mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

Re: Who thinks it’s time to start talking about Pontiac again?

#38829
Alex Luft
Keymaster

Alrighty:

1. “GM got rid of Pontiac not because of the bankruptcy but because they felt like it was time.— Alex that is wrong. It is know that GM wanted to keep Pontiac and have 5 core brands instead of the 4 but the govt said they could only have four core brands. Geting rid of Pontiac was something GM really didnt want to do.”

What do you mean it’s “wrong”, man? Were you physically present during the Chapter 11 proceedings? Were you there during board room meetings? How can you make that claim? And how can one say that GM — as company — wanted to do this or do that?

GM isn’t a person — it didn’t “want” to do anything. Here’s what really happens in most large organizations: there are factions that support one idea and other camps that support other ideas. Pontiac was an idea that was on its way out. And this is from many within GM’s ranks!

Furthermore, many incorrectly assume that “the government” is running GM… or that it has or had some kind of huge influence over operations. Again, there is only a small amount of truth to this. But for the most part, GM and several automotive task force folks took a hard look at its business. And decided that Pontiac had to go. It wasn’t a high-volume brand… and its profits were abysmal. So it was a lose-lose.

The fact that GM was hurting for cash meant that it needed to focus on what it can do right and what brought the largest return: Chevy, Buick, and Caddy. The government’s involvement is irrelevant, since the decisions made would have been made anyway by good business people. All “the government” did was help expedite the bankruptcy process.

2. “You said that “GM didn’t gain anything and didn’t save anything by dropping Pontiac.”—-Alex, that is not true at all. GM is saving a lot of money by not having Pontiac around today. Also, GM did lose something when they got rid of Pontiac….they lost a lot of fans and customers.”

Customers aside, how did GM save money by dumping Pontiac, exactly? Did they lay off a considerable amount of Pontiac employees? Did they close down Pontiac-only factories? How did GM “save”?

3. “You said Pontiac wasnt selling.—Well if u mean internationally then ya your right because Pontiac was a North American brand but if you mean in north American, you are WRONG!”

No, Pontiac was — in fact — NOT selling. It wasn’t selling well.

In its heyday (around 2002/2003), the brand topped out at 40,000 sales per month in the U.S. If it were a top-end luxury brand making a high profit margin per vehicle, that would be phenomenal. But that’s not what it was.

Pontiac was supposed to be a mainstream brand, but it didn’t have the volume or the profit margin to make business sense.

The brand wasn’t making any money but was a resource drain on GM. It’s as simple as that.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.