Buick Boosts Luxury Image

[akirby]

I have no issue with Buick vehicles - I like them for the most part. But as jpd80 said - the overall strategy with Chevy is unnecessary and hurts Chevy to help Buick. Why do you need both the Malibu and the Regal? Why not take the Regal and offer a decontented version around the same price point as the Malibu. Same with the other Buicks. They would make great Chevys. And don't say it wouldn't work because people expect Chevys to be cheap. It worked for Ford when they killed Mercury and took the Focus, Fusion and Taurus upscale.

 

OR make the Buicks entry level Caddys if you want to keep Chevy cheap.

Edited March 15, 2013 by akirby

[FordBuyer]

We considered the Enclave during our recent search for a new car. It is an impressive car for sure, but I felt it wasn't worth the extra expense over the Edge Limited AWD we ended up ordering.

 

Not sure that is a good comparison in that Enclave is three row CUV, and Edge two row. Better comparison would be Explorer or MKT. Of course the Explorer is a super popular Ford CUV that is a grand slam in sales. Sales still skyrocketing upwards. Enclave I would take over Cadillac SRX.

[NickF1011]

Buick exists and thrives in the USA because GM refuses to lift the image of Chevrolet. Had GM spent a similar amount of resources on lifting the

perception and quality of Chevrolet's vehicles, there would be little need for Buick in the USA. as high series Chevrolets would be filling that role.

 

And that answers FordBuyer's question about why Infiniti and Acura owners might very well still trade them in for Chevrolets if Buick didn't exist. They are already doing it for Fords.

 

And seriously FordBuyer, you're going to harp about Lincoln's sales when last month they had no MKZ's to sell and the rest of their lineup is, well, old? Oh what ever will you do to find negativity when Lincoln finally has a full month of sales with MKZ inventories at proper levels and oh God help us when the MKC arrives?

 

Everything bad you can think of to say about Lincoln involves what they are dealing with today instead of the things even you know are changing rapidly. Contrast that with Buick and GM. What is their long-term strategy to keep them viable? The space they can market themselves in will continue to shrink as Chevrolet's managers insist (rightfully so) that their product be improved. Meanwhile, they are taking away resources from GM's largest brand resulting in inexecusable shortcomings like the current Malibu and Silverado, which are basically last-in-class compared to the other major players in the market. But hey, at least Buick is selling 200,000 vehicles a year!!

Edited March 15, 2013 by NickF1011

[PREMiERdrum]

And that answers FordBuyer's question about why Infiniti and Acura owners might very well still trade them in for Chevrolets if Buick didn't exist. They are already doing it for Fords.

 

No disrespect intended to either Acura or Infiniti, but as mostly entry-level luxury brands, should these conquest sales be coveted? I'd hope Lincoln were setting their sights higher, towards Lexus and the Germans.

 

I know at least locally, the advertising for Acura all centers around the idea of "getting a luxury Acura for the same price as a regular car."

 

Honestly, Acura, Buick, Infiniti, and perhaps Volvo buyers are similar, people looking for a little more luxury for a little more money.

[akirby]

No disrespect intended to either Acura or Infiniti, but as mostly entry-level luxury brands, should these conquest sales be coveted? I'd hope Lincoln were setting their sights higher, towards Lexus and the Germans.

 

I know at least locally, the advertising for Acura all centers around the idea of "getting a luxury Acura for the same price as a regular car."

 

Honestly, Acura, Buick, Infiniti, and perhaps Volvo buyers are similar, people looking for a little more luxury for a little more money.

 

A sale is a sale and a conquest is an incremental sale and incremental customer addition. So yes, they should be coveted just as much as any other conquest.

[NickF1011]

A sale is a sale and a conquest is an incremental sale and incremental customer addition. So yes, they should be coveted just as much as any other conquest.

 

And there's the rub with GM's strategy. Would they be gaining more conquest buyers by keeping niche brand Buick alive or by instead marketing competent Chevrolets?

[PREMiERdrum]

A sale is a sale and a conquest is an incremental sale and incremental customer addition. So yes, they should be coveted just as much as any other conquest.

 

Should they be targeting Kia intenders then, with $199/mo leases?

 

You covet conquest buyers who can afford to pay your prices. Going after buyers who are used to getting things "on the cheap" isn't going to get you very far.

[FordBuyer]

Ford is doing well with Titanium...great. But a Titianium Fusion still looks much like a Fusion SE. An Enclave IMO looks much better and different than its siblings just as the MKZ looks much better than a Fusion. I would have never thought Buick could find a niche between Chevy and Cadillac, but it did.

 

As for Acura and Infiniti buyers buying some sort of fancy Cruze or Malibu with more features, I don't think so. I remember many Saturn buyers saying they had never bought GM before, but Saturn attracted them, at least when Saturn was selling affordable, compact cars. I'm sure Buick still attracts some of the old GM buyers that bought Pontiac and Oldsmobile, but again GM is stating 60% of its Buick sales are conquest sales now.

 

Just because Ford didn't have the will or maybe ability to create a division between Ford and Lincoln doesn't mean GM can't do it as they are doing it no matter what the negatards on here state. Choice is good, and I would rather see Buick stay and do great than be limited to gussied up Chevys.

 

Btw, I just saw a new MKZ parked at local restaurant near here all spiffed up, it looks great, and I hope it sells great. Lincoln could very well be on comeback trail, but current sales and reality can be a bitch and that is where Lincoln is at today like it or not. Lincoln needs a homerun, and hopefully the new MKZ is the home run they desperately need IMO. Buick is in a different place than Lincoln, and a much better place by every measure. The future is never guaranteed. I thought you guys had enought life experiences to realize it. I thought a lot of things in 2007, but thngs are differrent now in many ways. Who knows where Lincoln will be in 2018. I don't and you don't. All we have now is the present. Another reality is that Ford has yet to prove that it knows how to run a very competive luxury vehicle brand.

[jpd80]

A sale is a sale and a conquest is an incremental sale and incremental customer addition. So yes, they should be coveted just as much as any other conquest.

Yes but that has to be balanced against attrition, GMC for example has significant conquests but equally high attrition resulting in a much lower nett gain.

I Know Buick is different, that division is doing well and winning more buyers each year, what I don't understand is GM's under use of Chevrolet,

that brand could emulate everything done by the Ford brand if GM had the will to try.

Edited March 15, 2013 by jpd80

[FordBuyer]

And there's the rub with GM's strategy. Would they be gaining more conquest buyers by keeping niche brand Buick alive or by instead marketing competent Chevrolets?

 

First, only reason stated for keeping Buick initially was its China connection and brand image there. Who would have thought Buick would do so well here after bankruptcy? I thought it would slowy die off here. But it hasn't, and is getting stronger, and the Encore looks like desirable, small SUV for affluent females. Instead of being all pissy about Buick success, how about congratulating them. Jealousy and being a spoiled sport are not admirable character traits. As consumers, we should be glad for more choice, especially good choice.

[FordBuyer]

Yes but that has to be balanced against attrition, GMC for example has significant conquests but equally high attrition resulting in a much lower nett gain.

I Know Buick is different, that division is doing well and winning more buyers each year, what I don't understand is GM under use of Chevrolet, that brand

could emulate everything done by the Ford brand if GM had the will to do that.

 

Dang, Chevy has 13 all new or improved products coming out this year. Yeah, they screwed up the Silverado neglecting it so long, and there is speculation new one is not as good as it should be, but I would say GM is paying attention to Chevy and introducing lots of new and improved product. Certainly Ford is the trend setter here, but GM seems to get it now and putting lots of effort into Chevy. And going back and redoing the Malibu is a good sign also. If I were Ford, I wouldn't underestimate Chevy. Ford will have to keep its foot to floor, and that is good. Competition/choice is good.

[NickF1011]

Lincoln needs a homerun

 

No.

[fordmantpw]

Instead of being all pissy about Buick success, how about congratulating them. Jealousy and being a spoiled sport are not admirable character traits. As consumers, we should be glad for more choice, especially good choice.

 

Congrats to GM for having success with Buick while simultaneously holding back Chevy and keeping it from being all that it can be because you held a place for Buick, that really doesn't need to be there. That better?

 

Seriously, Chevy could be so much more if Buick wasn't here, much the same way Ford is so much better without Mercury.

[RichardJensen]

"GM seems to get it now"

 

People have been saying that for thirty years. It's no more true now than it was with the J-Body ('finally, a domestic competitor for the Japanese compacts), the W-body ('finally, GM's answer to the Taurus'), the Blazer ('finally, GM's answer to the Explorer'), hiring Proctor & Gamble execs ('finally, GM understands the value of brand management'), hiring Bob Lutz ('finally, a car guy is calling the shots at GM'), firing Bob Wagoner ('finally, GM is getting rid of useless dead wood'), filing Chapter 11 ('finally, GM can restructure its onerous franchise and UAW agreements'), and so on and so forth. The GM of today is quite similar to the GM of 1982, it's just a leaner and more efficient maker of mistakes.

 

Or maybe you think importing the SS instead of making the Malibu competitive is a good idea.

 

---

 

And just where do you get off saying that someone else was "wrong" because he comparison shopped an Enclave and an Edge? Like somehow his real life actual honest to goodness money on the table cash on the barrel purchased, bought, paid for acquisition of an Edge over an Enclave is invalid because the Enclave has three rows?

 

 

Geez. FB. You should be happy that you've got a 5 post limit. Here, where you've posted like 15 times, you're just making yourself look silly,

 

"GM finally gets it" indeed...... If Chapter 11 didn't give them sense enough to stop robbing Peter to pay Paul, then I have doubts that they will ever realize how stupid their strategies are.

[PREMiERdrum]

I have doubts that they will ever realize how stupid their strategies are.

 

Example: "We sold way more trucks than Ford, and made less money!"

 

a leaner and more efficient maker of mistakes.

 

I heard they're looking for a new tagline again. No, really.

[FordBuyer]

No.

 

I stand corrected. They need a grand slam to get sales up to decent, relevant levels. Not sure what a relevant sales level is, but it's a hell of a lot more than 5,000-7,000 sales/month that they've been doing last couple years. And that is with heavy incentives as they clog up lots. Lincoln still has about 700 dealerships, and they need a lot more sales if they expect these dealers to stick around and improve their showrooms. They must as Ford is offering financial support to build spec stores. And I want Lincoln to succeed and sell a lot of vehicles. But reality keeps getting in the way. Both MKZ and MKC are entry level unless Lincoln does MKFocus sedan, and both need to be big, luxury volume sellers.

[akirby]

Should they be targeting Kia intenders then, with $199/mo leases?

 

You covet conquest buyers who can afford to pay your prices. Going after buyers who are used to getting things "on the cheap" isn't going to get you very far.

 

That wasn't the question. The question was if you're getting sales from Acura or Infiniti is that good or bad?

 

If you're getting those sales because you lowered your standards and prices and profits then yes that's bad.

 

If you're producing the products you want at the correct price point and profit level and you're getting conquest sales then it doesn't matter where they're coming from.

[PREMiERdrum]

If you're producing the products you want at the correct price point and profit level and you're getting conquest sales then it doesn't matter where they're coming from.

Maybe my question wasn't worded how I meant it.

 

Like I said, locally, the Acura ILX and TL are pushed as budget lease "luxury cars" at around $179-299/month, and RDX and MDX are pushed as budget lease "luxury crossovers" from $259-399/month. I don't want Lincoln chasing that end of things.

[akirby]

Ford is doing well with Titanium...great. But a Titianium Fusion still looks much like a Fusion SE. An Enclave IMO looks much better and different than its siblings just as the MKZ looks much better than a Fusion. I would have never thought Buick could find a niche between Chevy and Cadillac, but it did.

 

It only found a niche because they lowered the standards for Chevy to avoid overlap.

As for Acura and Infiniti buyers buying some sort of fancy Cruze or Malibu with more features, I don't think so.

Are you even paying attention? Nobody said make Cruze or Malibu nicer - just take the current Buick models and make them Chevys by adding a base model with less equipment. You don't lose anything from Buick.

 

Just because Ford didn't have the will or maybe ability to create a division between Ford and Lincoln doesn't mean GM can't do it as they are doing it no matter what the negatards on here state.

Ford had it so they already had both the will and ability to do it. The question that GM should be asking is the one Ford already answered and it's not CAN we do it but rather SHOULD we do it. I can easily make a business case for having 3 brands and make it show a positive ROI. But what Mulally said was here's the ROI for keeping Ford, Mercury and Lincoln. Now show me the ROI it we kill Mercury and just have 2. And then you compare those 2 options to see which is better. That's what GM will not do. They are not willing to sacrifice sales to improve profitability.

Another reality is that Ford has yet to prove that it knows how to run a very competive luxury vehicle brand.

And you think Cadillac has? Why? Just because they have 2 nice performance oriented vehicles (that are cannibalizing sales between them)?

 

Please don't ever try to run your own business. You don't have a prayer.

[akirby]

Maybe my question wasn't worded how I meant it.

 

Like I said, locally, the Acura ILX and TL are pushed as budget lease "luxury cars" at around $179-299/month, and RDX and MDX are pushed as budget lease "luxury crossovers" from $259-399/month. I don't want Lincoln chasing that end of things.

 

Agreed.

[papilgee4evaeva]

I stand corrected. They need a grand slam to get sales up to decent, relevant levels.

No, again.

[FordBuyer]

Maybe my question wasn't worded how I meant it.

 

Like I said, locally, the Acura ILX and TL are pushed as budget lease "luxury cars" at around $179-299/month, and RDX and MDX are pushed as budget lease "luxury crossovers" from $259-399/month. I don't want Lincoln chasing that end of things.

 

So how would an all new, just out MKZ at lease rate of $349/month be classified as? Or MKX Crossover at $379/month? Both have downpayments of under $1,000. Now I imagine these would be Red Carpet leases, but still something even I could afford.

[PREMiERdrum]

So how would an all new, just out MKZ at lease rate of $349/month be classified as? Or MKX Crossover at $379/month? Both have downpayments of under $1,000. Now I imagine these would be Red Carpet leases, but still something even I could afford.

 

Locally, the best I've seen is 2013 MKZ for $389/month with $4,000 down, and $479month MKX with $500 down.

[RichardJensen]

So how would an all new, just out MKZ at lease rate of $349/month be classified as? Or MKX Crossover at $379/month? Both have downpayments of under $1,000. Now I imagine these would be Red Carpet leases, but still something even I could afford.

Oh. I know. I know. I know.

 

It smells like poop by a pig farm, therefore the whole planet smells like poop.

[RichardJensen]

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/303994450605142018