The 2010 Buick LaCrosse is the best car no one will buy.
08-09-09, 10:49 AM
#61
Lexus Champion
I think te new LaCrosse will sell. How well, who knows, but the currrent outgoing model does pretty well (11k-12k YTD in the recession).
I'm sure the new one will sell even better.
I'm sure the new one will sell even better.
08-09-09, 11:29 AM
#62
Lexus Fanatic
The only reason why GM saved Buick and didn't kill it off like Saturn, Hummer, Pontiac, etc, is because it's a cash cow in China, one of the world's quickest growing car markets today, because you can't tell me that Buick was doing that much better than those brands here in the US that it was able to survive.
Buick HAS done well here, domestically. It has an intensely loyal (and quite numerous) owner base, though admittedly somewhat older than average. Saturn once HAD a loyal, cult-like owner base, but screwed it up after 2000 by getting away from its primary mission, which was building reliable, inexpensive plastic-body cars that were a good alternative to Corollas and Civics. Hummer made superb off-roaders.....but, other than that, had little appeal to the public at large.
08-09-09, 12:00 PM
#63
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 7,864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A great product almost always overcomes past issues whether it's image or a previously poor product. The new Lacrosse is a tremendous design with a beautiful interior with greatly improved GM quality. It will certainly bring in some younger buyers (40 and 50 year old's who are indeed still young). Will it sell to 20 and 30 year old's? Of course not, it isn't intended to.
This may be partly true (China market), but GM's other reason is that Buick markets between Chevy and Cadillac. A nice bridge to have. While Saturn and Pontiac wastefully overlapped Chevy with slightly restyled models.
We'll certainly see more models soon from Buick. Three is just not enough for this company. It works for Scion, but not for Buick.
Let's remember it took only two new models from Cadillac to bring in new young buyers in droves - the CTS and Escalade. Buick will have a tougher time but who says GM wants to make Buick a young brand? There are already dozens of those in a market where old people is the fastest growing market. It would be silly to drop Buick now when Baby Boomers are coming full force.
I think the Lacrosse will be a hit for Buick as well, but just like with Cadillac it'll take a few different models and many years before you get the younger crowd to get into one.
The only reason why GM saved Buick and didn't kill it off like Saturn, Hummer, Pontiac, etc, is because it's a cash cow in China, one of the world's quickest growing car markets today, because you can't tell me that Buick was doing that much better than those brands here in the US that it was able to survive.
The only reason why GM saved Buick and didn't kill it off like Saturn, Hummer, Pontiac, etc, is because it's a cash cow in China, one of the world's quickest growing car markets today, because you can't tell me that Buick was doing that much better than those brands here in the US that it was able to survive.
whoa, I din't realize Buick only has THREE cars in its entire line-up:
http://www.buick.com/pages/mds/vehicles/allVehicles.do
It's stuff like the 09 LaCrosse & Lucerne (redundant & ugly) that got GM where it is.
The '10 LaCrosse looks like a huge and essential improvement. Still, how is there really a need for Buick in the US? They could just transfer the new LaCrosse and the Enclave into Caddy or even Chevy.
http://www.buick.com/pages/mds/vehicles/allVehicles.do
It's stuff like the 09 LaCrosse & Lucerne (redundant & ugly) that got GM where it is.
The '10 LaCrosse looks like a huge and essential improvement. Still, how is there really a need for Buick in the US? They could just transfer the new LaCrosse and the Enclave into Caddy or even Chevy.
We'll certainly see more models soon from Buick. Three is just not enough for this company. It works for Scion, but not for Buick.
Let's remember it took only two new models from Cadillac to bring in new young buyers in droves - the CTS and Escalade. Buick will have a tougher time but who says GM wants to make Buick a young brand? There are already dozens of those in a market where old people is the fastest growing market. It would be silly to drop Buick now when Baby Boomers are coming full force.
08-09-09, 09:59 PM
#65
Moderator
GM has to focus on its cars to boost sales
Not sure Lutz knows what he's doing. He wants to put Buick as a direct competitor to Lexus and Cadillac as a direct competitor to BMW. Not sure what to say...if it wasn't for bad luck GM wouldn't have any luck at all...
Tell them and they will buy: experts say GM has the fleet but needs to define brands
By Emily Fredrix, AP Business Writer
On Sunday August 9, 2009, 5:55 pm EDT
Buzz up! 40 Print
Companies:Ford Motor Co.
Put the brakes on the apologies. Think about your brands. And give us a reason to buy your cars.
Related Quotes
Symbol Price Change
F 8.01 -0.06
That's what marketing gurus say General Motors Co. must do as it begins a massive overhaul of advertising worth more than $2 billion a year now that it's out of bankruptcy protection.
Since emerging from bankruptcy court last month, GM is looking to revive sales as it focuses on its four remaining brands: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet and GMC. Experts say it has to get back to basics and tell consumers why they should choose its cars over those made by rivals like Ford, Toyota and Honda.
The company can do that, they say, by showing how its vehicles perform and by staking out stronger identities for the brands. There's no better time than now, as thousands of Americans who normally wouldn't be buying cars are lured into showrooms by the government's "cash-for-clunkers" trade-in program, promising up to $4,500 off a car if vehicles with poor gas mileage are traded in.
GM knows it has work to do, and it assigned the job to legendary auto executive Bob Lutz, not exactly known for his marketing experience but a longtime product development chief known for his blunt style.
Lutz, now in charge of the largest U.S. automaker's ad content, promised "quick" and "drastic" changes to GM's tone after he took the job last month. But the company hasn't announced its new strategy yet, other than Lutz saying he wants to position Buick as a competitor to Lexus and Cadillac to BMW.
"My top priority now is to enhance the ability of GM to let the public know about what great cars and trucks we build," Lutz said in an online chat last month. "For all the money spent in the past, this seemingly simple task has eluded us."
The company says it is reviewing accounts with its many ad agencies. Lutz told The Associated Press in an e-mail that the marketing revamp is well under way.
"The new stuff is in the works, and it's great," he wrote, though he declined to say when it would start airing.
Chances are, the company may want to do it soon so it can capitalize on "cash for clunkers," which made last month the best for auto sales in nearly a year. Sales improved from previous months for GM, but they were still down 19 percent from the same time last year, while rival Ford Motor Co. posted a 2.4 percent increase.
Marketing hasn't always been a problem for GM. After all, it created some of the world's most legendary brands.
Decades ago, GM's ads helped link America's love of cars with the Detroit automaker. A generation grew up singing "See the USA in your Chevrolet" with Dinah Shore in the 1950s. Decades later, the company used rocker Bob Seger's song "Like A Rock" to sell Chevy trucks.
But particularly in the past five years, the campaigns became more varied and incongruent. Remember the 2007 Super Bowl ad featuring a robot who killed himself in a dream sequence?
"These were all over the place," said Deborah Mitchell, a marketing professor at Wisconsin School of Business. "One might say they should be all over the place because they've got different brands. But the problem is even within the campaigns, there was a lot of jumping around."
Consumers don't know what separates the company's brands like Chevrolet and Buick from each other or competitors, experts say. That's why sales were soft even before the recession started.
In the past four years the company racked up more than $80 billion in losses, even as it spent about $10 billion on advertising from 2005 through the first quarter of this year, according to TNS Media Intelligence.
GM has at least been quick to pull ads that aren't working, like a recent one for the redesigned Buick LaCrosse. The ad was widely criticized for, among other reasons, not having much to do with the vehicle. In the ad, where the sedan is featured as though it were a model, a director says he only takes pictures of "beautiful things" as the car is attended to by crew members, rests by a pool and on the beach.
A male voice at the end says: "You've changed. And I love it."
But few people did. Some in the marketing industry panned the ad for being too light and not making enough sense. Even when asked how the ad could have aired, Lutz said in an online chat that it tested well. GM pulled the spot after a month.
So what should GM do?
First, stop apologizing. The company must distance its corporate identity from its brands, said Jim Wangers, the marketing guru behind the Pontiac GTO, GM's first muscle car in the 1960s.
The company shouldn't do any more with its "reinvention" campaign, which admits the company made mistakes but promises change, he said.
"I would like to see them forget about apologizing, get out from under that GM umbrella and start beating somebody and start talking to me about that fine line of Chevys, Caddies and Buicks," he said.
But it's not simply a matter of telling the public through advertisements, said veteran marketing strategist Al Ries. GM must define niches for its brands and let consumers know, for example, how a Chevy is different from a Toyota, Ries said.
GM has been so focused on making its cars better that its brands are confusing to consumers, and this will take years to undo, he said. Consumers don't really know what makes a car "better" but they do respond to "different," he said, citing the success of brands with unique niches like Porsche, Volkswagen and Mini Cooper.
"You won't solve the problem by making better cars," Ries said. "You'll solve the problem by making different cars that stand for something."
The company's lineup is among the best in its history, said Peter De Lorenzo, publisher of autoextremist.com, who used to work in automotive advertising and marketing. But consumers think only two words when they hear GM, he said: "bad" and "bankruptcy."
"The negativity of what happened with GM will eventually recede into the background if the products are so good that they can't be ignored," De Lorenzo said. "But that will take time."
AP Auto Writer Tom Krisher contributed to this report.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/GM-has...63891.html?x=0
Tell them and they will buy: experts say GM has the fleet but needs to define brands
By Emily Fredrix, AP Business Writer
On Sunday August 9, 2009, 5:55 pm EDT
Buzz up! 40 Print
Companies:Ford Motor Co.
Put the brakes on the apologies. Think about your brands. And give us a reason to buy your cars.
Related Quotes
Symbol Price Change
F 8.01 -0.06
That's what marketing gurus say General Motors Co. must do as it begins a massive overhaul of advertising worth more than $2 billion a year now that it's out of bankruptcy protection.
Since emerging from bankruptcy court last month, GM is looking to revive sales as it focuses on its four remaining brands: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet and GMC. Experts say it has to get back to basics and tell consumers why they should choose its cars over those made by rivals like Ford, Toyota and Honda.
The company can do that, they say, by showing how its vehicles perform and by staking out stronger identities for the brands. There's no better time than now, as thousands of Americans who normally wouldn't be buying cars are lured into showrooms by the government's "cash-for-clunkers" trade-in program, promising up to $4,500 off a car if vehicles with poor gas mileage are traded in.
GM knows it has work to do, and it assigned the job to legendary auto executive Bob Lutz, not exactly known for his marketing experience but a longtime product development chief known for his blunt style.
Lutz, now in charge of the largest U.S. automaker's ad content, promised "quick" and "drastic" changes to GM's tone after he took the job last month. But the company hasn't announced its new strategy yet, other than Lutz saying he wants to position Buick as a competitor to Lexus and Cadillac to BMW.
"My top priority now is to enhance the ability of GM to let the public know about what great cars and trucks we build," Lutz said in an online chat last month. "For all the money spent in the past, this seemingly simple task has eluded us."
The company says it is reviewing accounts with its many ad agencies. Lutz told The Associated Press in an e-mail that the marketing revamp is well under way.
"The new stuff is in the works, and it's great," he wrote, though he declined to say when it would start airing.
Chances are, the company may want to do it soon so it can capitalize on "cash for clunkers," which made last month the best for auto sales in nearly a year. Sales improved from previous months for GM, but they were still down 19 percent from the same time last year, while rival Ford Motor Co. posted a 2.4 percent increase.
Marketing hasn't always been a problem for GM. After all, it created some of the world's most legendary brands.
Decades ago, GM's ads helped link America's love of cars with the Detroit automaker. A generation grew up singing "See the USA in your Chevrolet" with Dinah Shore in the 1950s. Decades later, the company used rocker Bob Seger's song "Like A Rock" to sell Chevy trucks.
But particularly in the past five years, the campaigns became more varied and incongruent. Remember the 2007 Super Bowl ad featuring a robot who killed himself in a dream sequence?
"These were all over the place," said Deborah Mitchell, a marketing professor at Wisconsin School of Business. "One might say they should be all over the place because they've got different brands. But the problem is even within the campaigns, there was a lot of jumping around."
Consumers don't know what separates the company's brands like Chevrolet and Buick from each other or competitors, experts say. That's why sales were soft even before the recession started.
In the past four years the company racked up more than $80 billion in losses, even as it spent about $10 billion on advertising from 2005 through the first quarter of this year, according to TNS Media Intelligence.
GM has at least been quick to pull ads that aren't working, like a recent one for the redesigned Buick LaCrosse. The ad was widely criticized for, among other reasons, not having much to do with the vehicle. In the ad, where the sedan is featured as though it were a model, a director says he only takes pictures of "beautiful things" as the car is attended to by crew members, rests by a pool and on the beach.
A male voice at the end says: "You've changed. And I love it."
But few people did. Some in the marketing industry panned the ad for being too light and not making enough sense. Even when asked how the ad could have aired, Lutz said in an online chat that it tested well. GM pulled the spot after a month.
So what should GM do?
First, stop apologizing. The company must distance its corporate identity from its brands, said Jim Wangers, the marketing guru behind the Pontiac GTO, GM's first muscle car in the 1960s.
The company shouldn't do any more with its "reinvention" campaign, which admits the company made mistakes but promises change, he said.
"I would like to see them forget about apologizing, get out from under that GM umbrella and start beating somebody and start talking to me about that fine line of Chevys, Caddies and Buicks," he said.
But it's not simply a matter of telling the public through advertisements, said veteran marketing strategist Al Ries. GM must define niches for its brands and let consumers know, for example, how a Chevy is different from a Toyota, Ries said.
GM has been so focused on making its cars better that its brands are confusing to consumers, and this will take years to undo, he said. Consumers don't really know what makes a car "better" but they do respond to "different," he said, citing the success of brands with unique niches like Porsche, Volkswagen and Mini Cooper.
"You won't solve the problem by making better cars," Ries said. "You'll solve the problem by making different cars that stand for something."
The company's lineup is among the best in its history, said Peter De Lorenzo, publisher of autoextremist.com, who used to work in automotive advertising and marketing. But consumers think only two words when they hear GM, he said: "bad" and "bankruptcy."
"The negativity of what happened with GM will eventually recede into the background if the products are so good that they can't be ignored," De Lorenzo said. "But that will take time."
AP Auto Writer Tom Krisher contributed to this report.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/GM-has...63891.html?x=0
08-09-09, 10:35 PM
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well Lutz has it wrong. Lexus is not just positioned as a soft riding brand, he might want to go to a dealership. Cadillac hasn't done well with sport outside the CTS and CTS-V. They are rebadging a Saturn VUE and might build another smaller SUV.
Sometimes I even wonder why they even bother.
Sometimes I even wonder why they even bother.
08-10-09, 04:07 AM
#67
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 7,864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lutz is usually pretty smart about cars but is totally out of it on this one.
Buick = Lexus?
Caddy= BMW?
So a company with 3 or 4 divisions needs two luxury marques?
Maybe a Buick could compete with an ES but nothing more. Cadillac is still not where Lexus is and they think they can bring Buick there?
Buick = Lexus?
Caddy= BMW?
So a company with 3 or 4 divisions needs two luxury marques?
Maybe a Buick could compete with an ES but nothing more. Cadillac is still not where Lexus is and they think they can bring Buick there?
08-10-09, 06:35 AM
#68
Lexus Fanatic
GM has been so focused on making its cars better that its brands are confusing to consumers, and this will take years to undo, he said. Consumers don't really know what makes a car "better" but they do respond to "different," he said, citing the success of brands with unique niches like Porsche, Volkswagen and Mini Cooper.
"You won't solve the problem by making better cars," Ries said. "You'll solve the problem by making different cars that stand for something."
The company's lineup is among the best in its history, said Peter De Lorenzo, publisher of autoextremist.com, who used to work in automotive advertising and marketing.
"You won't solve the problem by making better cars," Ries said. "You'll solve the problem by making different cars that stand for something."
The company's lineup is among the best in its history, said Peter De Lorenzo, publisher of autoextremist.com, who used to work in automotive advertising and marketing.
08-10-09, 07:10 AM
#69
Lexus Champion
Lutz is usually pretty smart about cars but is totally out of it on this one.
Buick = Lexus?
Caddy= BMW?
So a company with 3 or 4 divisions needs two luxury marques?
Maybe a Buick could compete with an ES but nothing more. Cadillac is still not where Lexus is and they think they can bring Buick there?
Buick = Lexus?
Caddy= BMW?
So a company with 3 or 4 divisions needs two luxury marques?
Maybe a Buick could compete with an ES but nothing more. Cadillac is still not where Lexus is and they think they can bring Buick there?
This isn't some sort of new statement off the top of Lutz's head... it's the direction GM has been intending to take these two brands for the last 5 years now. It takes a long time from the time a company like GM decides to start heading in a new direction to the time we start actually seeing the fruits of it... well about 5 years ago GM announced Buick would target Lexus. They didn't seem to indicate that they'd attempt to compete with Lexus all the way up to the LS, but they did intend to compete with the ES, RX, GX, and possibly the GS and SC later down the road. They might also be coming out with a hybrid as well.
I think if you put the CTS next to the LaCrosse it's pretty evident where each car is aimed, and I'd say so far they've been pretty successful with it other than the fact that Caddy needs a 3-series sized car (which they are working on).
08-10-09, 07:30 AM
#70
Lexus Champion
There was a link posted on the ES forum that the rollout of the LaCrosse has been delayed due to some electronic glitches. The headline of the link indicated it was a rumor. Anyone else heard or seen it?
08-10-09, 07:39 AM
#71
Lexus Fanatic
Good luck with this. I've seen too many of these failed lux attempts before by Ford and GM. But house-cleaning has been done since. Expect some huge discounts off their premium Lexus-like and/or BMW-like pricing when reality sets in.
I expect the LaCrosse to be successful, but not at the expense of Lexus/BMW/Mercedes/Audi.
I expect the LaCrosse to be successful, but not at the expense of Lexus/BMW/Mercedes/Audi.
08-10-09, 08:26 AM
#72
Lexus Champion
The LaCrosse is already out at dealers near me. Maybe they put a stop on production so no more are shipping right now, but they definitely didn't delay the launch since it has already happened.
The LaCrosse is already MSRP'ing at a significantly lower price than the ES350 which it is arguably better than.
With that said, even though I don't think discounts should be necessary for GM to sell the car, GM has created a culture of their customers expecting discounts, so people might hesitate to buy until they place some rebates.
Good luck with this. I've seen too many of these failed lux attempts before by Ford and GM. But house-cleaning has been done since. Expect some huge discounts off their premium Lexus-like and/or BMW-like pricing when reality sets in.
I expect the LaCrosse to be successful, but not at the expense of Lexus/BMW/Mercedes/Audi.
I expect the LaCrosse to be successful, but not at the expense of Lexus/BMW/Mercedes/Audi.
With that said, even though I don't think discounts should be necessary for GM to sell the car, GM has created a culture of their customers expecting discounts, so people might hesitate to buy until they place some rebates.
08-10-09, 08:45 AM
#73
Lexus Champion
The LaCrosse is already out at dealers near me. Maybe they put a stop on production so no more are shipping right now, but they definitely didn't delay the launch since it has already happened.
The LaCrosse is already MSRP'ing at a significantly lower price than the ES350 which it is arguably better than.
With that said, even though I don't think discounts should be necessary for GM to sell the car, GM has created a culture of their customers expecting discounts, so people might hesitate to buy until they place some rebates.
The LaCrosse is already MSRP'ing at a significantly lower price than the ES350 which it is arguably better than.
With that said, even though I don't think discounts should be necessary for GM to sell the car, GM has created a culture of their customers expecting discounts, so people might hesitate to buy until they place some rebates.
08-10-09, 09:22 AM
#75
Lexus Fanatic
[QUOTE**=Threxx;4752268
The LaCrosse is already MSRP'ing at a significantly lower price than the ES350 which it is arguably better than.
With that said, even though I don't think discounts should be necessary for GM to sell the car, GM has created a culture of their customers expecting discounts, so people might hesitate to buy until they place some rebates.[/QUOTE]
Sounds promising, with a realistic pricing approach for market acceptance.
The LaCrosse is already MSRP'ing at a significantly lower price than the ES350 which it is arguably better than.
With that said, even though I don't think discounts should be necessary for GM to sell the car, GM has created a culture of their customers expecting discounts, so people might hesitate to buy until they place some rebates.[/QUOTE]
Sounds promising, with a realistic pricing approach for market acceptance.