When GM Abandons Then Returns To A Segment, It Can’t Regain A Leadership Position: Analysis
Sponsored Links
It is not uncommon for an automaker to abandon a market segment and then return to it several years later, but it is a risky strategy, as historic GM sales figures demonstrate.
The problem in almost every case is that if a manufacturer stops selling a type of vehicle that people want to buy, existing owners will go elsewhere the next time they make a purchase. Regaining their interest and potential purchase then becomes very difficult. They now have a relationship with another brand and a different dealer, and unless something goes badly wrong they will likely stay with them in the future. It is possible to bring the customer back, but retaining existing customers is much easier than capturing new ones, or in this case regaining them.
In this article we’ll be looking at three GM vehicle types – mid-size pickup trucks, mid-size utilities and medium-duty trucks – and two specific models (Buick Regal and Chevy Camaro) whose lack of commercial success at least partly supports this claim. We’ll then show how GM performs very strongly in segments it has never left.
Mid-Size Pickup Trucks
In some markets, the first-generation Chevy Colorado was immediately replaced by a new version in 2012. However, the introduction of the U.S. Colorado (based on the same GMT-31XX platform but different in many respects) and its corporate cousin, the GMC Canyon, only took place in the U.S. for the 2015 model year. In other words, GM was without a midsize pickup in the
Sales Numbers - Midsize Mainstream Pickup Trucks - 2020 - USA
| MODEL | YTD 20 / YTD 19 | YTD 20 | YTD 19 | YTD 20 SHARE | YTD 19 SHARE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOYOTA TACOMA | -4.02% | 238,806 | 248,801 | 41% | 41% |
| CHEVROLET COLORADO | -21.31% | 96,238 | 122,304 | 17% | 20% |
| FORD RANGER | +13.30% | 101,486 | 89,571 | 18% | 15% |
| JEEP GLADIATOR | +93.63% | 77,542 | 40,047 | 13% | 7% |
| NISSAN FRONTIER | -49.09% | 36,845 | 72,369 | 6% | 12% |
| GMC CANYON | -23.26% | 25,190 | 32,825 | 4% | 5% |
| TOTAL | -4.92% | 576,107 | 605,917 |
In 2020, the Colorado was the third most popular mainstream mid-size pickup truck in the U.S., ahead of the Jeep Gladiator. The more expensive Canyon was firmly in last place, but the combined sales of the two GM trucks amounted to 121,428 units, comfortably ahead of the Ford Ranger’s 101,486.
This would be a good result if the Toyota Tacoma didn’t exist, but it does. Toyota dominated the segment with 238,806 sales, almost double those of the Colorado and Canyon combined. Unless Toyota drops the catch in a big way, it’s difficult to see how GM can hope to close this gap in the next few years. When it comes to midsize trucks, leaving a segment means that GM is now a second-place contender in the space.
Mid-Size Utilities
GM has several models in its line-up which could be described as mid-size utilities, but the only mainstream utility with two rows of seats which experienced a gap in production is the Chevy Blazer. The previous Blazer was discontinued after the 2005 model year and was not replaced until almost a decade and a half later, in the 2019 model year.
Sales Numbers - Two-Row Midsize Mainstream Crossovers - 2020 - United States
| MODEL | YTD 20 / YTD 19 | YTD 20 | YTD 19 | YTD 20 SHARE | YTD 19 SHARE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE | -13.66% | 209,786 | 242,969 | 34% | 36% |
| FORD EDGE | -21.39% | 108,886 | 138,515 | 17% | 21% |
| HYUNDAI SANTA FE | -20.90% | 100,757 | 127,373 | 16% | 19% |
| CHEVROLET BLAZER | +62.78% | 94,599 | 58,115 | 15% | 9% |
| NISSAN MURANO | -14.78% | 58,255 | 68,361 | 9% | 10% |
| HONDA PASSPORT | +9.65% | 39,567 | 36,085 | 6% | 5% |
| TOYOTA VENZA | +145,155.56% | 13,073 | 9 | 2% | 0% |
| TOTAL | -6.93% | 624,923 | 671,427 |
In 2020, 94,599 examples of the new Blazer were sold in the U.S., placing it fourth in the segment. It might have reached three figures, and perhaps finished ahead of the Ford Edge and Hyundai Santa Fe, if there was enough supply. However, the fact that it was sitting on dealer lots for an average of only 28 days (well under the 60 days considered optimal in the U.S. auto industry) both in September of 2020 and in January of 2021 suggested that Chevrolet was struggling to build as many units as customers wanted to buy.
But none of that explains why the Blazer didn’t even come close to matching sales of the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which recorded a whopping 209,786 sales despite a 14 percent downturn compared with 2019. GM effectively handed the market segment to Jeep when it discontinued the first-generation Blazer, and it’s difficult to imagine the Stellantis brand losing its dominance any time soon.
Medium-Duty Trucks
GM produced the Chevy Kodiak and GMC TopKick medium-duty trucks over three generations from 1980 to 2009. It then left the sector for a decade before returning with the Chevy Silverado Medium Duty – the 4500HD, 5500HD and 6500HD (which has no GMC equivalents) in 2019.
U.S. sales of these vehicles amounted to 7,419 units in 2020. Rival Ford, which has been producing medium-duty trucks without interruption for many years, experienced a calamitous 39 percent downturn from its 2019 figures, due largely to complications arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, but it still easily outsold GM with 10,036 sales.
Buick Regal
The fourth-generation Buick Regal was discontinued after the 2004 model year. GM brought the nameplate back for a rebadged version of the European Opel Insignia five years later. It was replaced by the a new model of the same name, also developed by Opel, in 2018.
Sales Numbers - Sporty Midsize Premium Cars - 2018 - United States
| MODEL | YTD 18 / YTD 17 | YTD 18 | YTD 17 | YTD 18 SHARE | YTD 17 SHARE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TLX | -12.56% | 30,468 | 34,846 | 50% | 74% |
| STINGER | +1,893.59% | 16,806 | 843 | 27% | 2% |
| REGAL | +22.14% | 14,118 | 11,559 | 23% | 24% |
| TOTAL | +29.94% | 61,392 | 47,248 |
In its final years, the Regal was not a big success. Only 14,118 units were sold in the U.S. in 2018, or approximately one for every 23,000 citizens.
In the same year, Kia sold 16,806 examples of the Stinger, beating the Regal into third place in the segment even though the Stinger was available only with one body style (the Buick was offered as a Sportback or a TourX station wagon) and had a higher starting price. But neither the Regal nor the Stinger sold anywhere close to the 30,000 units sold by the Acura offering, which has consistently been in the market (first at the TL and now the TLX) for over two decades.
Chevrolet Camaro
The Chevy Camaro is an outlier in this study because the fifth-generation version, introduced eight years after the demise of its predecessor, was in fact very successful. Its retro looks, which recalled the nameplate’s muscle car origins, made it a strong contender against the Ford Mustang and Dodge Challenger.
Sales Numbers - Two-Door Muscle Cars - 2020 - USA
| MODEL | YTD 20 / YTD 19 | YTD 20 | YTD 19 | YTD 20 SHARE | YTD 19 SHARE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DODGE CHALLENGER | -13.18% | 52,955 | 60,997 | 37% | 34% |
| FORD MUSTANG | -15.73% | 61,090 | 72,489 | 42% | 40% |
| CHEVROLET CAMARO | -38.31% | 29,775 | 48,265 | 21% | 27% |
| TOTAL | -20.87% | 143,820 | 181,751 |
Things started to go wrong when the current, sixth-generation Camaro was introduced for the 2016 model year. The design had not moved forward much, visibility was poor, the price was high(er than most rivals) and GM offered few incentives.
U.S. sales fell sharply in 2020 from 48,265 to just 29,775 units, the largest drop in the two-door muscle car segment, but even in 2019 the car had been nowhere near as successful as the Mustang or the Challenger. A successful comeback still needs work if it is to be maintained.
The Success Stories
When GM perseveres with a model, rather than dropping it and then trying to recover sales several years later with a new entry, it usually works. In the outstanding case, nearly one in four GM vehicles sold in the U.S. last year was a Chevrolet Silverado, principally due to the enormous popularity of the light-duty 1500 model. The Silverado nameplate has been used continuously since 1999 in a segment GM occupied for many years before that.
The history of the Chevy Corvette extends over nearly 70 years, and the brand loyalty the nameplate has acquired in that time likely explains to some extent why the Corvette C8 is exceptionally popular despite the radical change from a front-engine to a mid-engine layout. In fact, the Corvette C8 is outselling its entire segment combined.
Sales Numbers - Premium Sports Cars - 2020 - USA
| MODEL | YTD 20 / YTD 19 | YTD 20 | YTD 19 | YTD 20 SHARE | YTD 19 SHARE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHEVROLET CORVETTE | +20.22% | 21,626 | 17,988 | 51% | 44% |
| PORSCHE 911 | -4.59% | 8,840 | 9,265 | 21% | 22% |
| PORSCHE 718 | -11.16% | 3,447 | 3,880 | 8% | 9% |
| MERCEDES-BENZ AMG GT | -17.09% | 3,489 | 4,208 | 8% | 10% |
| MERCEDES-BENZ SLC-CLASS | +15.33% | 2,122 | 1,840 | 5% | 4% |
| MERCEDES-BENZ SL-CLASS | +5.44% | 1,782 | 1,690 | 4% | 4% |
| AUDI R8 | +1.22% | 581 | 574 | 1% | 1% |
| NISSAN GT-R | -8.16% | 304 | 331 | 1% | 1% |
| FORD GT | -23.58% | 175 | 229 | 0% | 1% |
| BMW I8 | -82.67% | 191 | 1,102 | 0% | 3% |
| ACURA NSX | -46.22% | 128 | 238 | 0% | 1% |
| TOTAL | +3.24% | 42,685 | 41,345 |
The Chevy Suburban has a longer pedigree still, dating back to the 1935 model year. Its short-wheelbase variant, the Chevy Tahoe, and the Suburban make up the lion’s share of the highly lucrative segment.
When taking into account the GMC Yukon, another GM offering in the same space, GM accounts for about three-quarters of the segment volume, with Ford a distant second.
Sales Numbers - Mainstream Full-Size SUVs - 2020 - United States
| MODEL | YTD 20 / YTD 19 | YTD 20 | YTD 19 | YTD 20 SHARE | YTD 19 SHARE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHEVROLET TAHOE | -12.80% | 88,238 | 101,189 | 30% | 28% |
| CHEVROLET SUBURBAN | -27.52% | 37,636 | 51,928 | 13% | 15% |
| FORD EXPEDITION | -9.93% | 77,838 | 86,422 | 26% | 24% |
| GMC YUKON | -15.04% | 63,440 | 74,673 | 22% | 21% |
| NISSAN ARMADA | -38.71% | 19,640 | 32,044 | 7% | 9% |
| TOYOTA SEQUOIA | -28.43% | 7,364 | 10,289 | 3% | 3% |
| TOTAL | -17.50% | 294,156 | 356,545 |
The Lesson
The moral of the story here is that leaving a segment will more than likely result in an uphill battle position and also-ran status when/if GM decides to return to it in the future. That’s why it’s vital for GM to be completely aware of this when abandoning segments, something it’s been doing a lot of lately, as the market segment moves to crossovers and electric vehicles.
| Segment Abandoned | Vehicle Discontinued |
|---|---|
| Mainstream Subcompact sedan | Chevrolet Sonic |
| Mainstream Subcompact hatch | Chevrolet Sonic |
| Mainstream Compact sedan | Chevrolet Cruze |
| Mainstream Compact hatchback | Chevrolet Cruze |
| Mainstream full-size car | Chevrolet Impala |
| Premium convertible | Buick Cascada |
| Premium midsize sedan/sporback | Buick Regal Sportback |
| Premium midsize wagon | Buick Regal TourX |
| Premium full-size sedan | Buick LaCrosse |
| Luxury compact coupe | Cadillac ATS Coupe |
| Midsize luxury sedan | Cadillac CTS Sedan |
| Large luxury sedan | Cadillac XTS |
| Large luxury sedan | Cadillac CT6 |
If GM does decide to return to these segments in the future, then it will have to work twice as hard to attain half the result of the segment leader(s). And that’s not optimal for any parties involved, including itself, its partners, stakeholders, shareholders or dealers.
Agree? Disagree? Let us know in the comments and be sure to subscribe to GM Authority for more obsessive GM news and anaylis.
- Words: David Finlay. Analysis: Alex Luft.
Sponsored Links
GM is globally focused on “profitability”.
IMHO, “leading” in a market segment / region, but loosing money doing it isn’t a “leadership position”. Just ask Ford of Europe.
Leading in a segment isn’t important? You think GM wouldn’t kill to have the Colorado and canyon selling at Tacoma volumes?
The more you sell, the more you make. You don’t make more by selling less, no matter how profitable you are.
VW rules Europe and makes money. It even started its EV program several years after GM and is selling more cars.
Sigurd, like who cares what they do in europe? I don’t know anyone in the US who has a vw or wants one. its almost an irrelevant brand in our state and probably most of America.
FORD and GM needs to think hard and long before giving up any parts of a vehicle market to the Imports, because that’s how they take the lead. The Big LIE that Sedans don’t sale in America because both charge more for a over size station wagon will put the American Auto Makers even farther behind in sales. Imports are still selling Sedans as gas go up cars come back into play putting FORD and GM behind again. The Ranger was a #1 seller when it was killed off, Camaro needed a total redesign in 2016, I would have put my money on a RWD Impala- base model, mid luxury model, SS and ZL1 model. A Buick Electric Park Avenue EV 4dr would have made better sense for the brand think 1976 styling
There it is….the Impala/Park Avenue would have sold awesome post. I don’t think young families are saying “Well we really wanted a big Park Avenue or a Crown Vic or another big sedan, but there aren’t any so let’s settle for a CR-V or Highlander”. Tastes have changed. I also personally still drive a sedan, and I hope sedans come back around eventually, but the market wants SUVs now. They don’t want Park Avenues. At least not in enough volume to be worth the development.
There’s a lot of 4 door Dodge HellCats on the road Chevy started that market Impala SS is needed, a lot of Tesla sedans with more coming Buick EV name Electra perfect, Lincoln Continental EV with suicide doors a hit. Customers want something special that evoke memories in a sedan, not a cookie cutter with No Soul or History
OTOH, the CT4/5 is selling. Motorweek did a recent test on a 2.7 PL CT4 awd and a Civic Type R, the CT4 was faster and better balanced then the Civic R while costing a few grand more. The Regal GS pushed $50k which is 3.0 CT5, 2.7 CT4 price and would be destroyed by the Cadillacs and the 2.0 Malibu matches its performance.
I get that GM needs moderately priced sedans, hopefully VSS-R is still on around ’26 after the initial E/Vs launched and the current administration is history.
If they had just kept the store parking lot spaces car sized it wouldn’t be so bad. Now days parking spaces are phone booth sized.
That’s why you need to know your customer base. Use them or lose them. Duh.
Exactly! GM has lost the touch with their customer base, even as they got better technologically.
True, e.g. Cadillac is an absolute dumpster fire. They are in 3rd to last place in the luxruy market segment of around 150k vehicles annually, only ahead of Infiniti and Lincoln. The combined others in front of them including Tesla total over 1.5m vehicles.
Without comparable market share numbers from the respective discontinued model years, this article is, at best, speculative ramblings of bold marketing and claims from business couch graduate quarterbacks on Monday. At worst, irresponsible journalism. Either way the bold claims in this article are not backed by reliable comparable data and are spectacular gaslighting that GM”Authority” should be embarrassed to publish. Your GM related articles, aside from, direct-from-GM press releases, continues to become lazier and more pointless.
I agree, just sloppy, emotional rambling not backed by data. Hey author, GM sold more cars and trucks back in ’07-08 then today and see what happened in ’09. Regardless GM is still the top automaker in the US with profit and a business plan unlike the ’00s so what gives?.
Jesse market share numbers are irrelevant here since market share is the sum of segment share. They’re talking about segment share here. If you have low segment share in all the segments you compete in, then your market share will be low.
I applaud this article. Finally someone who understands the danger of pulling out of segments.
Guestt you are as ignorant and clueless as it gets. I’ve been a long time reader but have never commented but I’ll start today because I just can’t stand it when uninformed trolls posing as readers like yourself try to disparage good reporting simply because your don’t agree with the findings.
“I agree, just sloppy, emotional rambling not backed by data.”
I see nothing sloppy in the article. I also see no rambling in the article. What I do see is a very well written article backed by data that supports the claim that once GM leaves a segment, it never returns to be the sales volume leader in that segment.
The author provided plenty of evidence to support the claim. All you have provided is baseless criticism with no actual fact or counterpoints. Why don’t YOU provide evidence to support YOUR claim? Let’s see it… is GM #1 in midsize trucks? No? Ok then how about medium duty trucks? No again? Ah ok then… why don’t you go play in the sandbox and let the grownups talk business.
Jack(azz)
The author still doesn’t articulate how GM isn’t in a leading position because they pulled out of markets, not to mention the BK that was an obvious blow to GMs leaders that had to craw to DC for money is motivation not to repeat those mistakes again, they don’t have to be #1 in midsized trucks considering they make money on them and their #1 in full-size sales and SUVs.
Since you think adults throw childish insults each other instead of talking their disagreements out I’ll play a little bit “no, you’re stupid…”..
Guestt,
I think the point of the article is that, when you pull out of segments, it’s not easy to come back and regain your previous share. GM has made a comedy of errors over the decades that has hurt them immenssly. The constant change of CEO’s, no clear vision, then changing vision, changing strategy etc., led them to crawl to the govt. to get them out of bankruptcy. No fan of Barra, but she has managed to stabilize the company.
Selling Opel and Vauxhaul and dumping Holden was her best decision. Hard to believe it took that long to realize they should dump cost burden unprofitable companies.
Bottom line is this. They need a real vision, focus and have a purpose. People who have a purpose in their life are successful. Compare GM with successful companies inside and outside the industry large and small and ask yourself what makes them different. It’s a case study in business.
Barra’s lack of a grip on GM’S design team will be GM’s undoing. The “they all have to look alike flaps grille ” is hideous and a turn off as is the $150 black bowtie. If the customer wants a black bowtie you already sold them the vehicle and are going to put a bowtie on the vehicle anyway so stop gouging for every little piece on the car.
I’m amazed they don’t charge extra for a hood latch.
It’s not just the black bowtie. It is charging $500, or more, for paint. Chrysler, Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, and others have at least a few color choices for which one does not pay extra.
Getting back to the black bowtie: the last Chevy I bought (2018 Tahoe) had one fitted as a dealer option. I told the dealer put the factory one back on and take off the charge. He said “no”. I picked up the keys to my trade-in and headed for the door. The charge came off, as did those for other dealer “packs”.
What gives ? Toyota is a threat to the U. S. Auto Market they sale full and midsize Trucks, Full and midsize SUVs, full and midsize cars. When the full-size Sequoia SUV move to SA Texas with the Tundra, it will rival GM Arlington Tx big 4. That move is being made for more sales
The Tundra is a joke, so is Sequoia. They still have eggs from the ’07 launch and won’t make a threat unless GM makes a total mistake of just not making anymore trucks. The Tacoma not too much but about it as it’s buyers like it but as said GM fielded midsized competition when Ford and FCA wasn’t interested. Toyota had the sedan market figured but don’t get your hopes high for trucks.
That joke sales petty good in Texas because that’s where it’s built, add to that Toyota only have 1 Tundra plant. If Toyota builds a few more then what you got, Everyone thought it was a joke when Toyota start selling vehicles here in the 70’s, look how that joke turned out. Now Toyota is apart of NASCAR and NHRA DRAG RACING
Toyotas history of this country hearts back to the mid-1950s. Look up a vehicle called the Toyopet Crown. I remember when I was a youngster, going into Hollywood sports cars on Hollywood Boulevard. They had a couple of Toyopets in stock.
Things didn’t get serious until they released the Toyota Corona. Then, the rest was history.
And Toyota still a joke compared to what GM/Ford moves in that state. Toyota was flat-footed and shocked when the then Toyota CEO visited Jerry Jones during a Cowboys game in ’91 and saw how many US pickups were in the parking lot, which Toyota rushed to their first failure the T100, not to mention the Tundra WAS built in 2 plants but down to one after the ’07 disaster. Toyota did thier math with mainstream cars mainly in Cali but only GM can do themselves in with trucks.
Tundra and Sequoia are not a joke. Tundra buyers, many former F150 owners, love them and won’t go back. Toyota is not trying to “outdo” the Big Three in trucks. All they need to do is get their slice of market share and they fold those buyers in to buying other Toyota products. It works.
They’re pure also-rans, and their sales reflect that. They copy the Americans and suck at it. Anyone going from an F-150 to a Tundra and doesnt miss the capability, durability, fuel mileage and power would have been better off trading in for a Honda Ridgeline.
But they want a truck and they like the Tundra. It works for Toyota. Toyota knows how to make things work.
Absolutely agreed. So much misinformation and misleading information. I will address the author in the rest of my reply:
Colorado is second because GM left the segment? Well, it was behind the Tacoma during the first generation, so… what does that prove?
And GM never abandoned full size pickups, ergo they’re successful (but still second, you forgot to mention, wasnt that your entire point in the midsize truck….never mind). Marvelous proof, dear sir. The segment never declined to the point that making a new Silverado wasnt considered worth the investment. Profits didnt fall out of full size truck sales, and there was never any doubt that full size American trucks would remain very popular and profitable. Even during the dark days of the recession, even during Covid, even way back after 9/11 when all hell broke loose and the economy looked like a swimming pool during an earthquake… did the F-series drop from the top sales (vehicle, not just truck) position? Did GM trucks fall to the mighty Toyota Corolla? No. Never.
This is all a bunch of crap that only serves as another failed attempt at explaining why it is the WRONG choice to discontinue passenger car lines that have been bleeding money for years.
I own a sedan, a hatchback, and my domestic partner owns a sedan and a coupe. I’m not a “crossover” kinda guy. The only one I sorta liked was the Honda Element, and I ended up selling it within a year after talking myself into one. So, I’m not here to tell you how wrong you are for being displeased that the Chevy Impala is gone, but the horrible CVT road trash Nissan CUVs (and the like) are selling like mad. I’m telling you that misrepresented facts and pure fantasy based on (VERY) selective memory only serves to boost your ratings with those who agree with you anyway, and make the rest of us go..WTF?
I would rather see a new RWD sedan from Ford and GM than another stubby, tall wagon. But I’m not holding my breath. It makes sense to give the market what it wants. The hold backs never win the war, ask anyone making horse carriages today. Sure, there are a few, but how are they doing compared to automakers?
This is one of the most pointless click bait storied to date here.
It takes time to dominate a segment. Few come out of the gate with a class leader.
Then in sales you have two things loyalty that has to be earned or volume that is the result of high discounts or low pricing.
Often high volumes and large discounts mean no money made. As we have seen this last year GM has had its highest transaction price I n history. This means they were making good money. That is what matters volume leading can be a two edged sword.
GM was not going to catch Toyota for a good while as they have a very loyal following. Then they split sales with GMC that generally beat Ford mid or full size. What you fail to bring up this GMC sales often are higher profit and make more money per sale in the segment.
The Blazer is just a new model in a competitive segment. The Jeep is seen by many as not the same as the rest of the segment. It is sold like an off road vehicle not a family road vehicle.
Jeep tries to tag all their vehicles as adventure off road like vehicles though most are not. People buy the image and forget the quality.
Here is the deal. FCA had to sell out to survive. Ford if not for the Ford family majority of ownership would be owned by someone else or broken up due to low stock value.
GM on the other hand is making money and investing in the future unlike any other company outside VW.
The market watchers have placed GM ahead Ford and most others as having a better plan for the Electric future that is coming. This is why stock is up now and will go higher next year.
GM will be profitable next year while others struggle with the chip shortage as most are not making much now let alone if sales decline due to no inventory.
It used to be car counts mattered and they were only the thing that mattered. Today it is more return on investments that really count.
Just because you disagree with the perspective doesn’t make it clickbait.
Any time you post misleading headlines on a fax story it is click bait. Agree or not.
What are you even talking about C8.R? The observations made in the article are spot on… I’m glad someone wrote about it.
There is nothing misleading here. We’ve seen it for years now… GM pulls out of a segment, comes back a few years later but can’t get a leadership position because it lost a bunch of customers when it initially left the segment and those customers are not coming back. As a dealer for 20 years, I’ve seen it way too many times. GM needs to stop doing these things.
As others here said, you just don’t want to accept reality, but it is true. Don’t try to smear a good article by calling it clickbait because you disagree with it.
I see C8.R as yet another ignoramus, much like Guestt above. You say the article is clickbait but I think your comment is clickbait or is it comment bait?
The article makes a clear claim and then goes on to support it with facts and figures. The bottom line is that GM never returns to the best selling position once they abandon a segment… meaning that they should be careful about which segments they abandon so that it doesn’t come to bight GM in the long term.
You talk about loyalty. Well genius, it’s impossible for customers to be loyal when GM abandons segments. You need
Did GM exit midsize trucks? Yes. Did GM return to midsize trucks? Yes. Is GM #1 in midsize trucks? No. Far from it.
The same exact scenario takes place for all the other segments they talk about in the article. So again, where is the clickbait? Either you’re misinformed about what clickbait means or you’re just trolling. Which one is it?
C8.R… you just do not get it.
“It takes time to dominate a segment.”
Ok so you started on the right track… but how do you expect GM to dominate anything if they constantly discontinue models and exit segments?
In reality, it takes a lot more than just time. It takes time, patience, constantly improvement to product, a great customer experience. But more basic than all of that is the product. GM constantly pull out of segments only to realize that it was a mistake a few years later, then they come back but its too late… the customers already went elsewhere.
I guarantee you that after my CT6, I am going to either Mercedes, BMW or Genesis. The Cadillac dealer has nothing for me. Heck, Cadillac entirely gave up on me. When they realize their mistake in a few years and come back with another model, it will be very hard to win back my business.
That is exactly what they’re talking about in this article. If you think that’s clickbait, you’re even dumber than I thought.
Rob the cold harsh truth is GM was dumping billions into Europe and getting no where. This at a time where even Europe is buying less cars. Add to that they are going to force EV there so pulling out now let’s GM pump more money into the EV to challenge VW.
Even Ford a long established brand in Europe if failing and declining in sales.
Down under GM could not sell cars built in country cheap. Sales were declining for years as the country started to buy imported Mazda’s, Toyota’s and Hyundai’s that were built in Korea and Malaysia at much cheaper labor. They low ball the prices and end up undercutting Ford and GM till there was no money in it,
GM then imports cars and gets blasted for not making them there but if they did no one would buy due to higher prices.
GM is focusing on exporting to where they make money and will re enter markets with EV products at a time they will be needed and by then the prices will be very competitive.
What they were doing was only going to waste money.
Yes it takes time to build market share but it also takes the tight product and GM just did not have it nor the billions needed to get it right only in 10/ years needing to dump it for EV.
Europe is a vision of the future. They will be forcing the EV products no matter if mfgs are ready or not.
You folks here [email protected]$ch but few of you ever take the time to factor the development cost and just where the market is going.
The truth is I am far from a fan of EV but I at least fully understand that the coming transition is coming no matter how you feel about it. The automakers are realizing this too. But only a few are in a place to do much about it right now. More will partner and others will fail.
GM will be in a very good place here in a few years and in the mean time even with other factors like viruses they will survive and they will prosper.
Hyundai came to America and tanked in their first attempt. They pulled back regrouped and invested in better product. It took 20 years but they have made it back. What GM is doing is much similar.
What many forget is the Camaro was killed the first time due to laws that made the car unable to pass the crash tests. Why no we gen? There was not enough money vs sales to keep it alive. GM was broke. The GTO was a miracle it ever got converted to America but Lutz did it on nearly no funding. That hood with scoops? It was a second year item as they had no money to do it in 2004.
GM is only investing in models that sell in high volume or in numbers that prove most profitable. They are not going to invest billions in a lesser program than they can make in another model.
GM spent decades catering to niche segments to make people out of the main stream happy. It led to chapter 11.
You need to realize if they stopped making your low volume sedan it was because there were too few people like you to make it worth while. If they raised the price then you would not buy anyways. Better to invest in a model with better returns.
Other mfgs are moving this way so the market will continue to change and leave the odd folks out.
Like I said before it is not enough to make money anymore. They need to max the return on the investment.
GM leaves segments and then they fail when they return. Not clickbait. Facts and logic are stubborn things.
C8.R,
I wouldn’t call the article clickbait, I thought it was well done. But where I DID agree with you was this:
“The market watchers have placed GM ahead Ford and most others as having a better plan for the Electric future that is coming. This is why stock is up now and will go higher next year.”
BINGO.
There is no one outside of Tesla that is ahead of GM when it comes to EVs, Volkswagen included. GM went about as close to all in on EVs as they could without killing off their golden goose SUVs and trucks. The perfect balance.
If GM hadn’t made such bold moves, they’d have had 3 options:
1.) This EV push totally flops. GM wastes billions in cash way too early, and they collapse into teetering on bankruptcy;
2.) The EV push is moderately successful, GM makes average profits but nothing to write home about, and they’re stuck in no man’s land between ICE and EV (this is Stellantis right now, at BEST); or
3.) Their EVs begin to dominate the market, GM begins to take the lead in numerous high-margin segments (SUVs, crossovers, trucks, off-roaders, luxury cars, etc.), and GM has a renaissance like they haven’t had since the 1950’s. Much increased profits and market share comes with the territory.
GM is too far in now for option #2 to be realistic, so that scenario likely won’t happen. It’s either going to be a terrific success, or bitter failure. The eventual outcome is of course totally up for debate.
Me personally, I think it’ll be the former – GM will experience exponential growth over the nest 10 years. their trucks and SUVs are selling unlike anything else they’ve produced in generations, and their EV platforms are more advanced than any other mass-market brand except Tesla. They have only 2 platforms that will underpin all of their makes. Why is this important? It means low-volume vehicles (full-size sedans, sports coupes, and high-end luxury cars) are now more coat-effective for GM to produce than arguably at any point in their history. You want one of these vehicles? With the platform cost-sharing, this will be possible now where it wasn’t before. Prepare to see a large number of niche vehicles GM hasn’t built in a long time.
I used to be very skeptical of this move…but now? I’ve never been more hopeful for the future of GM in my entire lifetime. And the markets agree wholeheartedly.
Yes GM hold the edge only VW is in the same zip code.
Tesla is a market of one and that will change soon. They will lose their lead and dominance as they just can not afford or have the ability to deliver as many products in as short of a time as VW and GM will. The scales it just off the table.
The future is electric for a number of reasons. Regulations being #1, the next is economics of electronics is so much cheaper once development is recovered.
They try to compare the mid size trucks but yet GM is second in a class and has been that is limited vs the full size trucks.
GM has planned a foundation for the future and stopped trying to be all things to all people with highly discounted cars sold at a loss.
You and I often think much the same. We are ice gear heads that love our cars. But we both have seen where this is going and are both informed enough to fully understand where this is going.
Too many people can’t see past next week and with this you have to look ahead 20 years. You also need to see where the world is moving yo and like it or not GM gets it too.
With Ice being number one in volume means little anymore as it is all about the profits vs investment.
Chrysler as we knew it is mostly gone. Ford is in deep trouble and they will need help. VW is on its game while Toyota is behind but holds the cash and ability to catch up.
Everyone else is scrambling to find a dance partner or they will be hung out to dry.
You are one of the few who get it here. While we may. It agree on the click bait I know you see the big picture.
The reality is that automakers need to maximize income and to do so means abandoning markets and vehicles that are not earning their keep.
When many of these other mfg make the change they will be limited and behind as they try to pay for the future while not making money to support the now.
Automakers are not companies anymore that have deep pockets. Those pockets have gone to Intel and Apple.
To continue to lose money in Europe and down under is just pure insanity. There are times you have to step back to move forward. To repeatedly to continue to sell cars in Europe and waste money that will pay for the gains in the future would be a formula of failure.
Are in point Ford market in Europe is killing them like gangrene.
C8.R,
Well said!! I have nothing to add, but to tip my virtual cap to you. This guy gets it.
If only C8.R didn’t call good content clickbait, he would be taken seriously.
It’s just so obvious: lead, follow, or get out of the way. This holds true in all vehicle segments and with all technologies be it ICE or electric.
GM was a leader long before most followers of this blog were born. Literally a textbook example of legendary vision, leadership, ingenuity and market dominance – unchallenged for decades.
Then, somewhere in the 1970s, they decided to follow. They sacrificed leadership to put cost cutting before innovation and quality, insulted their customer’s intelligence with cynical badge engineered cars with designs they seemingly phoned in and began a decades long downward spiral during which they soiled their legendary reputation, gave up increasing percentages of market share and ultimately shuttered previously hallowed brands to fend off bankruptcy at the government’s prompting.
Of late, they’ve just given up. They decided it’s easier to get out of the way and let the competition have at it rather than bring back world class design, engineering and quality to regain their rightful place at the top of the “mobility” food chain. Maybe they’ll finally achieve long overdue success with a new generation of superior all electric vehicles. But if the culture within GM doesn’t change, those, too will be eclipsed by better design and engineering from their competitors. Period
Good observations.
This is precisely why GM should never have abandoned most of the segments mentioned. These customers will be a lot harder to win back
True on winning back customers. But GM was losing money in most of those segments, if not all. Staying in them back then would mean a substantially weaker and sicker GM now. As things stand, the company currently is in great health now, much leaner and meaner, while also being extremely well positioned for the future. Most companies are lucky if one of those is true for them, let alone both.
I expect GM to reenter a number of electrified versions of the segments they left in the very near term.
GM was NOT losing money on any of the segments it pulled out of, except for the Volt. Cruze, Sonic, Impala, LaCrosse, CT6 did not lose money in the last decade.
Oh yes they were lol. Take the CT6 for example. Do you have any clue how expensive that Omega platform was to develop?? They weren’t making anywhere NEAR enough money selling CT6’s to justify it’s continued existence, even though the car was phenomenal.
Updating those vehicles would have been financial suicide. If they weren’t actively losing money on the cars, they would be the second they started rolling out the next generations. Impala, Cruze, Sonic, they were all old and needed updating. Why go through expensive new generations for vehicles in tanking markets?
Stats don’t lie but can be presented in a convenient and out of context manner to reinforce one’s point.
An example of this can be found with Buick Regal because it’s model discontinued on 2004 was far from premium and aimed at a rapidly shrinking older demo. Regal had long ago lost US brand equity. Regal (and a three model Buick) had long outlived it’s expiration date due to previous poor management therefore in 2009 selling the lovely Opel was always going to be an uphill battle.
Quitting segments is always a high risk move. Dropping Cruze will one day bite GM especially because the car could have transitioned into an EV easily.
Not sure what you mean.
The Regal was a premium midsize sedan before being dropped and then came back a premium midsize sedan. Was it aimed at a different audience? Yes. But the segment remained the same. The problem was that GM let the old Regal lose touch with the market for too long so a drastic product transition was needed.
I see nothing wrong with the context or stats here.
A lot of the sales performance difference is product design and pricing. The Mustang and Challenger are more appealing designs than the Camaro and that is why they are more successful. The Challenger has been priced more attractively than the Camaro. Taking about model year gaps, the Challenger’s model year gap is magnitudes greater than the Camaro’s model year gap. Also, the Tacoma is more rugged off-road than the Colorado which is important to its customer base. Furthermore, Toyota has discounted the Tacoma more than Chevrolet has discounted the Colorado since the current Colorado has been introduced.
Up until October of 2019, I would have agreed with the “Also, the Tacoma is more rugged off-road than the Colorado…” statement but the ZR2 Bison I purchased then is much more capable than a Tacoma, even one with the Pro package. The DSSV shocks are simply amazing. The electric locking front diff is not available on the Tacoma. The ZR2’s electric locking rear diff is much more responsive than that on either of the two TRD’s I owned. A 9.5K winch is a GM dealer installed option on the Bison but aftermarket only with the need to replace the front bumper on a Tacoma. Toyota is still using drum brakes in the rear. The 3.5L in the recent Tacomas is not as well suited for towing and low end torque applications as the 4.0 it replaced. Neither engine can match the horsepower, torque or gas mileage of Chevy’s 3.6 VL. Eight speed auto in the Colorado vs Toyota’s six speed. Full boron skid plates front to rear on the Bison are aftermarket only from Toyota. 17″ wheels vs 16″ provide more clearance.
I would not argue against the qualifier “which is important to its customer base” but would suggest that demographic would be well advised to take a look at the Colorado, especially one with the ZR2 and Bison options if they’re looking for off-road performance. Toyota makes a good truck but I think they’ve become a bit complacent with their market share over the past few years.
The 2019 Colorado I bought was slightly higher than the offer I received for a 2021 Tacoma Pro but, by the time I added the aftermarket only options important to me to the Toyota, the Chevy was a better choice.
I agree with C8.R, especially in the Corvette’s case. Were it not for the 265 CID V-8 and the three-speed manual, among other factors, the first generation would have been the only one. It took time, racing, advertising and continued improvements to build the equity foundation the car enjoys today. I’m less convinced brand loyalty plays a major role with the C8’s success than the C8’s redesign attracts customers that previous generations repelled.
But to get that recipe right, a car company has to be present and offer a product. You can’t get something right when you don’t have a product because you discontinued it.
One more thing: General Motors needs to advertise. Really, how many saw any promotions of the Buick Regal wagon? How many, aside from car buffs, knew it even existed? Any ads for the Impala or the Malibu? Meantime, Toyota advertised the Avalon and Camry respectively, and sold (and still sells) them in good volumes. Ford advertises as well.
GM has also dropped a lot of great advertising “language” over the years. “See the USA in Your Chevrolet”, with plenty of print and broadcast ads, went well. “Find New Roads”? Really? “Like a Rock!” for the pickup line was a good one, and then disappeared.
Buick is perceived as an old man’s car only because no effort was made to change any minds. I’m old enough to recall when a Pontiac was something school principals and minor-level bank officials drove. Then, Bunkie Knudsen brought Pontiac around to being the performance line at GM, jerking the rug out from under its rival division, Oldsmobile.
Or you don’t have the parts to make it!
Well. I think the point of the article is well taken. I don’t think the current crowd at GM understands or accepts the importance of brand loyalty. A customer who feels alienated by their beloved brand is going to buy elsewhere. They can hold their nose only so long, especially when there are so many competitive vehicles now. And they will continue to buy the competitor’s product as long as that company makes them feel the love.
Design, components that don’t keep customers returning to a service drive unresolved more than one time and ignoring the customer’s wants. GM seriously needs to have a panel of non GM people to approve or disapprove of their designs before they spend billions to find out it’s a non starter.
I fully agree with the difficulty in re-capturing an abandoned market. I’d always driven Chevy’s – Camaro, Vette, Blazer (S10 & K5), Suburban, C10. In 05, I was shopping for a truck to replace my extended cab 4WD S10 and GM really had nothing on par with the Tacoma (4WD double cab TRD Off Road). Seven years later, I bought a second Tacoma as the first had been a solid truck. Another seven years, 2019, I was in the market again and was really only looking at Toyotas. I’d have bought a third but all three local dealerships managed to piss me off so badly I decided to take another look at Chevy. To my surprise, the Colorado was actually better than the Tacoma in almost every way. Now have 31K on a 19 ZR2 Bison and couldn’t be happier.
What is the issue here exactly? Some don’t like GM’s model mix?
GM is the biggest seller of vehicles in America, and has been for quite some time. And GM is more profitable than either Ford or FCA. That’s not failure in any sense of the word. Data matters, not opinion.
I’m reading some really great points from others above. There’s a lot about profitability and market share, etc. Certainly things that a healthy company must have. I also see the point of others who are keeping things more simple: You can’t sell what you don’t have.
I’ve stated this numerous times and I don’t need to be a broken record. But GM is missing the bigger picture by dropping out of the sedan (car) market and not offering what some people still want. Take Buick. They are the last brand that should have dropped sedan models totally! As many of us have bantered back and forth about on here, there are many people who will now become “ex” GM/Buick drivers and become “new” Toyota drivers. Very sad, but true. Now, how will GM ever get those buyers back? Chances are, they won’t.
So now let’s step back to the market share/profitability side. GM could certainly produce two sets of sedan’s giving both Chevy and Buick two cars. Sharing the two (4 sedans total) would assist in the cost or production, yet keep most of those buyers in the fold for when the market trends swing back. It would also give GM a foothold with keeping one plant operating, and hopefully one in the USA. Even if the profits were not as much as the SUV’s or trucks, they need to take into account the cost of retaining many of these customers. Just like the article talks about. But sadly, GM seems to be ok with this pattern of dropping out of a segment, losing those customers and then whining about why they can’t catch up.
Right now, the auto industry is in a period of transition. GM has become a financially stable company, something that Sergio Marchionne was not able to achieve with Fiat Chrysler. Sergio knew the tremendous cost for research and development and was always looking for a partner that could help spread these investments over a larger base. However, GM is now well positioned for future products. Let’s look at these products: EV600, EP1, Hydrotec along with the Ultium platform. Their investments should pay off and with the Ultium platform the ability to easily build different vehicles at the same facility. In other words, with their focus to become profitable, GM now has the capacity to do research and development. They did eliminate products and left money losing markets, but doing this gave them the ability to invest in new technologies that should help them maintain their leadership status.
I believe that consumers develop loyalties to manufacturers, rather than specific vehicle brands or models. If I had a really good or bad set of experiences owning a Chevrolet, that will likely affect my desire to own a Buick or Cadillac. All manufacturers have to whittle costs out of their manufacturing operation, but my recent long-term experience with a GM product left me with the impression that GM has a talent pool of genius designers and engineers, who then submit their best work to some evil bastard that decides that machined steel parts can be replaced with cast aluminum ones, that aluminum can be replaced with plastic, that nuts, bolts, and washers can be replaced with plastic clips,etc. I realize that saving $5 or $10 per vehicle really adds up in the long run, but on an individual basis it meant that I had several years of recurring service visits to spend thousands in labor to replace $100 dollar parts that GM had saved $2 each on by downgrading them to be just barely good enough to outlast the warranty. I would have been far better off and happier to have paid another $500 for the car to have been built the way conscientious engineers had intended. This was my experience with one, now-discontinued model and year of Cadillac that I bought used, but it left me deciding (perhaps unfairly…) “I’m never buying another GM product.”
man now that has got alot of responses. Gm has made this mistake constantly .ie the cavalier sales success then instead of making it better ,it was the colbalt then the cruse now they want people to make there first car be a toyota or honda and never come back to GM! Cadillac i have owned 2 SRX now they have changed names so many times all models and telling me they cant give me as much on trade in cause they dont make it anymore so why stay with GM.Ford has done the same thing yet f150 and mustang have stayed the same .how dont they get this.
Very timely & well researched article that provokes lots of opinion & debate. Kudos to the authors & research team. My GM history of “brand loyalty” (I don’t think it exists in today’s younger genz):
Grandfather sold Buicks his whole life.
First car family hand me down: ’62 Buick Skylark convertible my Great Uncle purchased through my Grandfather Buick Dealer.
Awesome car. WISH I had $$ to restore.
2nd car: used Chevy Monte Carlo. 200k+ miles
3rd car: new Pontiac Grand Am. 200k+
4th car: new Pontiac Grand Prix. 200k+
5th car: new Pontiac Bonneville SST 200k+
6th car: Pontiac G8. Never happened. Pontiac killed off. Switched to “certified used” sporty smaller Euro Style 2011 BUICK Regal Sedan Turbo. Best fun drive car since my ’62 Skylark convertible. Totalled in deer accident.
7th car: Another used 2011 Buick Regal.
8th car: ????
Option 1: NO more Buick Regal
Option 2: NOT a China made Envision BUT would be my choice if made anywhere but China.
Option 3: A NON-GM product for the first time in my 60+ year life. OR maybe a used Pontiac G8………….
Article also ignores production capacity. Colorado/Canyon/Savanna/Express plant is running full out. They couldn’t compete with Toyota even if they wanted to without building a dedicated plant or moving some production to another plant. To do that they would have to be confident of a production level similar to Tacoma. That’s a big ask. But they have sold every one they could with minimal incentives compared to full-size models and residuals are probably the strongest in the GM portfolio. Blazer is also constrained, being built in a plant also building Equinox and Terrain. Grand Cherokee and Tacoma are unconstrained at their plants. As for segments they have left, I can’t see them returning. the volume and profitability is just not there to worry about it.
Having more demand than supply is a great problem to have and most business people would jump all over that opportunity. If GM feel that they have the demand for Colorado and Canyon, they would have expanded production capacity. They haven’t expanded production, so it would stand to reason that they don’t think they have the demand.
Did pulling out of the segment hurt GM? Absolutely. This is why Toyota is so successful – they are a steady company that improves year after year. GM tries to compete with leaps and bounds and that’s a lot more difficult than the steady, continuous improvement model.
“ This is why Toyota is so successful – they are a steady company that improves year after year.”
Toyota is also smart enough to leave the same name on products you’re after year, decade after decade. Take the Corolla. It’s been around for at least three decades. What has Chevrolet done with their compacted subcompact lines? We’ve had the prism under both Chevrolet and Geo labels, then up with something else I forget watt. The cavalier became the cobalt became the cruise.
The Tacoma has been the Tacoma for decades. Meantime Chevrolet had the S Tim, the more Colorado. There was a break in between.
General motors keeps juggling model names so often that people can’t keep up. Another comment-Make a remark that his Cadillac SRX became something else, thereby evaluating the model of car that he had because it was discontinued. You just can’t keep doing this to customers without them noticing it.
I’m cynical enough to think that eventually Chevrolet will release a bottle called the 400. Why the 400? It will be to commemorate the 400th model name that they’ve had for a vehicle.
Grizzly’s right – the dearth of advertising and a lack of model name equity are two Achilles’ heels gm is guilty of repeating.
The last GM vehicle I saw advertised heavily was the 2008 Malibu; it was even on an ATM where I banked at the time. I haven’t seen a Buick Regal ad since 2015-6 (the wife took the scenic route while bringing home groceries in hubby’s car and the pop bottle sprayed him when he broke the seal).
GM needs to drop Buick and re introduce Pontiac.
“This is why Toyota is so successful – they are a steady company that improves year after year.”
Huh? The Tundra has been stagnant and woefully mediocre for over a decade. The Tacoma was stagnant for years before the 3rd gen came out and when it finally did come out, it was a massive disappointment with many known design issues simply carried over from the 2nd gen. Most would say the powertrain amd build quality of the 3rd gen was a significant downgrade compared to the 2nd gen. The Rav4’s new powertrain has been plagued with issues and NVH complaints. Toyota’s sales success is built on customers that know nothing about vehicles and just default to Toyota because they perceive Toyota as the “reliable” brand despite their declining quality.
Whatever you are selling if you don’t offer the best product and customer service for the money you are going to struggle to be a leader in that field.
Then you add General Motors habit of killing off products just as they get it right or giving conflicting information about the future of that product has to hurt sales.