As much as we all like to talk cars and discuss their various qualities, features, and attributes, it’s important to remember that General Motors is a business — one that needs to make money in order to survive, thrive, and create better vehicles for the the people. Unquestionably, the biggest obstacle standing in the way of The General’s ability to do just this is GM Europe. Screw it, we’ll just come out and say it: Opel.
The General should have walked away from the brand when it had the chance. But now, it’s stuck in a bottomless morass, with only the hope of light (not even a glimmer) at the end of the tunnel.
A Loser From The Very Beginning
Opel has been a money-losing venture for more than the last decade — to the extent of $10 billion during the time period. Through countless cases of mismanagement and overall subpar governance, the unit has limped along — subsidized by its parent company. The division lost $747 million in 2011 and is on track to lose more than a billion green ones in 2012 — persisting to be a major drag on what is an otherwise very healthy GM.
What’s perhaps even more melancholy, though, is that GM had the chance to rid itself of the storied German brand over two years ago when it was going through bankruptcy. Somewhere along the line, someone (Ed Whitacre & Co). decided to keep the operation in the name of European market share, given that Chevrolet was (and still is) a very low-volume player in the region.
Today, GM is doing its best to turn Opel around. The division, which — like a corporate siren — has claimed the positions of countless executives, is said to be on track to break even by mid-decade. But for what?
What Is The Point?
What’s really the point of keeping Opel if it doesn’t contribute to the bottom line, while in the process requiring an enormous amount of effort and energy for the possibility of a turnaround? I say possibility, since there’s no guarantee that the efforts will pay off — by mid-decade, or ever.
Wouldn’t GM be better off to focus all that time, energy, and resources on creating better products, rather than trying to revive a failing business unit in the face of adverse economic conditions and a (German) government that refuses to play ball (mostly because of Opel’s American ownership)?
GM appears to think that the answer is “no”, as in it would rather continue beating the dead horse that is Opel. Doing so, however, will be at the expense of the global success of Chevrolet — GM’s true global mainstream brand. In effect, Chevy will have a more difficult time penetrating the Euro market thanks to Opel — turning the game into Opel versus Chevy.
Sure, Opel might have greater cachet, name recognition, and consumer mindshare… but it’s far from being profitable. So what’s the point of all that time and energy? Wouldn’t the smart thing be to dump it, and start over anew?
Still A Hostile Environment
But what makes us ask “what’s the point” even more is the fact that there’s still a very real, yet intangible feeling of “us vs. them” at Opel. At all levels, the corporate environment has been described to GM Authority by those familiar with the automaker’s operations as “hostile” and “counter productive”, as employees of the German brand seem to have a skewed perception of reality — one in which GM hasn’t owned the company for over a century.
For some reason, Opel folk are under the impression that GM is out to harm Opel, along with Germany (and possibly their family, and their family’s cow). The fact that GM has been subsidizing Opel’ monstrous losses… well, that’s a minor oversight.
The Result
What GM now has on its hands is a loss-making business unit at which it’s throwing everything and the kitchen sink, but tangible results are so far away (if not entirely impossible), that we don’t even see a reason to try anymore. In effect, Opel is:
- keeping GM from investing more than its competitors in R&D, process, human resources (compensation, development), and various other facets of the business — all of which result in the creation of better products
- keeping Chevy from the achieving higher sales volume (despite what some European car enthusiasts may think about The Bow Tie Brand — it’s possible)
- keeping talented GM executives and employees occupied on a failed project, all of whom can be focusing their energies on creating better products instead of playing political Stratego with Europe (read: Germany) and unions, or pinching pennies by forming partnerships with second-tier European automakers
- keeping GM’s stock price deflated, and investor confidence low
- wasting talent, time, and human resources that could be better used elsewhere
At the end of the day, GM would be better off without Opel. The automaker can easily transfer the proven R&D/engineering/design operations from Opel to GM (even open up an R&D office in Germany), then drop the Opel brand (and its baggage) altogether. That should have been done years ago… but today is still not too late. The short-term action plan should include a laser focus on Chevy globally, making money in Europe at a low volume (via high plant utilization), and growing from there. In fact, it will probably be faster to turn a profit by following this strategy than getting Opel into the black.
Come to think of it, Opel reminds me of a beautiful girl (since Opels are quite attractive) that doesn’t like to cook, clean, or work — but instead spends all of your money and puts you in debt as your labor away the day. Fritz Henderson was right. And don’t even get me started on Vauxhall.
Comments
Okay, so this article displayed very little understanding for what Opel really is all about. Like much of GM in America over the past decade, there is way too much production in a market that is absolutely shrinking (Western Europe). Furthermore, the Vauxhall operation, which is built alongside Opel on the continent, might be better off shut down. The UK Vauxhall (Opel) factories typically are plagued with the worst quality control as well as labor disputes and has been an anchor on the rest of the operation.
For the most part, Opel has some of the best, freshest designs within GM Global, many of which are sold worldwide through other divisions (such as Holden). Opel’s R&D in Russelheim Germany is responsible for many breakthroughs in automotive design.
Rather than letting Opel go, perhaps GM should pull the plug on Buick, who’s “miraculous return” is anything but.
I completely agree, personally I would buy an Opel/Vauxhall in a heartbeat if it were sold here, the Astra OPC specifically. Also alot of R/D was contributed, by Opel, to the Chevy Cruze, one of Chevy’s best selling cars. Frankly pulling the plug on Buick would be the best option, I know there are alot of loyal Buick owners, but it is a business, and at some point you have to cut the dying limb, and in this case it would be Buick. True Buick is bringing alot of youthful buyers, but most of these new buyers are going for the Regal, the badge engineered Insignia, and the Verano, essentially a Astra.
Tyler — I specifically recommended that GM fold Opel R&D into its global operations before ridding itself of the unit.
Buick, on the other hand, is a rapidly-growing brand. It’s profitable, and it serves a real non-conflicting purpose. Opel, on the other hand, shares NONE of those attributes.
I looked into the figures and markets of Buick and I would have to disagree, because of 2 main points. One Buick is sold really in China and North America, I will agree that it is rapidly growing, but only because of China (where GM sells 35% of Buick’s, higher then even North America). Secondly it is not a global brand, Buick’s main market is North America and China, where as Opel is a truly global brand. The main problem with Opel is the agreements with the Unions and the Corporate structure, which has to be entirely rebuilt, the cars still sell well in Europe having a 6% market share and the Astra for example was top of its class and the Insignia was European Car of the year. To get rid of Opel would be shooting GM in the foot, Opel is still a popular marque in Europe. Its also a problem of class, because there is virtually no such thing as an entry level luxury market in Europe its either Luxury from Audi, Merc and BMW, or basic motoring such as Opel VW and Fiat, take for example the Acura line of cars, mostly re-badge Hondas in the rest of the World but North America is an Entry level marque. Opel should be kept in the class that it is in to create a friendly inter company competition, kinda like Pontiac and Chevy but not the same car with a different badge, but have 2 different design schools, the European Opel and the American/Korean designed Chevy’s such as the Sonic and the Cruze. One other point I will make note of is the conflicting purpose, most manufacturers will sell basic cars in the compact and subcompact roles even merc and Audi will do that. For example the Audi A1 and 3 and the Mercedes A and B class, so the argument of conflcting purposes is null and void based on the fact that their structure of selling cars is the same as most marques in Europe, and the conflicting purposes with Chevrolet should not be a major concern, especially if its withing the same company. The main problem is the structure of corporate affairs and union labour, the corporate structure should be abolished and brought under the control of GM Europe in Switzerland while the R/D should be left to their own work.
Scott, let me go down your list and refute the claims:
1. “this article displayed very little understanding for what Opel really is all about”
Opel is a loss-making division of General Motors. Nothing more, and nothing less. That’s what “it’s all about”.
The fact that the market is shrinking is irrelevant; a business needs to adapt. Dumping Opel and the rest of its “baggage” and focusing on Chevy (without any baggage) is the wise course of action.
2. Completely agree about Opel R&D. That’s why I specifically recommended to fold Opel R&D before removing the unit.
3. Which Holdens use Opel R&D? I’m not aware of any… unless you’re counting platforms… and that was a global GM effort not specific to Opel.
In fact, Opel is now its own brand in Australia (and Chile):
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/09/opel-commences-sales-in-australia-chile/
4. As for Buick, the brand is nothing like Opel. It’s profitable, it serves an obvious and non-conflicting (with other brands) need/demand/customer, and sales are growing:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/12/gm-u-s-sales-grow-3-percent-in-november-2012/
In short, I’d have to disagree with your original assessment: “so this article displayed very little understanding for what Opel really is all about.” That is, unless I completely misunderstood you. In that case, I apologize.
I do not understand why you keep telling stupid things about Buick… Buick is currently have model lineup which is all rebadged Opel cars (except Enclave and LaCross but dont forget the platform of Insignia) and they did not invest any money in research and producing development of Verano, Excelle, Regal and Encore and it is normal to be profitable, and those cars have big share in production of Buick in China and USA.
Alexander you’re the stupid one who doesn’t understand what it means to be making money and losing money. Alex is right: it’s time to get rid of Opel.
And it doesn’t matter where the platform was designed since GM was the one who ultimately paid for it. So shut your little pie hole and learn to speak English.
‘The UK Vauxhall (Opel) factories typically are plagued with the worst quality control as well as labor disputes and has been an anchor on the rest of the operation.’
Would you care to give some figures with regard to warranty returns that prove that the Astras made in the UK are of significantly worse quality than those made in Poland or Germany? If you can. I’d love to see them, seeing as we’ve heard no such thing.
As for labour disputes, when did they happen? 10 years I’ve worked at Ellesmere Port and I remember a single one-shift walkout in 2004 over the compulsory redundancy of dozens of workers and two short-lived (like, 2 weeks) unofficial overtime bans over some local issues. In 10 years. Hardly ‘plagued’ and ‘typical’. In fact, when GM awarded the contract for the next Astra to the UK, they specifically cited the flexibility of the workforce and their good relations with the union as a prime factor in the decision.
Scott:
I did some quick research on strikes in Vauxhall, and from what I can see, there have not been any in years. Can you back up your claim?
Apart from the massive underusage of factories in Europe across all brands, German unions and politics have been the number one inhibitor of expense reduction by car makers in Europe.
Little wonder therefore that Vauxhall took advantage of their situation and made themselves more competitive in comparision to their Opel counterparts.
As for reliability, What Car? reports Chevrolet entered their rankings with Korean built cars at 9th, and Vauxhall ranked 24 out of 36. Not good I suppose but average cost of repair was lower than Honda who ranked #1 They were clearly held down by some very old and unreliable cars that haven’t been sold in years. See here for full results
http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/what-car-reliability-survey-2012/introduction/263555
Alex I get where your point of view however, the main reason GM never got rid of Opel while it had the chance was because of the US government. Think about it with the treasury being GM’s largest shareholder it can pretty much do whatever it wants with the company. Opel wasn’t terminated because it would be a spit in the face to the Germans one of our allies, get it?
While that makes sense in theory Hafeez, I don’t think it was the reality. I remember reading how German politicians were upset that GM decided to keep Opel (going back to that national contention of Opel vs. GM), rather than selling to Magna/Sberbank fund…
What about moving Opel upmarket and leave the Chevrolet as being mainstream?
The problem is that there isn’t really an entry level in Europe, most automotive companies in Europe make both luxury cars as well as regular cars, take Lancia for example they sold the Delta and the Beta, both basic cars more or less, while selling cars like the Thema, a car which back in its prime could take on the likes of a BMW 5 series. Take Mercedes for example they sell basic cars such as the A and B class as does Opel with the Corsa, Astra and the upcoming Adam, in Europe at least. The problem with setting up another luxury company in Europe would cannibalize Cadillac sales in Europe, not only in terms of luxury but as a performance company as well.
In NA seeing as we have a distinct Entry level and mainstream market, I would say sell the Astra Corsa and the Adam as Vauxhall to set a friendly competition between Chevy and Vauxhall, for their youthful cars like the Sonic and the Cruze vs the Astra and the Corsa. While selling Opel in place of Buick selling cars such as the Verano, Insignia, Mokka etc. (i included the Verano because it does have enough of a different look compared to the Astra, sort of a minature Insignia if you will). This introduction of Opel in as a 2 pronged company would give GM 2 companies to compete with Honda and smaller Nissans and Scion as well (if Gm was to introduce the Enigma as a Toyota GT86/FRS/BRZ competition so to say), while still maintaining Opel as an entry level marque to compete with Acura, Infiniti and Lexus. In NA moving upstream would work, but in Europe there is no where to move up unless you kill Cadillac in Europe. Evidence of this is also seen with VW, when they tried to create a full sized luxury Saloon and both in the NA and Euro market it still sells poorly. So the best bet is to try and stream line their corporate structure because in the area which they serve now they still sell alot of good cars, and set new deals with unions, and introduce Opel as a replacement for Buick in China and a tandem Vauxhall/Opel here in NA. Also to make a note of Opel and Chevy selling in the same market, it would create a healthy competition within GM in Europe in the same way as here in NA.
What do you understand by “entry level”, “luxury”, “regular” and “mainstream” cars?
What makes you see Opel as “entry level”, but the same cars when rebadged as Buick as “luxury”? I don’t understand… plz advise!
@Observer7:
Mainstream is mainstream, or non-luxury. Chevy, Opel, Ford, Fiat, VW, Hyundai, Kia, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.
Luxury is luxury: Audi, MBZ, BMW, Cadillac, Lexus, etc.
What makes Buicks more luxurious is positioning, features (the kinds of features, not the overall amount), and the fact that they are not rebadged Opels. Yes, they’re very similar (Astra/Verano, Mokka/Encore, Insignia/Regal), but GM performs addition work to make them quieter, improve the quality of cabin materials, use different powertrains, and price them higher than mainstream vehicles. In addition, warranty plays into this as well.
Ultimately, Buick today is not where GM wants to be. It doesn’t simply want to sell badged Opels as Buicks; instead, the goal is to continue moving Buick upmarket by creating vehicles that serve those luxury customers who don’t want a performance-luxury experience, but would rather have a softer, quieter, and more refined vehicle. Does that answer your questions?
@Alex:
From afar there are just some cosmetic changes (the “ass brows” as you called it), but how much of the described features is real, i.e. beyond “positioning”? Maybe the talk about “active noice cancelling”?
Wasn’t it on your blog that I read about fake wood in the Buick-badged Astra instead of the real thing? That did not sound like luxury to me.
@Observer7 Active noise canceling is one of the differences; another is increased sound-proofing, as are the seats (leather). But you’re correct in noticing that all of those are not enough to bring Buick into its own.
That’s the reason for my previous comment of Buick not being where it wants to be (in my opinion). Instead, it seems to be a work in progress as it moves upscale (with its own vehicles, higher quality materials, and more luxury overall).
You can probably get leather in a Opel. Just saying.
Not like this you can’t Tyler
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2011/10/buick-spent-at-least-1000-hours-optimizing-veranos-seats-for-comfort/
http://www.opel.ie/content/dam/Opel/Europe/master/hq/en/01_Vehicles/01_PassengerCars/Insignia_FAMILY/Insignia_SportsTourer/02_Highlights/Lightbox/Insignia_Sportstourer_Features_Design_LeatherIndianSummer_cnt_mmpar_1_768x432_in11_tr01_036.jpg
I do believe you can, Opel Insignia Sport Tourer.
Wel, it seems that the US-Buick Regal has “leather-appointed seats” in its basic trim, while with its Opel twin Insignia, leather seats are an extra, priced from 4’450 to 5’245 Euros. German price list http://www.opel.de/content/dam/Opel/Europe/germany/nscwebsite/de/01_Vehicles/01_PassengerCars/Insignia_FAMILY/Insignia_Notch/02_Auss_und_Tech_Daten/01_Modelle/Insignia_Preisliste_20121119_1.0.pdf
On the Astra sedan (twin of the US-Buick Verano) Leather package is available for 1’400 or 1’550 Euro (according to German price list http://www.opel.de/content/dam/Opel/Europe/germany/nscwebsite/de/01_Vehicles/01_PassengerCars/New_Astra_Hatchback/01_ModelOverview/04_PDF/Astra_Preisliste_20121119_3.0.pdf )
so again the point stands that their noting more then slightly up rated Opels. True you have to pay more for it, but alls considering its probably the same price for an Opel with leather seats and the whole nine yards, as a basic Regal and Verano, the Up rated Verano and Regal probably get some extra features but to the same level as the extra features as the Sierra compared to the Silverado, but the basic Insignia and Regal get same engines and the up rated Insignia gets the 2.8T V6.
“Ultimately, Buick today is not where GM wants to be. It doesn’t simply want to sell badged Opels as Buicks; instead, the goal is to continue moving Buick upmarket by creating vehicles that serve those luxury customers who don’t want a performance-luxury experience, but would rather have a softer, quieter, and more refined vehicle”
Sounds like typical GM publicity speak to me. Buick is exactly where GM wants it to be. Create a complete range of cars off the back of Opel designs and sell at a premium in the US and China. GM cannot possibly keep moving Buick upmarket otherwise it will bang straight into Cadillac’s target market. The idea that target customers don’t want a “performance-luxury experience” is daft, that they would rather have “a softer, quieter, and more refined vehicle” sounds like one of Buicks adverts from the 70s appealing to nearly deads that used to make up the bulk of Buick’s customer.
“Buick is exactly where GM wants it to be. Create a complete range of cars off the back of Opel designs and sell at a premium in the US and China.”
Sounds like you’re one of those Opel employees responsible for the described Opel-GM tension. Did you forget that GM has been funding Opel’s losses for over a decade, or that Opel is a GM company? As such, GM can do whatever it desires with the products its engineers designed.
As for a “complete range of cars”, need I remind you of the LaCrosse and Enclave?
“GM cannot possibly keep moving Buick upmarket otherwise it will bang straight into Cadillac’s target market. The idea that target customers don’t want a “performance-luxury experience” is daft, that they would rather have “a softer, quieter, and more refined vehicle” sounds like one of Buicks adverts from the 70s appealing to nearly deads that used to make up the bulk of Buick’s customer.”
What’s daft is your lack of understanding of the luxury car market, and the tastes, preferences, and priorities that comprise it. I will try to briefly elucidate you herein.
There is a significant amount of luxury car buyers that don’t care about performance in a vehicle. They instead prioritize silence, comfort, and a disconnected experience. To these buyers, driving is a chore — not a hobby, and it usually doesn’t serve them any pleasure.
“But how many buyers can that be?”, you might ask. “Surely, they can’t make up the majority.”
Taking a brief look into the past, Lexus came to become the best-selling luxury marque in the late 90s and early 2000s by serving exactly these customers. That was before Lexus lost focus (and its #1 spot) and decided to chase BMW into the performance luxury game; it was also way before anything sport-related was in the Lexus lexicon.
So, there are two vastly disparate luxury car buyers: those who want a performance driving experience and (the promise to) go fast, and those who want to be coddled and isolated from the road. There is a ton of market research to support this.
Cadillac will do just fine serving the former group, while Buick is focusing on the latter. It’s ok for Buick to “bump against” Cadillac since both are serving very distinct buyers. There is overlap, but its minuscule.
That’s why I recommended (the following is my personal opinion) that Buick isn’t where it wants to be yet. It can’t command as high prices as it wants due to its image and due to the lack of real Buick product (LaX and Enclave aside).
Alex you are way off the mark (AGAIN) I have worked for Vauxhall not Opel, and I remember the decade in the 90s when GM Europe was subsidising losses for GM in the US. There is no evidence to substantiate what you say at all – market research was one of the many reasons GM in the US got into the mess it did prior to bankruptcy. There is not a single luxury / premium car that sells in any large quantity that does not have good performance and dynamics and to suggest buyers don’t want them flies straight in the face of what GM has been trying to do which is move away from the 70 year olds that used to buy Buicks for the exact reasons you mention but they are now in a very very small minority. BMW Mercedes Audi Lexus Infinity Jaguar are all selling right across the price reach from Buick to Cadillac with 1 brand but many models. No problem with that at all but don’t pretend Buick are not trying to be competitive in this market. Face it Alex the days of the Buick “like your dad bought” are gone for good and there is no chance GM would try to bring them back. As for LaCrosse it uses Epsilon II a platform developed by GM Europe, and the Enclave uses Lambda which was developed from Epsilon so you cannot escape the Opel connection.
David — let’s take this relationship step-by-step, shall we?
“Alex you are way off the mark (AGAIN) I have worked for Vauxhall not Opel, and I remember the decade in the 90s when GM Europe was subsidising losses for GM in the US.”
As far as I can remember, Opel/GM Europe has been unprofitable for the last 9 years. 2012 will make that 10. Europe did help the U.S. (and other international divisions) in the 90s, but we’re talking about the 2000s here — are we not?
“… market research was one of the many reasons GM in the US got into the mess it did prior to bankruptcy”.
Wrong. Uncompetitive and poor product got GM into the mess… not market research.
“There is not a single luxury / premium car that sells in any large quantity that does not have good performance and dynamics and to suggest buyers don’t want them…”
Wrong again. See Lexus — the most popular luxury brand in the U.S. until the last 2-3 years.
On top of that, every single Lexus model that sells in a high volume is a soft-riding vehicle that DOES NOT place emphasis on performance, especially the ES and RX.
“Face it Alex the days of the Buick “like your dad bought” are gone for good and there is no chance GM would try to bring them back.”
It’s not about my dad, your dad, or anyone’s dad. It’s about the market, and its demand. See Lexus.
“As for LaCrosse it uses Epsilon II a platform developed by GM Europe, and the Enclave uses Lambda which was developed from Epsilon so you cannot escape the Opel connection.”
Opel is a GM subsidiary. They’re GM platforms on which Opel happened to have led the development.
Sorry Alex you are digging a bigger hole for yourself!
“As far as I can remember, Opel/GM Europe has been unprofitable for the last 9 years. 2012 will make that 10. Europe did help the U.S. (and other international divisions) in the 90s, but we’re talking about the 2000s here — are we not?”
So what! The principle is the same, just because a company has problems, as GM in US did in the 1990, doesn’t mean you just close it down or give it away. No you take action to put it right which is what is happening now.
“Uncompetitive and poor product got GM into the mess… not market research.”
No, in the past GM spent billions on hiring market research and brand management consultants who told them where each division should be positioned and the type of products the market wanted and it was the end result of this that was the reason for the utter crap churned out by GM at the time.
“See Lexus — the most popular luxury brand in the U.S. until the last 2-3 years. On top of that, every single Lexus model that sells in a high volume is a soft-riding vehicle that DOES NOT place emphasis on performance, especially the ES and RX”
Why use Lexus as an example then? Ask yourself why they are not the most popular luxury brand anymore. More to the point look who overtook them and you have the answer.
“It’s not about my dad, your dad, or anyone’s dad. It’s about the market, and its demand. See Lexus”
Why see Lexus, why should Buick follow third best? Buick should be looking at the top 2 instead
“Opel is a GM subsidiary. They’re GM platforms on which Opel happened to have led the development”
Yes which confirms what I said in the first place that no Buick sold today is without some sort of Opel input.
Your contention that Buick is not interested in performance and doesn’t need to be is made even less credible by the fact GM has registered the GNX, T Type and Grand National nameplates for future use.
Sorry Alex you are as I said way off the mark with your assumptions about Buick, Opel and especially Vauxhall.
David — if I’m digging a hole for myself, then you’re excavating a mine… Let’s try this again:
“So what! The principle is the same, just because a company has problems, as GM in US did in the 1990, doesn’t mean you just close it down or give it away. No you take action to put it right which is what is happening now.”
You don’t see the problem with losing money for (nearly) a decade? At some point, enough is enough — and a radical change is needed.
“No, in the past GM spent billions on hiring market research and brand management consultants who told them where each division should be positioned and the type of products the market wanted and it was the end result of this that was the reason for the utter crap churned out by GM at the time.”
Market research and brand management would have bene just fine if the product were competitive. For the most part, it was not.
In addition, the GM you’re referring to was using an outdated business model (a brand for each taste/preference/etc.) — which worked in the 40s – 60s, maybe even the 80s — but not the 90s and later. Again, product is key… and product was lackluster.
“Why use Lexus as an example then? Ask yourself why they are not the most popular luxury brand anymore. More to the point look who overtook them and you have the answer.”
You’re missing the forest for the trees. Lexus lost its lead due to 1) troubles in Japan, 2) the infamous pedal/unintended acceleration fiasco, and — most of all — 3) the loss of focus on the soft luxury market that brought it to prominence in the first place. It decided that it wanted to chase BMW in the performance-luxury game — alienating a lot of its “traditional’ customers. What you need to undertand is that Lexus, along with MBZ, BMW, Audi, Acura, and Infiniti, is one brand. It needs to appeal to as many customers as possible with a single brand. With Buick and Cadillac, GM doesn’t have this problem; it can use both brands to target the two entirely different luxury buyers.
“Why see Lexus, why should Buick follow third best? Buick should be looking at the top 2 instead”
It’s not about being “best” — it’s about sales volume. Cadillac has (or will have) the BMW/BMZ/Audi market “covered”. Buick can swoop in and sell cars to those luxury customers not looking for a performance luxury experience. It’s a competitie advantage.
And since profit is significantly higher on luxury models than “mainstream” models, this strategy allows GM to accomplish its profitability targets — resulting in even better, more competitive products in the long term.
“Yes which confirms what I said in the first place that no Buick sold today is without some sort of Opel input.”
And what of it?
“Your contention that Buick is not interested in performance and doesn’t need to be is made even less credible by the fact GM has registered the GNX, T Type and Grand National nameplates for future use.”
Even if the trademark filings will result in actual products, it’s not necessarily a wise idea…
“Sorry Alex you are as I said way off the mark with your assumptions about Buick, Opel and especially Vauxhall.”
May I ask which assumptions you’re referring to, specifically?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203471004577142720401484482.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us_business
BMW is the top dog now. Just like to point that out, considering your superior knowledge of the luxury car segment being dominated by people who do not want a performance luxury car. (sarcasm intended). It isn’t so much the performance issue, its an issue of class, of taste, of refinement, a skill that Mercedes Audi Jaguar and BMW are masters at, and a skill that New Cadillac and Lexus are learning. I am not saying that Buick is not a classy vehicle, but Buick, Lincoln, Chrysler, Acura, are entry level luxury vehicles, luxury for the every-man perse. Their basic cars that were rebadged as a premium make, jack up the price enough that most people can afford it, so that people can have some refinement in their vehicles, or some added features to their everyday vehicles. In all honesty that’s why there isn’t really an entry level in Europe, their just premium cars from average companies e.g. Opel and VW.
and by premium I mean entry level from basic companies.
Alex your hole has become a crater! LOL.
“You don’t see the problem with losing money for (nearly) a decade? At some point, enough is enough — and a radical change is needed”
I understand perfectly about the seriousness of the losses and radical changes are what are being done (and other options considered) now.
“Market research and brand management would have bene just fine if the product were competitive. For the most part, it was not. In addition, the GM you’re referring to was using an outdated business model (a brand for each taste/preference/etc.) — which worked in the 40s – 60s, maybe even the 80s — but not the 90s and later. Again, product is key… and product was lacklustre”
At last a tiny bit we can agree on! Product was and still is the key. The problem was at the time GM allowed their product portfolio in the US to be dictated by brand management and market researchers as was clearly highlighted by Bob Lutz many years later.
“You’re missing the forest for the trees. Lexus lost its lead due to 1) troubles in Japan, 2) the infamous pedal/unintended acceleration fiasco, and — most of all — 3) the loss of focus on the soft luxury market that brought it to prominence in the first place. It decided that it wanted to chase BMW in the performance-luxury game — alienating a lot of its “traditional’ customers. What you need to undertand is that Lexus, along with MBZ, BMW, Audi, Acura, and Infiniti, is one brand. It needs to appeal to as many customers as possible with a single brand. With Buick and Cadillac, GM doesn’t have this problem; it can use both brands to target the two entirely different luxury buyers”
Totally and completely wrong!
The effect on sales from the Tsunami are long gone, it was Toyota who had the issue and backlash over unintended acceleration not Lexus, and their sales were starting to weaken before all of this for precisely the opposite reasons you state. Lexus failed to change it’s products to suit the market and is why BMW, Mercedes and Audi are growing so rpidly.
“It’s not about being “best” — it’s about sales volume. Cadillac has (or will have) the BMW/BMZ/Audi market “covered”. Buick can swoop in and sell cars to those luxury customers not looking for a performance luxury experience. It’s a competitive advantage”
Absolutely not – Lutz, Ackerson, Reuss have all stated the key to GM’s future health is to produce “best in class” products not mindless chasing of market share.
“And what of it?”
Put simply – No Opel = No Buick
“Your contention that Buick is not interested in performance and doesn’t need to be is made even less credible by the fact GM has registered the GNX, T Type and Grand National nameplates for future use.”
“Even if the trademark filings will result in actual products, it’s not necessarily a wise idea”…
It is absolutely 100% the right idea and Buick know it! In any event it builds on what Buick are doing now with their GS models.
@Alex Luft
Sure, the platforms Delta, Gamma, Epsilon etc etc are “GM Platforms”. But they are made by people, and they depend on the knowledge of those people. Ownership of paper and some rights to what is printed on the paper does not make it a living property.
This turns around your idea that GM can close down all manufacturing in Europe, give up the European market, but keep the Opel technical development center. I see this as a pipe dream.
Also, hiring completely new people and giving them the task of resuming and continuing the work of the collective work of several thousand people over there in Rüsselsheim — well, it will be a heave break in development, at least. It might be useful to get rid of old habits, but to achieve the level of the team just sacked will not be easy.
As to the non-“complete range of cars”: I mentioned the Enclave and Lacrosses before. The latest Saab 9-5 was originally intended as the extended Epsilon-II-car in Europe, but we all know that the world crisis of 2008 and GMs bancruptcy have led to a big reshuffling of GM’s brand line-up.
Opel did have cars of that class, like the Signum or Omega. I expect GM to introduce an Opel-twin of the Lacrosse, maybe only with the next generation Epsilon platform. But consider that the Chevrolet cousin, the Impala is only brought to market now, or rather next year. Let’s see, if GM brings the 2014 Imapa to Europe before a corresponding Opel model… I perceive GM’s brand strategy in Europ as moving Opel up-market, and presenting Chevrolet as the entry level (Korea imports).
As to the Enclave, the barrier might be the lack of a choice of engines (ony the 3.6L), but also the narrowness of the market. GM is also not offereing the Enclave’s Chevrolet brother, the Traverse, in Europe.
Besides these two models, the Opel range of cars is much wider and more varied than Buick’s.
In Europe there is no such thing as an entry level luxury vehicle. In North America however there is such a class, look at companies like Acura, by no means a full luxury car like that of Mercedes or Audi or BMW, thats what makes Buick in NA a entry level luxury car, no major performance variants and in terms of interior quality, their is no comparison (honestly I like GM vehicles but Buick vs Merc or Audi lets be reasonable). Where as in Europe their is either luxury companies (Audi Merc etc.) or basic auto companies (VW Chevy Honda etc.). As I said in my statement is that companies like Acura is sold as Honda in Europe and it is the same with Opel and Buick with a few interior modifications and NA doesn’t get the V6 rated version of the Regal. I do apologize for the confusion on that matter, I would also like to point out that I was trying to state that Opel in Europe is a mainstream company, but with alot of the same interior quality as Buick, Top Gear’s James May did a review on the Vauxhall Insignia VXR and said it was a very quiet vehicle, and I believe that is the car with the 321 HP 2.8L turbo V6, so the argument on the quietness of the vehicle is void, considering what the guys at Top Gear have tested before in terms of luxury and performance and also comparing to the smaller engine variants of the Regal we get. I understand how it is quieter because of the vibrational energy from a larger engine, but considering that it is still a quiet vehicle with a V6, one can assume that the same build materials went into the interior.
GM fields far too many models that are not segment leaders here in North America , so it beggars the mind as to why they are involved in Europe . Is it because of their business acumen and commnd of the marketplace ?? God forbid , the General has been demoted to Corporal as Ford , Honda and Toyota and now Hyundai , Kia and Nissan have all garnered the lion share of the marketplace by being highly selective of their abbreveated lineups in each size segment ,,, been improving the reliability ,appointments and resale values . What GM did with the Malibu is deplorable . Here is a segment contender , orders from the top say downsiize the platform so instead of taking the present one and improving the interior , engines etc , in trots the downsized version and space chopped out of the rear passenger compartment and the same dated cockpit The result is a thorough panning by the most popular automotive magazine and sales plummet . GM can’t afford such blunders , the marketplace is too smart and competitive , so now GM is involved in Europe with Opel , wonderful . Their first act is to fire/let go thousand of employees , how easy is that , except how will they be segment leaders in this specialized European market when they haven’t a clue , with the odd exception , to be so in North America . When I managed dept. stores for years , the buck stopped with me every time , as it does with any top flight business management ….those at Ford , Honda and Toyota to name a few in the auto segment come to mind . GM doesn’t appear to have any such person(s), in that ivory tower they live in are brand name fiefdoms that appear to be isolated from the reality of the a common goal , to quote an old saying , ” united we stand , divided we fall ” . MALIBU , you may have awaken the corporal , for the moment , so you are not a total loss….what a way to learn !!
I smell Union. Sell Opel to it’s employees.
The question is: what is GM without Opel and the Opel-based cars? It’s a low-qualtity mass-production manufacturer that will be overrun by Toyota, Volkswagen, Hyundai, Renault/Nissan and even Ford in terms of quality, design, image, innovation and number of sales.
What most of you forget: Opel’s problems began, when GM-management decided to cut costs in the early ’90s (Lopez!) and prevent Opel’s global presence.
@The German It seems that you misunderstood my original statement, in which I state that GM should keep the German design and engineering operations; all that would be sold is the brand, along with plants.
In answering “what is GM without Opel”, I’d ask if you’ve seen the Cadillac ATS or CTS. Don’t underestimate GM’s global design and engineering operations, including those in North America, Korea, China, and Australia. Needless to say, “low quality” doesn’t even apply when it comes to those models from Cadillac.
@Alex Luft:
“GM should keep the German design and engineering operations”
the big question is: is an engineering center of 6000 people viable with no manufacturing base around, the next being at least a day trip away on another continent? I doubt that.
“all that would be sold is the brand, along with plants.”
SOLD? You tell GM to do away with Opel for making losses? Who in the world would want to take up such a loss making operation stripped of everything which is valuable about it, i.e. the development center and the rights to all the patents? Every competitor would be glad to get rid of a competitor and of GM sacrificing their presence on the European market on GM’s expense and the win of VW, Renault-Nissan, FIAT-Chrysler, Toyota and Hyundai-Kia. GM would have to close all factories and endure a long costly fight with the working class for throwing 34’000 into unemployment. See currently the struggle at Florange (France) because of Arcelor-Mittal’s decistion to shut down the steel mill completely.
The central point is to destroy “over-capacity” in the European automotive industry. Closing down Opel would be a welcome for each other car maker, because they will hope that their can then use their factories at capacity.
– If everybody at Opel hated GM; maybe it is because there were reasons for (cf. ‘The German’, the letter to GM by Opel’s board member Wilhelm Gäb when he quit etc, etc…)
– How motivated do you think Opel’s engineers will be working for GM if Opel is gone?
– How about building Buick and Chevy-badged Opels sold globally at Opel?
– How about paying Opel back a fair royalties for their R&D
– I, too, wish Opel had been sold
– Maybe you should rebrand to Chevy or VW-Authority
There are hardly any “Chevy-badged Opels” any more in production.
GM is pushing Chevrolet as a global brand (as Cadillac) and is marrying Opel and Buick as brands for specific markets with rebadged cars.
For example the Meriva which had been jointly developed by GM do Brasil and Opel, being sold als “Chevrolet Meriva” in Brasil and “Opel Meriva” in other markets has been replaced by different models, the Opel Meriva B on the one hand, and “Chevrolet Spin” on the other. The latter seems to be intended as a global competitor to the Toyota Avanza, shall be produced also in Indonesia, and will probably only be offered in the “Third World” or “emerging markets” as the talking heads call it nowadays.
Without Opel GM is Trucks. They can thank the Aussies for keeping RWD cars alive (which includes the new Alpha), but anything FWD or FWD based traces its lineage back to Russelsheim: Epsilon (and derivatives Lambda theta, Delta, Gamma. GM Europe and its engineering ops can’t be divorced from Opel as basically they’re one in the same. Chevrolet is basically selling cheap decontented Korean built Opels in Europe and at a minuscule volume. You want to kill GM as a global volume manufacturer get rid of Opel.
That is all RWD cars except the Vette.
Meanwhile, as GM loses over $10B in Europe in the face of a hostile German government, German automobile companies run free and are welcomed into the U.S. with tax incentives to setup factories, etc. (ditto Japanese and Koreans). In an ironic way perhaps this proves the U.S. Government’s hands off policy within GM since there has been no evidence of an effort to help out the company it partially owns. Alas, as is the case in Japan where non-Japanese automobile manufacturers have been barred since the MacArthur occupation after WWII, the international playing field is sometimes tilted against U.S. car companies. A nudge by our government with regard to the state of affairs concerning BMW, VW and MB in the U.S. would get the German Government’s attention for sure. The Germans apparently have no compunction with regard to this issue when it comes to making GM squeal.
My take on the question in 5 points:
1st: Closing down Opel equals closing down Buick as well. Except for the Buick Enclave, all current Buick cars are rebadged Opels or (LaCrosse) are based on the Rüsselsheim-developed Regal/Insignia platform. OK, with minor cosmetic changes on front and back.
2nd: Getting rid of Opel means giving up all manufacturing in Europe (11 facilities); there is no way to jump-start Chevrolet sales to make up for the losses of the Opel sales so that Chevrolet-manufacturing can be moved from Korea to Europe in significant numbers (not even all Opel branded cars are manufactured in Opel factories — Mokka and Antara are imported from Korea, the Astra sedan — as far as I know — from St. Petersburg).
3rd: Keeping the Opel development center without any manufacturing at its side and support seems to me a no-go. Do you think that the engineers could build new cars and engines by working only on their desks and drawing boards? Practical trials would only be done in Korea and China?
4th: Opel had been acquired by GM in 1929, that is less than a century ago, not more (83 years, to be exact).
5th: Opel being a 100% owned subsidiary of GM, there is a lot of leeway to move actual costs and profits between the two companies, including by booking royalties for Opel-devoloped cars to Detroit instead of Rüsselsheim — think of the scandal raised in Europe over various US companies having a huge turnover in Europe, but paying no income taxes at all in the countries they make businiess in. So all the information about huge Opel losses has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Same ole same ole comments. Only breezed thru them.
Alex, would you say the same thing to Ford? Dump Ford Germany?
@62vetteefp Absolutely not. Unlike GM, Ford is a single (mainstream) brand. Whatever it’s going through in Europe right now is a factor of the market and local economies… it can’t really do much else that would make a significant difference.
On the other hand, GM has two competing brands that are non-complementary with Chevy and Opel. Now, Chevy has a fairly low sales volume… but that could very well change in the long term. Meanwhile, Opel is riddled with issues. Seems like a great opportunity to hit the reset button, keep all the good parts (R&D, engineering, design), and get rid of everything else.
@Alex Luft (December 23):
Ford is closing down three factories in Europe (Genk being the largest one), and could do the same as you suggest for GM: close down all production in Europe and rely on cheap imports from poorer world regions, as GM does from Korea, or from India, Vietnam, China what ever.
You err when you claim that GM is offering “two competing brandsthat are non-complementary” in Europe. Chevrolet has been introduced as the cheapo alternative to the better equipped Opel which could then be moved up market. “Luxury” is the cheat for the Opel twins in North America (not in China, where Buick started with badge-engineered Daewoos).
Adding to my previous post:
While Ford would suffer from the same political backlash produced by sending tens of thousands of workers into the poverty of unemployment, Ford would have the advantage of using the same brand as before, while GM would have to build up a new brand from scratch, which has the mark of being the cheap Korean imports, formerly known as Daewoo. The Daewoo/Chevrolet currently sells less than one fifth of Opel in Western Europe. ACEA counts a market share of 6.6% for Opel in Western Europe, and 6.5 in EU27+EFTA, and 1.3% and 1.4% respectively for Chevrolet. In the poorer countries outside of the EU+EFTA, the relationship is probably more in favor of the cheaper brand, Chevrolet. The deepening economic crisis might push the scale more in favor of the cheaper cars, but consider that unemployed do not buy new cars at all.
Another addtion:
After closing down Opel, GM would have to fill the void by introducing Buick as a replacement for the Opel class of cars, and thus introduce a completely new brand name, with the additional problem of justifying the offering the same cars as before, but with different name plates and a different brand name. And where would those Buick-Opels be produced? And at what cost of transport be brought to Europe?
And then the problem that nobody knows how to pronounce “Buick”.
Simply shutting down production in Europe and selling the Opel brand name to some competitor is simply a pipe dream. I think that the current GM management is at least trying to do the right thing, i.e. to rebuild the damaged Opel brand image and make the brand more attractive by introducing an attractive line of cars.
And then the problem that nobody knows how to pronounce “Buick”.
Sure they do, it’s Boo-eek. 😎
Alex is right. GM is in a spot. If GM could do with Chevrolet what Hyundai
has pulled off in the United States – it would be fantastic. Problem is,
as has been rightly commented upon here, our trade policies and
vested interests by state governments has made manufacturing cars
domestically sold here a very profitable proposition. Breaking into
the European market would take new-think products ( Voltec ) that
the big guys in Europe ( VW, Audi, BMW, Mercedes ) have not
taken the risks to rival – such as Voltec. Production in Asia would
mean lower priced cars that just plain do more than the BMW and
Mercedes crowd can offer. Consumers in the USA adopted the
Prius wholeheartedly, but it took 7 years and two versions of the
hybrid. Give Chevrolet THAT KIND OF AMMUNITION, and all
hell would break loose in Europe as the established guys would
have to spend the R&D to catch up and European consumers
would be the richer for it.
Socialist Germany – which is a model for many “Progressives” in our
government, including the one at the very top – has shown us what
happens when unions run the show vs. private enterprise. GM is
in a pinch because they just cannot utilize the German engineering
arm without cleaning house because those entrenched engineers
are partisan to their union mentality.
One solution. Scrap Opel and hire new engineers who’re looking for
work just out of school. Employment is scarce and GM would do
well to tap into this bright and new-thinking workforce. The cars
will have to be made in S. Korea where they have opened up
a whole lot of factory space and vehicle quality has risen to
rival the Euro brands like BMW – who dominate so much of
Europe with their survival technique of selling cars way over
the price they could without the marque’s reputation for prestige.
Alex, you should rejoice that so many of the site’s readers are
in Europe, as their spelling and voting suggests. I agree 100%
that old grudges and unions held Opel back, and the responces
here support that view.
All the Chevrolets currently sold in Europe are already Korean built. (Maybe some exceptions, like Corvette, which is not so much perceived as a Chevrolet).
Just rebadged Daewoo for most people.
Meanwhile Hyundai/Kia is manufacturing in Europe.
Coming back on the hate you spit on the unions — when did you get your last pay cut? How deep was the cut?
Frank Weber – a German engineer with a heavy German accent was one of
The geniuses responsible for the Volt – a car that does what
absolutely NO OTHER car, foreign or domestic, can do – go
35-50 miles all electric up to 100 mph up any hill or in any
weather and then transform into an EV powered by gas genset
to negate ANY range anxiety. At the $40,000 pricepoint,
German car companies ( including Opel ) have nothing even
near this capability – and for that point – even in ANY price
category!
Mr. Weber left GM and is now hard at work in Germany for
BMW no doubt trying to help them with the extended-range
version of their i series. The i series appears overpriced
and EV results seem uninspiring. Again – Victory = Volt.
Amperas made in USA and sold in Europe for stupidly high
prices won’t work so make Voltec versions for Europe that
meet their needs – build ’em in S. Korea or China.
Rather than fight with obstinent engineers in Germany
who would no longer work for Opel – hire new ones
and lure them here ( USA ) with high pay and excellent
perks. This is done all over the world, where American
architects and engineers build bridges, buildings and
everything else imaginable for country’s that have the
money to pay them ( See Middle Eastern and Asian
countrys like UAE and Singapore ). Remember we
wouldn’t have Atomic weapons and transcontinental
ballistic missiles were it not for German engineers
escaping Nazism.
@ Observer7 :
Built in S. Korea BUT not ENGINEERED in Germany. Big difference.
Cruze has been a big success, and it’s the only car I can think of
with Opel-engineered bits along with S. Korean and American think
infused.
To answer your union jab – Nearly all foreign brands have long established
plants here to build their cars for U.S. markets and for export back
into their very own countries as exports. Honda America just celebrated
30 years of building Accords in the USA, many of which are exported.
UAW has relentlessly pursued the workers in these many factories to go
union. The workers have rejected these attempts. The reason they give
is that the wages they recieve from these companies is at and often
above those offered by the union – with no dues, and no internal politics
which often see union officials living like kings at the expense of the
common line worker. Key to keeping the unions at bay has been giving
their workers many benefits and services to keep workers happy, healthy
and prosperous.
The UAW had to compromise in GM’s restructuring. One result was the
first subcompact ( Sonic ) produced in the USA for the American market..
…EVER! Are union officials happy? Absolutely NOT – in fact, they
position picketers in front of the very factories wherein their own members
work hard daily making the cars! Unions got too large in the USA with
too much power which resulted in poor workmanship, awful cars, and
carbuyers like myself who opted to buy foreign makes for over 20 years.
You tell me the UAW ( Union Way ) has worked here. When unions ask
for more, more , more the companies cannot compete on an even
playing field in the marketplace – thus the U.S. auto collapse of 2008.
Unions saved labor in this country at one time in history and I am
very much worker’s rights and pro union. Problem is, the unions
just got to large and too powerful for their own good.
@James:
No, the Cruze has not been engineered in Germany. only the platform “Delta II” which the Cruze is built with had been developed by oder under the leadership of the Opel ITEZ.
The actual car had been developed, I think, in Korea, by GM Korea (formerly Daewoo), where it replaced the Daewoo Lacetti aka Chevrolet Nubira (or Buick Excelle in China).
Alex I am used to reading your posts and by and large they are inoffensive (to the point of being almost bland) and are normally short on detail. However, your latest tirade against Opel and Vauxhall proved to be you’re most controversial as well being hopelessly inaccurate.
Let us start with the GM bankruptcy. Who were the 2 men most responsible for it? Rick Wagoner and Fritz Henderson with Henderson being the bigger idiot of the 2. Unfortunately Ed Whiteacre kept him in place until he realised he was just about to give away half of GM’s global operation to Magna and lose all the skill in design and engineering that helped put GM in the US back on the road to recovery along with a proper car guy (Lutz). Magna would have been a disaster for Opel / Vauxhall in Europe – not enough investment capital, experience and a dubious dual relation with 2 other Russian car makers. Also, while we are talking about the US, THE only reason Buick survived at all was the Chinese market and in the inability for Chevrolet to move up market in the US and cover the gap. I am not even convinced that Buick is particularly profitable but, if it is, it is doing it on the back of largely GM Europe platform design and engineering and in some cases whole body design.
“A Loser From The Very Beginning” Really? So Opel has been a loser since 1929 has it? Ridiculous – during the 1990s under another idiot, Louis Hughes, it was Opel and Vauxhall profits that were propping up GM in the US and as a direct result of this Opel was starved of investment in new product development that then started Opel’s problems from 2000 onwards. So using your same rationale GM should have closed GM in the US and concentrated on Europe in the 90s! Just as ridiculous. Holden are currently losing money in Australia, does that mean we close them down and replace them with Chevrolet? No of course not.
“What is the point?” Another unbelievable statement, just like we can close Opel and keep the R&D Centre. If you take Opel / Vauxhall sales out of the equation all the global platforms will need a total rethink based on half the current utilization therefore increasing per unit cost of production and development. The next half-baked idea is that somehow Chevrolet is going to fill the gap. Chevrolet in Europe is dead in the water, it seen by most as offering a very cheap entry level Korean econo-box and sales reflect it. That does not mean its bad for America where the name does have some kudos but it will NEVER BE A SUITABLE REPLACEMENT FOR OPEL OR VAUXHALL IN EUROPE – PERIOD
“Still a hostile environment” I don’t see any evidence of this. Opel work closely with GM divisions all around the world and do an excellent job of platform, engine and body design that has helped GM to rejuvenate product all over the globe. The Euro market is a very hostile environment and the legal position, taken up by the German government and unions mean it is very difficult to trim excess capacity quickly but Bocham is going to be chopped as was Antwerp and also the GM auto trans plant at Strasbourg so there are already evidence of substantial capacity being taken out.
The Result
• Keeping GM from investing more than its competitors in R&D, process, human resources (compensation, development), and various other facets of the business — all of which result in the creation of better products – WRONG! GM are investing as much and in some cases more in this area than their mainstream competitors.
• Keeping Chevy from the achieving higher sales volume (despite what some European car enthusiasts may think about The Bow Tie Brand — it’s possible) – WRONG! Chevrolet sales are all but stagnant at the moment and show no sign of changing, at a critical time such as this Chevrolet are just an unecessary distraction that is also costing a lot of money for nothing ie. The latest $550m adverting deal which is dollars down the drain.
• Keeping talented GM executives and employees occupied on a failed project, all of whom can be focusing their energies on creating better products instead of playing political Stratego with Europe (read: Germany) and unions, or pinching pennies by forming partnerships with second-tier European automakers. Wrong! The van deal with Renault and Vauxhall works very well. The Fiat deal with diesel engine development and Corsa D platform sharing has worked well and the new Fiat based Combo is selling pretty well.
• Keeping GM’s stock price deflated, and investor confidence low WRONG! GM stock has been upgraded to investment grade by Fitch
• Wasting talent, time, and human resources that could be better used elsewhere – Where? Not wasted on a no hope brand like Chevrolet in Europe
And don’t even get me started on Vauxhall. Why not? Vauxhall is the bright spot for GM Europe. The UK is the 2nd biggest market in Europe and is the biggest GM market outside of the US and China. GM internal documents show Vauxhall is breaking even at the moment and the transaction prices customers pay are the highest of any GM market in Europe. Let’s take November 2012 sales Vauxhall in No2 place with a market share of 12.24% up 23.33% on Nov 2011, Chevrolet No24 place with a market share of 0.52% down 18.07% compared to Nov 2011, So Vauxhall outsells Chevrolet by 23.5 to 1. Further to this GM internal warranty statistics show Ellesmere Port has the 3rd highest quality score of any GM plant worldwide, 1. Hamtramck 2. Zaragozza 3. Ellesmere Port.
I don’t know anything about the economics of Opel, but a couple of years ago I was in Europe on a two-week ski trip and rented an Opel Astra. I had so much fun driving the car in the Alps that I was tempted to skip the skiing and rally the car on the mountain roads. If it was sold in the US I would definitely buy one.
Well said David! I’ve been a lifelong fan of Vauxhall and all things GM but during a recent trip to the US, I had the misfortune of being given an Impala rental car. To say I was disappointed is an understatement – the dashboard was like that of an early 90s Toyota and the general build quality was poor. I realise that renal cars live a hard life but if GM think the current Impala can seriously compete with European, Japanese and Korean cars, then they need a reality check. I know the new Impala is almost here and it looks like a vast improvement but if Chevy were to replace Vauxhall/Opel in Europe as Alex suggests, then they’ve got a long way to go to meet or surpass the quality and design of the Insignia and Astra for example.
I recently attended a Vauxhall promotional event where a 15 minute video was shown which detailed the changes they’re making to improve brand perception. I have to say that their current range of cars is probably the best ever and they deserve to succeed. For too long, Vauxhall was chasing market share and selling cars to fleets at heavily discounted prices but finally common sense has prevailed and they’re looking more at the private buyer and what they actually want rather than the “that’ll do” mentality of old.
Stuart — in regards to the Impala you drove: that was the last-generation model that outlived its prime (half a decade ago). Have a look at the all-new 2014 Impala — I think you will (more than) like what you see:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/04/nyias-2012-this-is-the-all-new-2014-chevrolet-impala/
edit: ironically, the last-gen Impala (the one you drove, I’m guessing) was the best-seller in the segment for 4 years running… albeit many of those sales were to fleets.
“the best-seller in the segment for 4 years running” so what it is only a best-seller in America, but in Europe it would had been a flop! This shows again that European cars are significantly high quality and better biult, and Europeans spend more money on a car than Americans. My Citroen C5 would be premium for American conditions though:D
The last-gen Impala was by no means a class-leading vehicle. Yet it sold in America, it sold well, and it was profitable… that more than one can say of Opel today.
However, the Impala wasn’t brought to Europe for several reasons, one of which was the fact that the non-luxury full-size segment doesn’t exist there. The Impala served demand for a class of car demanded by the markets (in which it was available) at the time, and performed very well there.
“This shows again that European cars are significantly high quality and better built”
I don’t even know where to start with this, as its such a crock of inaccuracy. But I’ll try anyway.
1. Have you even seen the new Impala? If the non-luxury full size segment existed in Europe, it would undoubtedly do very well there.
2. What so you consider a European car? A VW Jetta built in Mexico with parts from China, Taiwan, and Canadian suppliers? Quite frankly, there’s no such thing anymore as a [insert nation here] car unless the car is planned and built in that country, with parts from that country. Today, most vehicles are designed, engineered, and assembled all over the world.
Ironically, my girlfriend just bought a ’12 Jetta TDI… some of the worst initial quality I’ve ever experienced in a car.
3. Just because production takes place in a certain country/region (Europe) doesn’t mean that the vehicle is any better assembled than the same vehicle produced in a different part of the world.
Today, most automakers (worth their salt) have processes in place for globally-built cars. These processes transcend borders and geography. For instance, an Opel could be built in South America as well as it could be built in Europe thanks to those manufacturing processes, policies, and techniques.
Alex, have you ever been to Europe? Otherwise you would have seen that Opel is a volume brand like Ford or Toyota in North America and there are dozens of them on our European roads. Do you think it is so easy to take a brand like Opel from the market or to replace it with a completely unknown brand? Opel is not a niche brand here like Buick in North America and the so called “semi” or “nearly” premium segment is still the largest in Europe. Even though Opel is only limited on Europe they are still GMs 2nd best selling brand globally and Opel is selling more Insignias in Europe than Buick in NA and China! Buick’s success is based on the potential of Opel from which Opel is not benefiting or does GM allow them to sell and produce their own vehicles in China? VW brought Skoda to China in 2006 and now they are selling around 200000 cars a year!! Actually Opel also wanted to expand to Brasil in South America, but GM did not allow them to do that. But why? There is a market for these cars and GM wants to keep them out of this market.
GM does sell Opel branded cars in China, models like the Zafira and Antara, imported from Korea and Germany, respectively. Opel has been introduced recently in Australia as a second brand besides Holden (now badge-engineered Chevrolets), and also in Chile.
I am quite sure that GM will introduce Opel also in Brasil, and may have to confront similar resistances there against a second GM brand, as in Europe against the introduction of Chevrolet (initially as rebranded Daewoos) from Korea.
@Observer7 yes, Opels are sold in China… but in extremely low volumes. This is likely the result of internal (and artificial) limitations resulting from the success of Buick in the country.
Opels, as with any imports, are subject to a punitive import duty whereas Buick make a large percentage of what they sell in China.
@David
“Buick make a large percentage of what they sell in China”.
1st: Actually, not “Buick” is making anything in China, Buick there is just one of several brands of the company GM Shanghai, which is a 50:50 joint venture of SAIC with GM.
And all Buick cars sold in China are made there. Home made, so to day, not imported.
What part of Buick sold in China do you think is imported?
Should have been a bit more specific, I was refering to the imported CKD parts for Park Avenue assembly etc. For information SAIC increased their share of the JV in Feb 2010 so the split is now 49:51
True but keep in mind that Buick overall sells about 35% of all Buick’s in the Peoples Republic, higher then that of North America. They are home built but Buick still retains the profits, like any subsidiary.
Strange math — I think you are right in saying that GM sells more Buick in China than in North America, but then the 35% figure can’t be right: the Buick brand is marketing only in China and in North America, nowhere else.
If your 35% is a typo and you actually mean 55%, that might be accurate.
BTW, does really an entity named “Buick” retain any profits of anything? Isn’t “Buick” just a brand name of General Motors Company, without a juridical form by itself? Is there a “Buick Ltd” or something somewhere? I don’t believe it.
I think it might be world distribution, I got the figures from wikipedia, but they did sell 330000 in 2007 and considering China’s economic growth that number is on the rise. And no Buick it self does not retain the profits they go back to GM as a whole, what I am saying is that all the profit from Chinese operations, so while Buick’s in China are built in China, the profits go back to GM.
@Tyler:
“worldwide distribution” of Buick? Where of all lands, except in China and North America?
Buick is just one of about 10 regional brands which GM targets to specific markets. Do you know of any countries beyond China and North America, where Buick is actively marketed? I don’t, and GM doesn’t report of any, as far as I know.
As to the profits from Buick sales in China, they go primarily to “Shanghai General Motors Co., Ltd” (SGM), 51:49 joint venture of SAIC (Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation) and GM.
Just to be clear, your “primarily” means 51% to SAIC and 49% to GM (here in the US).
I thought GM bought back that 1% and it is 50/50?
Yupp, GM sold its stake temporarily in 2010:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2009/12/gm-sells-controlling-stake-of-china-operations-to-saic-is-it-worth-it/
and
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2010/11/internationalized-chinas-saic-buys-1-percent-of-new-general-motors/
It then bought back the 1 percent:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/04/so-why-did-gm-sell-then-buy-back-its-1-stake-in-gm-shanghai/
“Alex, have you ever been to Europe?”
I grew up all over Europe… played tennis in Spain, and played hockey in Finland.
“Otherwise you would have seen that Opel is a volume brand like Ford or Toyota in North America and there are dozens of them on our European roads.”
Did I ever say otherwise? Opel is, undoubtedly, a volume brand. The point is that it is UNPROFITABLE, and has been for years. It is irrelevant how many cars it sells, whether it’s mainstream, luxury, or something else entirely — that fact remains.
As it relates to growing Opel internationally — you’re correct. No argument there. 🙂
While I agree with a lot said here Buick is not going to become a luxury marque anywhere near Cadillac. It will remain “near” lux. They will not be selling a standard LaCrosse for anywhere near the price of a standard XLS. ($44k vs. 32k) And the full size XLS is an anomaly at Cadillac and the real full size Caddy will have a standard price well over $50k when it comes out.
GM does not need a second low volume marque in the luxury segment. It will probably get more separation from the Chevrolet segment though. New Impala at $27k is to close to LaCrosse $32k. Bet the next LaCrosse is near $35k (ES is $36k).
Perhaps you’re correct if we’re discussing a short time frame. But in the long run, there is definite room for Buick to continue climbing. It doesn’t need to be on the same level as Cadillac, but it can sure as heck get close… provided that no mistakes are made that would impede such a strategy.
What GM desperately needs is to increase profits (as will be discussed in an upcoming article). Another low-volume, high-margin brand is the only way to achieve that goal.
You do realize that if Buick gets close to Cadillac in terms of how luxury the marque is perse, you risk cannibalizing Cadillac as a whole. Frankly thats just nonsensical, and rather ignorant to the industry as a whole. You mean to tell me that you want to give more sales to a Buick Lacrosse then to a Cadillac XTS or a Buick Regal over a Cadillac CTS. See how little sense that makes.
You’re missing the fact that luxury automobiles is not a single formula. It’s comprised of different customers, with entirely different values.
Ultimately, GM can steal sales from performance lux offerings and those of traditional Lexus buyers with the strategy I’m describing. The high-margin luxury sale goes to GM, while customers are satisfied with a no-compromise luxury product. End of story.
If you don’t realize this, do yourself a favor and drive a Lexus from the late 90s or early 2000s, especially the ES and RX.
Yes it is comprised of 2 different buyers, either older people that don’t need a high performance car or those too cheap to buy a BMW or a Merc or a Caddy. If you add on another low volume high margin brand when you have another brand of the same caliber, your going to cannibalize both of their sales and lose money. Why? because your one selling 2 high cost cars to the market, so that takes away the buyers that would buy the brand because of cost, and also sways the market to think “oh well the cost of a Buick is close to a Cadillac or a BMW, I should get one of those instead” no matter how you rationalize that with your “luxury buyer who wants refinement not performance”, (and frankly I would love to hear how a Buick has more refinement and luxury then a Cadillac or a Merc, seriously) because if people hear that they can get more for close to the same cost, they will go for more, wouldn’t you? Frankly its you who doesn’t realize the workings of the market or you would see the error of raising the marque to a near Cadillac level. Even when you compare the cost of a Lexus to that of a Buick their relatively close, the Lacrosse vs the ES350 the cost of ownership is around 33-35000 http://www.autoguide.com/manufacturer/buick/2010-buick-lacrosse-vs-2010-lexus-es350-1327.html. If you raise the marque to near Cadillac level, people will go for the Lexus, if they so want the lower cost Lexus or the similar cost Caddy or Merc, out of the understanding of relativity of cost and also cannibalize the sales of both Cadillac and Buick by taking away from the buyers that would buy the baseline Cadillacs for fully loaded Buicks and losing the people that would buy baseline Buicks because of higher cost of ownership.
“Yes it is comprised of 2 different buyers, either older people that don’t need a high performance car or those too cheap to buy a BMW or a Merc or a Caddy.”
Incorrect. Age is a always a factor across all product; instead, the name of the game is “customer preference”. Believe it or not, one doesn’t have to be “old” to prefer the opposite of an performance-lux driving experience (BMW, Audi, etc.). The average age of a BMW buyer is 3-4 years less than that of Lexus.
“If you add on another low volume high margin brand when you have another brand of the same caliber, your going to cannibalize both of their sales and lose money.”
Incorrect. Two brands serving different luxury customers will attract buyers of competing makes. Once again, Cadillac is actively pursuing (primarily) BMW, which offers a similar experience as Audi and MBZ. We’ll see if Cadillac successful in bringing in conquest buyers from those brands; meanwhile, those who purchase Lexus vehicles (for their traditional/primary qualities), can be served very well by Buick.
The intra-brand cannibalization comment shows a lack of understanding of markets, consumers, and preferences on your part. I again encourage you to drive a Lexus back-to-back with a BMW, Audi, MBZ, etc.
“… and frankly I would love to hear how a Buick has more refinement and luxury then a Cadillac or a Merc, seriously…”
Refinement is subjective. The factors I’m specifically referring to are cabin silence and a disconnected driving experience. Allow me to explain.
Performance luxury is all about an engaging driving experience; the engine/exhaust note is noticeable, the suspension is firm (sometimes harsh), the balance of the car is “proper” (50/50, RWD/RWD-biased AWD), and the overall driving experience is the name of the game. Performance luxury customers are looking specifically for this kind of experience, and for these kinds of stats/specs.
Contrast this with the utter cabin silence, soft (cushy) suspension, and the utterly disconnected (coddling) driving experience found in the Lexus ES, RX, or LS — and you get the qualities soft luxury car buyers are seeking. Among others, these are the elements most sought by these customers. This buyer doesn’t care about performance, hp, RWD, or any other metrics/specs/stats that are the dominant topic of automotive enthusiasts. They literally want to be taken as far away from the driving experience/road as possible and isolated in their silent luxury vehicle.
As it relates to the rest of your comment: from a brand/image perspective, Buick isn’t on the same level as Lexus just yet. As such, it can’t charge as high prices today. Give the brand 5-10 years, a true flagship and good product, and you can bet that it will…
Tyler you are almost spot on with your observations, I’m afraid Alex your comments are the exact reasons NOT to do what you suggest as I explained earlier in the thread. This obsession you have with Lexus will get Buick nowhere, Lexus have been totally eclipsed by the Germans now in the US and not before time, in fact in Europe they have almost sunk without trace.
David — as I already explained, Lexus (today) has lost its direction. It’s now chasing BMW into the performance luxury segment — thereby alienating its own (original) customer base. As for its European performance — has it ever been strong there?
What make me most concerned, however, is the fact that you worked for Vauxhall yet seem to lack any kind of marketing acumen.
Ok on the issue of age I will agree with you, age preference is across the board, but I ask you this, you mean to tell me that Audi Merc or BMW do not know how to make their cabin silent? German engineers can jam pack their cars with plenty of technology to run the Nurburgring in 7-8 minutes but they cannot fathom noise canceling? If you believe this, watch this video
and you will see that BMW one of the “performance luxury marques” is capable of pandering to the soft luxury buyer with a V12 turbo charged beast of an engine. If BMW is capable of doing so with a top of the line business saloon car then I am quite sure they are capable of doing so with a 3 series as well, as are the offerings from Mercedes, Audi and even Caddy. Personally after driving in performance luxury marques I can tell you that the noise is not that high in any of the cars that I have been in weather a BMW, Audi or a Mercedes. Also have you completely forgotten that most luxury cars have the technology to switch between a harder and better throttle response in a sport mode and a basic driving mode. So in my tangent what I am trying to say is that a performance marque is more then capable to catering to a soft luxury brand, and that the existence of a entry level marque is quintessentially useless, and that it is the quintessence of dust, to paraphrase Shakespeare. So and if you raise Buick to a low volume high margin brand, a soft luxury brand, then you will cannibalize your marque within your company, for the same reasons that I have stated, people that buy anything will buy to get more bang for your buck perse, that’s just basic business, and if I was buying a luxury car and saw that I could get a BMW that has both performance and refinement, compared to the Buick with some refinement, I’m getting the bimmer hands down. Also there are models that are not the highest performance models, such as the CTS from Cadillac, the A6 from Audi so on and so forth, where in keeping in consideration the video I just put in this statement, that can achieve a extremely quiet interior with fully loaded interior refinement, to a much higher degree then Buick so I ask again, tell me how a Buick has more interior refinement then a Merc or a Bimmer or a Audi?
I’m not really sure if you can compare a Buick to a Mercedes or bimmer or the Audi…… that’s where cadillac comes in (sport oriented)??? Buick is more of a premium luxury brand like Lincoln or Lexus or Acura…. All theses brands are just about to have certain extend of luxury stuff without breaking the bank, whereas the bimmers and all those you’re going to pay a lot for it and that’s fine if you want to go for that route, but not necessarily everyone wants a jittery ride bimmer nor can they afford the 5-7 series.
Well I’m not disagreeing with that, what I am saying is that a performance luxury brand like Bimmer or Merc can build a car with interior qualities of quietness and luxurious interior, and a soft ride, which is why I posted that video of that 760li. From Alex’s statements, he believes that major luxury marques cannot fathom such an idea, or at least that is what I am given to understand. I also agree with you on the fact that Buick is a poor mans luxury car perse, like that of Lincoln or Lexus or Acura, pardon my bluntness, and that not everybody can afford to buy a Bimmer Mere etc.. But if you read into Alex’s statements you would see that he advocates that Buick should be a low volume high margin brand, in other words a high cost luxury marque near the same level of cost as Cadillac and Mercedes Benz. The problem that I see in doing so, is that if you raise the cost of Buick to near the level of Cadillac, and knowing that the major performance luxury marques are capable of making their cars both for soft luxury and performance luxury buyers, people are going to buy the Cadillac or the Merc over the Buick, any given day.
well wouldn’t the sales of the Lexus and Acura be low volume either???
Two general comments:
1st: the European car market is shrinking overall, not only for Opel, but for all manufacturers. The industry experts expect new car registrations to be ths year the lowest of the last two decades. Opel is not the only manufacturer to suffer from an underutilisation of its factories.
2nd: The easiest way to use those spare capacities would be to produce ALL Opel branded cars in Opel factories instead of importing them from factories owed by GMIO (GM International Operations), i.e. from Korea (Antara, Mokka). I also believe that the few Astra sedans sold in Western Europe are imported from Russia (St. Petersburg).
@Observer7 Absolutely agreed. What’s troubling to me, however, is that GM’s losses are far and away greater than those of Ford or VW (for example) in Europe. So they’re burning through cash, and thereby making their parent far less profitable, than its closest global competitors.
You may have heard about the workers assembly today at the Bochum Opel plant, whre the Opel management confirmed that there is no more work to do for the 3000 workers there after 2016. When being challenged, the management simply walked out of the meeting.
Look out for the troubles this will in all probability create, doing political harm to Opel and General Motors in particular.
I did hear, indeed:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/12/opel-officially-signals-closure-of-bochum-plant-by-2016/
What kinds of ramifications do you think this will have?
I have plenty of marketing acumen thanks, I was involved in keeping Vauxhall near the top of the sales charts whilst ironically GM in the US and Opel in Europe saw sales slide down the toilet.
Lexus got off to a very good start, especially in the UK, offering exceptional build quality and 1st rate dealer service. But the market has matured and the isolated mushy driving experience you speak of is now out of sync with what the market wants, it happened quickly in Europe but has taken more time to change in the US but make no mistake it has changed and I do not see Lexus ever regaining their 1st position again unless they laser focus their efforts on emulating BMW / Mercedes / Audi
The conversation isn’t about Lexus “regaining” a first position… it’s about GM serving the gamut of luxury buyers with two brands. Doing so allows GM to dominate (rather than compete in) the general luxury space — a luxury other automakers don’t have.
Yes I agree with GM using 2 brands to cover the same market that BMW / Audi and Mercedes cover with one brand – absolutely right, all (maybe a lesser extent Mercedes) can effectively be covered by Buick at the bottom end of BMW and Audi then leave Cadillac to cover Mercedes and the upper BMW and Audi ranges – that makes perfect sense. What doesn’t is aiming at matching Lexus, Buick and Cadillac needs to aim for the market leaders and let Lexus wither on its very mediocre current products.
To clarify, my recommendation isn’t to aim Buick at today’s Lexus. Rather, it’s to aim it at the Lexus of the late 90s, early 2000s — before they decided to chase after BMW with their heads cut off, alienating many of their loyal die-hard customers.
You know that Toyota and BMW have concluded a strategic alliance, which led BMW to terminate its cooperation with PSA in the field of electric power trains (others continue) and to terminate their talks with GM about cooperation in electric power trains. According to reports, Toyota and BMW also plan the common development of a new sports car.
As an aside Alex I think this has become the longest thread on here for a very long time so well done for that!
Yupp, sure is. Always love a good discussion — thanks David 🙂
I disagree with this killing off or selling Opel; however, do agree that the German gov as well as buyers have little love for Adam Opel do to it’s American ownership. We are living in an era of economic nationalism in Europe, mainly Germany, and even Ford, PSA and Fiat are having a rough time there.
I support the creation of a global Buick-Vauxhall-Opel division. Buick is the strongest out of the tree brands, see China plus 180,000 is N.A. A lot of Americans have an anti-Buick bias but, if the brand can thrive in China, it can do well in Latin America Russia and India. Vauxhall is also making money with Corsa and Astra leading sellers–the brand beat Ford in the UK for the month of December.
The main problem is Germany–Opel does great in E Europe (Number 1 in Hungry and Austria). I think GM should draw down in Germany by closing more plants because this is only this element of the business that unfixable as it is an unfriendly market for outside brands.
I like the idea of a global Buick/Vauxhall that basically rebadges cars as Opel for a 4 percent German market share plus Eastern Europe. This would allow for low cost labor in Poland and S Korea and seems to be the most logic option at this point. Russelmussin
LOL GM doesn´t even allow Opel to produce locally and sell its OWN vehicles for a much cheaper price in China, because they are afraid that Opel sweeps Buick away from the window. GM keeps Opel deliberately on a short leash and artificially small, so how should Opel use its full potential and get profitable in your mind when GM puts stones in their path? It´s Ruesselsheim not Russelmussin btw. However, it is normal that most Germans are fed up with Opel and GM, because of all the bad news made by GM about Opels future. GM’s problems with Opel are homemade not by the market! Seriously why should Buick be better than Opel since their lineup is full of badge engineerd Opel vehicles and there is the real difference between these brands? Why should be a Regal more attractive than a Insignia? GM should keep the Insignia what it is: an German engineerd Opel car. In Russia GM doesn´t need Buick since they have Opel and the brand is doing well there as well in Turkey and in Israel the sales of the Astra were boosted. Opel also wanted to expand to Brasil, but GM didn´t give its green light for this step. Hmm GM wants to bring Cadillac to Brasil in the near future, but where is the logic by not bringing Opel to Brasil? Opel would be priced completely different than Chevy.
@jj:D
Opel “in China, because they are afraid that Opel sweeps Buick away from the window.”
You do know, I hope, that Opel Astra (Hatchback & sedan) and Insignia are built in China, although under the Buck brand. What difference would it make to put an Opel badge on those cars?
Also the little CUV which is sold as Mokka under the Opel brand, and as Encore under the Buick brand.
Before complaining that the “wrong” brand label is put on the locally produced cars, how about demanding that the Opel Mokka is being manufactured in an Opel factory instead of being built in R.o.Korea? Especially when Opel claims to have gotten 80’000 orders for the vehicle from customers in Europe?
“Opel also wanted to expand to Brasil, but GM didn´t give its green light for this step.”
Do you have any sources for that claim? Reliable sources being preferred…
If I read the GM strategy correctly, they are trying out Opel in Chile now, and when that is a success, they will bring Opel to Argentina, and finally also to Brasil — depending on a market success of Opel in the spanish speaking countries.
Just realize the fact that the badge engineering Opel/Chevrolet Brasil is ending; the Meriva B is an Opel only product, not a shared one between Opel and GM do Brasil. The Brasilians have developed their own, different successor of the Meriva, namely the Spin which will be produced globally and offered globally in the Third World countries.
The difference would be that the Opel brand will be strengthened within of GM with an international presence.
Get rid of them for once and good!
EURO money based European nations have been in a recession type mode for these past years . Serious deficits in France , Spain , Italy and Greece to name a few have shaken confidence and spending among the masses . Auto sales still are depressed these past several years . Cars that will survive and grow will be the value plus high fuel saving models . Diesels will become even more popular . Fuel prices in Europe are sky high . GM wants to make Opel a higher priced line ?? Why might one ask , could it be that they make more money on upscale models ?… duh! Volkswagen with its excellent line of GTIs , crossovers , Suvs , diesels and pricepoints that are unmatched is thriving not only here but growing stronger in north america . GM must stay out of the H.O. of Opel . The Astra has been one of the top sellers in Europe and they must sink or swim on their assessment of their strengths in the marketplace . .GM should make their statement solely on cash flow . Project an iron clad budget over the next three years that must be met such that losses must decline to zero by third year , or pull the plug ! Opel may have to obtain government funding support on capital expenditures but GM must stand firm or take over ALL decision making . Considering that GM has hardly any cars in the top 10 sellers in North America and is in a rebuilding mode , still , since 2008 , concentrating on Asian markets are GM’s real strength , Europe requires the a business acumen and focus they just don’t have here , yet .
VW is so cheap! The new Jetta sucks eggs, it is made from cheap hard plastic and you can see in almost every area of that vehicle VW tried to cut corners. . .
They only show regard to the nucleus or “true prophet” for lack of a much better term. They are quite famous video games and are one of the great pastimes. What is the best way to contact you?