alfa Romeo, Maserati) with a positive EBITDA. Also I don't think you can compare the two operations like that. Fiat doesn't have a full line of vehicles like Opel.The biggest Fiat car for sale is Fiat Tipo - which is B+ segment car while Opel has something from A-segment (Adam) to D-segment (Insignia) plus CUV of every size. Fiat is really a rather niche brand with limited appeal even in Europe. Per their results, they are: https://www.fcagroup.com/en-US/media_center/fca_press_release/FiatDocuments/2017/january/FCA_%202016_FULL_YEAR_AND_FOURTH_QUARTER_RESULTS.pdf Between Maserati & their EMEA ops, they booked an 879(E) EBITDA profit, and I can't find enough non-recurring items to take them below zero. And yeah, they're not comparable with Opel, but I don't think that GM would require that to do the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 I took a look at the Lancia website and its like looking into an issue of Cosmo. With that said, I'm not sure how Fiat can make any money with its lineup of cars...it has tiny/small Passenger cars and luxury/performance cars with um,"Character" that it sells some how. Lancia only has one product and it is the Ypsilon 4 door Fiat 500 twin. It is believed that the Lancia brand will go away soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 (edited) Per their results, they are: https://www.fcagroup.com/en-US/media_center/fca_press_release/FiatDocuments/2017/january/FCA_%202016_FULL_YEAR_AND_FOURTH_QUARTER_RESULTS.pdf Between Maserati & their EMEA ops, they booked an 879(E) EBITDA profit, and I can't find enough non-recurring items to take them below zero. And yeah, they're not comparable with Opel, but I don't think that GM would require that to do the deal. Hemm... The Maserati EBITDA is worldwide result so let's exclude it (I'm willing to bet more than 100% of the EBITDA is generated in North America). The EMEA region EBITDA is 540€ million which is not too shabby but I wonder how much of that is Fiat Professional vs. Fiat. Also, it mentioned the results are partly driven by Jeep Renegade. The core Fiat operation is probably still a loss or barely breakeven is my guess. But agree that GM wouldn't care that Opel for Fiat swap is a terrible deal. Edited February 24, 2017 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 (edited) And now GM and PSA are haggling over a supposed $9 Billion Pension Gap at Opel.- I started a new thread here Finally, the other shoe drops as to why GM wants out of GME, it's all coming out as leaks but to me the biggest issue is not the lack of profit, it;s the huge pension liability. Mods, feel free to merge the threads if it makes for better discussion.. Edited February 24, 2017 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.