Chevrolet vs GMC

[Milk 1027]

[K-A]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Their most profitable brand is a bad business decision? Please explain. Also, you talk about how big of a waste of money GMC is, yet then go on about how it isn't unique from Chevy. The more similar they vehicles are, the less money has been spent on them, and consequently minimal wasted money.

Also, most people can't tell the difference between any two vehicles in the same segment, once badges are removed. You'd be surprised at how many people think a Malibu is a Camry.

The point is, why spend any more money on what is essentially the exact same thing?

It may be their most profitable brand (which isn't saying much), however if GMC didn't exist, or Chevy Trucks didn't exist, i.e one of them was carrying the "Truck" load, they'd do just as fine, and save ALOT of money.

Just like having a bunch of sub-par cars dually badged as Pontiacs, and Chevy's, etc., while being the same exact cars got them into trouble. The only reason GMC isn't getting the axe is because more customers apparently happened to flock the GMC way, so canning it would be a mistake at this point.

Sure, my Girlfriend once thought my silver Hyundai Elantra Rental car was my silver ex S-Class (true story) when seeing it parked in my spot, i.e people dont really pay much attention, but fact is, a Camry and Malibu are very different cars, Tahoe and Yukon is an identical Truck, with money thrown away on some different styling gimmicks, and minimal "luxury" aspects changed.

Either way, GM finally seems to be embarking on the right track, so I have a feeling they're going to start doing right by the brands, and I wouldn't be surprised if, considering the huge knock out blow they've recently suffered, they really start kicking some butt, due to a fire being lit under their arses.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by K-A

The point is, why spend any more money on what is essentially the exact same thing?

It may be their most profitable brand (which isn't saying much), however if GMC didn't exist, or Chevy Trucks didn't exist, i.e one of them was carrying the "Truck" load, they'd do just as fine, and save ALOT of money.

Just like having a bunch of sub-par cars dually badged as Pontiacs, and Chevy's, etc., while being the same exact cars got them into trouble. The only reason GMC isn't getting the axe is because more customers apparently happened to flock the GMC way, so canning it would be a mistake at this point.

Sure, my Girlfriend once thought my silver Hyundai Elantra Rental car was my silver ex S-Class (true story) when seeing it parked in my spot, i.e people dont really pay much attention, but fact is, a Camry and Malibu are very different cars, Tahoe and Yukon is an identical Truck, with money thrown away on some different styling gimmicks, and minimal "luxury" aspects changed.

Either way, GM finally seems to be embarking on the right track, so I have a feeling they're going to start doing right by the brands, and I wouldn't be surprised if, considering the huge knock out blow they've recently suffered, they really start kicking some butt, due to a fire being lit under their arses.

You're barely spending that much money in R&D with GMC over Chevy. Chevy foots most of the engineering bill, GMC adds on more standard/optional features than Chevy with slightly different body work, and you're able to sell it at a premium over Chevy. I really don't see how that's a bad thing.

[K-A]

I dunno, perhaps you're right, especially in regards to the selling it at a premium thing. Those different front ends, lights, badging, steering wheels with different Logo's, etc. might seem cheap, but when produced in mass quantities will cost major $$. I didn't factor in the fact that they do sell GMC's at a premium, so perhaps it ends up working in their favor. I'd be curious to know how the numbers really look on their end....

As well, don't forget, just keeping the GMC name running, promo'ing it, adverts, GMC specific Dealers, etc. all cost money too.

[Dr Jkel]

As one who owns both a Chevy and GMC truck. I choose GMC. Why? it is a better truck, and I like the looks better., but no matter what I would not buy a Ford or Dodge truck. I was once told that the only difference in the Chevy and GMC was the badges put on it at the end of the assembly line which maybe true.

I think that Camaro Scotty is right on one point that a dealer or salesman can make a difference, because it made it in mine the GMC dealership was way more helpful than the local Chevy dealer. Just look at how many dealers tried to screw everyone on the Camaro, SAD very sad.

I Love GM and won't buy anything but GM, they need to really look at customer service. It is absolutely killing them. All dealers want to do is complain about not making money and they really don't want to help customers. I have found in my area the smaller the dealer the better the service you get, except that these dealers have very limited service departments.

Sometime they act like they are doing you a favor by selling you a vehicle. I drive over an hour to a GMC delaer who is great, pretty big dealer, but down home service. Funny thing is how much it means that they can remember your name everytime you come in.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by K-A

I dunno, perhaps you're right, especially in regards to the selling it at a premium thing. Those different front ends, lights, badging, steering wheels with different Logo's, etc. might seem cheap, but when produced in mass quantities will cost major $$. I didn't factor in the fact that they do sell GMC's at a premium, so perhaps it ends up working in their favor. I'd be curious to know how the numbers really look on their end....

As well, don't forget, just keeping the GMC name running, promo'ing it, adverts, GMC specific Dealers, etc. all cost money too.

The costs are actually somewhat opposite to what you think. The higher the volume, the less it costs GM per unit. Designing new sheet metal is a fixed cost, it doesn't matter if you sell 1 or 100,000 it will cost the same to design it. So if it costs GM 10 million dollars (complete guess) to develop it and get the extra tooling, that money is down to $100/truck. Labour costs to assemble it are the same. Better materials (for trim and grills) will cost a bit more, but that's a per unit cost so all that matters is GM's cost vs percieved value. So as long as its worth more to the customer than it costs GM to include it, they make money off it.

[jleinaweaver]

Originally Posted by Paul SS

Does General Motors need to have both Chevrolet trucks and GMC Trucks?

I am guessing that GMC trucks are more upscale than Chevy trucks, but don't they both have the same models with different names?

Considering the recent restructure, what are your thoughts on this?

What the GMC dealer told me is that when the trucks come off the same assembly line, if they start the first time, they put the GMC badges on them. If not, they put the Chevy badges.

No reason to believe the salesman was lying.

Hope this helps.

[shaffe]

I used to have the same view as the OP. Before looking into it, I didn't see a need for GMC at all, bc for the most part a fully loaded chevy truck or SUV is everybit as nice as a GMC IMO. But after looking into it, and realizing that GMC is very profitable I guess there is the reason to keep it.