QOTD: What to Do With Buick?

Tim Healey
by Tim Healey

Buick is on my brain.

Not only does an Envision test vehicle sit some 20-odd stories beneath my feet in my parking garage, but the brand has been running its usual ad blitz during the NCAA men’s basketball tournament (and presumably, the women’s, too). The tourney is one of my favorite sports events of the year, so I’ve been tuning in.

This means I’m seeing many Buick ads. This means the brand that this here site once put on Death Watch — and earned me at least one angry phone call from Buick PR — is still soldiering on.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that Buick twice hosted me at the Final Four as part of a press junket. This was at a previous job.

Thing is, what IS Buick right now?

We know what it is supposed to be — the entry/mid-luxury brand that serves as the bridge between Chevrolet and Cadillac. But right now, it’s a brand that only sells crossovers, covering all sizes and price points. Crossovers that share plenty of bones with “lesser” Chevrolets.

Not to mention that sister brand GMC also sells upmarket crossovers.

What is Buick, then? An entry/mid-level brand exclusively for crossover buyers?

More to the point, what should it be?

I don’t think the brand should die. That could just be nostalgia speaking — I remember some pretty interesting iron sold under the Buick brand in the ’80s and ’90s — but I do believe there is a place on the market for a luxury brand sold by GM that slots in one level below Cadillac.

Especially if GM kepts upper-level Chevys and lower-level Caddys from being priced in the same range.

Again, this isn’t a Death Watch piece. I’m not asking if Buick should live or die, though “die” can be an option. This is an open-ended question, not a binary.

I am asking you, the Best and Brightest, how you’d manage product planning for the brand if you were suddenly plunked into a mahogany-paneled office in the Renaissance Center and given an executive’s pay plan.

So, B and B, what say you? What should GM do with Buick?

Keep it as is? Bring back sedans? Pursue performance? Kill it? Something else?

Have at it.

[Image: Buick]

Tim Healey
Tim Healey

Tim Healey grew up around the auto-parts business and has always had a love for cars — his parents joke his first word was “‘Vette”. Despite this, he wanted to pursue a career in sports writing but he ended up falling semi-accidentally into the automotive-journalism industry, first at Consumer Guide Automotive and later at Web2Carz.com. He also worked as an industry analyst at Mintel Group and freelanced for About.com, CarFax, Vehix.com, High Gear Media, Torque News, FutureCar.com, Cars.com, among others, and of course Vertical Scope sites such as AutoGuide.com, Off-Road.com, and HybridCars.com. He’s an urbanite and as such, doesn’t need a daily driver, but if he had one, it would be compact, sporty, and have a manual transmission.

More by Tim Healey

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 98 comments
  • Lightspeed Lightspeed on Apr 01, 2021

    Kill Buick, expand Cadillac.

    • 28-Cars-Later 28-Cars-Later on Apr 01, 2021

      Other way around. 1. Buick is a big brand in PRC. 2. Buick as a brand hasn't been screwing the pooch on product for near the entirety of four decades. 3. Buicks are sold alongside GMC, so two marques in the channel. Unless Cadillac's distribution channel is merged its alone and requires a full lineup.

  • Inside Looking Out Inside Looking Out on Apr 01, 2021

    " What to Do With Buick?" Leave it alone.

  • Billyboy The Big Three, or what used to be the Big Three, have been building sedans in the FWD unibody mold since the 80’s to compete with the Japanese - and failing. The Taurus was the only decent attempt, and even that fizzled out after a few years. Back to GM, There’s no reason to choose a Malibu over a Camry or Accord for normal buyers. The story was the same when it was the Citation, Celebrity, Lumina, and Impala, as it was the same with Ford and Chrysler. GM knows this, as does Ford, and doesn’t care - and rightfully so. Better to cede this time-worn commodity segment to others and focus to where the market has shifted.
  • CanadaCraig You are not wrong. Or a dummy for that matter. I also think it's foolish of GM to kill off the Malibu. That said... I think there needs to be full-sized plain jane sedans for sale. And there are none. And haven't been for a long time. A basic BIG car. With room for six. Bench seat and all. Nothing fancy. And a low price to go along with it. I would buy one.
  • OCcarguy Back in the 1980s the Mitsubishi Cordia was one of my favorite cars. I would love to see them make cars we could get excited about again.
  • Chris I dislike SUVs. I think they are clunky looking and not much in the handling department. I'll take an Audi A4 or BMw three series or even a VW Jetta over any SUV. It I need more interior room for a shot time, I'll rent something bigger.
  • Amwhalbi I have a sedan and an SUV, and for pure driving and riding enjoyment, I'll pick my sedan every time. But yes, SUV's are generally more practical for all around usage, particularly if you have only one vehicle. So I think the perfect answer is the sedan hatchback (a la the last Buick Regal) which can still yield the drive and ride or a sedan, yet provide a greater modicum of practical, accessible cargo capacity. Most of the sedans made could (with minor styling changes) easily become 4 door hatchbacks. Oh, yeah, I forgot - Americans don't like hatchbacks, even if they do in Europe...
Next