Reuss Expects To Retake Market Share With Aggressive Product Rollout7
Last week, GM revealed the official U.S. sales figures for 2012. And despite a 3.7 percent year-over-year growth, the company’s market share sank to the lowest its been in many decades. It might be a cause for concern, if we didn’t know about the new-product surge coming in the near future.
The issue in 2012 was that GM had to make do with what is admittedly the oldest lineup in the U.S. auto industry. In 2013, that looks to change, with several all-new models. These include the next-generation Cadillac CTS, Chevrolet Silverado and Impala, Corvette C7 and GMC Sierra, among others. And by mid-2014, General Motors North America President Mark Reuss states that the most extensive vehicle lineup overhaul in company history — perhaps industry history — will have been completed. If the vehicles are well-done and stand out as segment leaders, then we can easily see The General’s market share swelling. If the new products scream mediocrity, well, we shouldn’t expect much change.
- Sweepstakes Of The Month: Win a 2023 Corvette Z06 Convertible. Details here.
need more information about future vehicles. need to know if I should wait or go somewhere else.
Ok wait a minute, we all know it takes a couple of years for a product to get a foothold and we all know many never do… Reuss is talking about regaining marketshare by 2014, seriously. The competition is thick and people are not buying the type of cars they did 10 years ago or even 5 years ago. Many have migrated to Korean brands in this time period… And those companies have learned how to cater to those consumers, thus Hyundais strong repeate buyers. Example: I dont know what Ford Taurus sales numbers are but I know they are not good and this is a product with name recognition… Consumer mindset is astonishly different then what it was, lets fsce it when you ask serious luxury buyers what they would buy they imediately start talking the German 3, maybe lexus. If you ask the average consumer what cars they would purchase its Toyota and Honda vehicles immediately, with some throwing in Hyundai and Nissan. If you ask what about a Chevy or Ford its like you have 10 heads, and then they start talking about some old GM or Ford product they had back in the day and how they buy foreign now. I have not met or driven with someone who has pirchased or owns a newer GM product. When I ask people why they dont drive a GM or Ford product they ask me why should I. Thus competition and the past are eating away at GM and Ford…
Man I sure do love that blue z71..
The new trucks alone (including subs and Tahoes) will bring back lots of market share. Remember pickup truck sales are a huge part of the market and while full size SUV sales are nowhere as large as they used to be they are not small and a new Sub will sell big time.
One area though that GM has to improve is the mid/full size sedan. GM has to get Malibu sales up. As far as full size, Impala sales are going to plummet because while the new Impala will be great the price will also be much greater than the current one. Rental fleets will not be buying the new Impala. BUT the new Impala should be more profitable even with lower sales.
Good points, 62. As far as price is concerned, the new Malibu is the old (current) Impala — and should appeal to those customers (fleet and consumers). Meanwhile, the Impala is moving upmarket and should attract current Impala buyers, as well as a new kind/type of customer altogether. In that regard, sales of the new ‘Bu need to increase substantially… hovering at the 10,000 a month mark isn’t acceptable when the Camry is selling 30,000+ units.
I don’t know if the new Malibu takes the place of the current Impala, for one very simple reason: GM made the rear legroom on the new Malibu very small. Why? I don’t know, but they did. People who rent the current Impala do it because they are taking the whole family on a trip (at least that’s why I’ve rented the current Impala) and small backseat legroom kind of ruins the experience.
I really hope GM did not intentionally cripple the new Malibu’s rearseat legroom as a way to drive people with families to the Impala or an SUV. Old GM would pull a stunt like that, I hope New GM is different. But then what’s the explanation?
You are so right, 13 years ago.
Since than there has been Sept 11, and the wars in Afganistan and Iraq.
Since than there has been the market share grab by Toyota and the recalls, and the motor press saying that Toyota are boring old man cars.
Honda has been making big heavy boring gas guzzlers since the first Pilot, the motor press says they have lost there way.
Ford has been number one for ever in trucks, but have just embarked on the eccoboost V6 program, it may be a while but I doubt long term maintanance cost will be in line with GMs new OHV V8s and V6.
and Dodge is the flavor of the month, I doubt that if the market demanded 15 % more Rams that Chrysler coud even meet that demand if it wanted too.
The Tundra is the flavor of 30 years ago, “annything but American”.
And Titan is the darling of the 3 or 4 people who dig that it’s nonunion.
I smell a comeback.
Got to fix that Malibu and call it Chevelle or whatever, somthing that will sell at least 300,000 units a year, no make that at least a half a million. Do what Cadillac did with the ATS, in that it was based on the best ever 3Series BMW, Base the new Chevelle of of the Best ever Camry, an efficient and friendly appliance that a half million americans a year can not live without.
Oh yeah, and the S-10 er um the Colorado, S-10 used to be the best seller. It was cheep and ” babys first muscle car”, in that it had rear drive and a stick shift and positraction. there needs to be a light little shortbed stick shift Colorado variant with positraction and roll up windows for less than $14,000 msrp.
My guess is that we would sell about a million of them before the insurance companys would get wise to all the highway carnage, ok back road carnage we are talking 200bhp and 3500lbs here. The 6sp manual could even be coxed to over 35 on the highway with proper drag coefecient.