By on April 7, 2014

2014-Chevy-Silverado _12_

Though Ram knocked Chevrolet off the monthly sales throne for the first time since August 1999, the brand is ready to reclaim their part of Truck Mountain by offering incentives and extending their annual Truck Month into April.

Automotive News reports brand vice president Brian Sweeney threw down an additional $1,000 on the hoods of 2014 Silverado double-cabs in pursuit of “the heart of the pickup market.” Furthermore, Chevy’s second Truck Month boosts incentives offered last month, dropping a maximum discount of $8,974 into the bed of the Silverado 2500 HD crew cab or $8,162 for the light-duty double cab V8 model.

Lease offerings were also boosted for the reclamation battle, as one email from a Northeastern United States gave details for a regional lease agreement of $269 per month with $1,900 due upon signature; the Ram’s terms were $259 per month, but with a higher down payment of $2,999 upon signature.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

73 Comments on “Chevrolet Offers Incentives, Extends Truck Month To Take Back Sales Crown...”


  • avatar
    Zackman

    Money talks, doesn’t it?

    Trucks used to be the cheapest vehicle one could buy brand-new. Somewhere between 1975 and 1980, that began to change. Now they are among the most expensive vehicles one can buy, compared to a nice car similarly equipped. Doesn’t make much sense to me.

    What began to sour me on trucks and how the OEMs were pricing them was that the safety regs as to impact protection, crumple zones, etc., was much different than for even the crummiest of cars. I’m not sure how true that is now, but nevertheless, pricing continues to go up at a rate higher than cars. Pure profit machines.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Those old trucks used to last and last as long as you replaced the parts in them that broke or wore out. I’m not sure that with all the gadgetry and computerized engine control, the same can be said of the current crop of trucks and trucklets.

      A friend recently told me that in his search for some parts for his old trucks, he found that the parts were no longer made. I found that to be true when helping a buddy rebuild his AC system on his ’93 S-10; the low-pressure sensor is no longer commercially available, so I had to hotwire it. It works but it won’t shut off if the refrigerant ever gets low.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        Bad idea as that can lead to freeze up and kill the system. The switch is still available at NAPA, I’m showing it as only $13.50 ~ $18 at my local store with reserving it online. You don’t need to discharge the system to replace it there is a Schrader valve in the port it screws to. Just don’t lolly gag around, once you break it free with the wrench use a gloved hand to quickly screw it all the way off. Same thing for putting it on be quick and you’ll just get a slight squirt of refrigerant.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Thanks, Scoutdude. Such fixes are generally made out of desperation to get a system up and running.

          What happened was that every sensor we ordered from NAPA, Autozone, O’Reilly’s and Carquest came in as being the LARGE, new version; not the small old version currently on the truck. No way to make that work.

          After dicking around for two weeks without a running AC system, I just bypassed the switch altogether. Not as designed but it just means that my buddy has to apply an R134A charge to it before every season to make sure that the system is topped off (if it leaks somewhere).

          If it doesn’t leak, so much the better since the R134A kit comes with overcharge protection and a gauge on the can. (Wal-Mart, $39.95 + tax) and it will keep.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      Trucks have morphed into lifestyle vehicles and the equivalent of luxury cars. They are now equipped and priced accordingly.

      This is good for the automakers. The ability to produce one vehicle in high volume that can cover a wide span of price ranges makes them highly profitable.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @Zackman – Full-size pickups still start at the price of every day sedans. Same as always. What’s different is in ’75 a pickup with AM/FM, pwr steering, A/C, factory rear bumper and right side mirror was considered a luxury truck, despite reg cab, rollup windows and rubber floor.

      All those options are now forced or FREE, but Platinum Longhorn luxo trucks aren’t required. After rebates, full-size pickups are among the best values on wheels.

      But today a pickup cancels the need for a separate family car and SUV. With more freed up money, buyers can pile on more options that in the ’70s. A well equipped truck may be a family’s only car.

      • 0 avatar
        IHateCars

        C’mon now, you’re spoiling the “today’s trucks don’t hold a candle to the old trucks” meme, that is second only to the “the only people that should buy/drive trucks are contractors and farmers” chant.

  • avatar
    LBJs Love Child

    Since when is second place the “Sales Throne”?

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Since the bailouts, handouts and nationalization.

      • 0 avatar
        tonycd

        Give the whole Obama/UAW thing a rest, okay? Some of us read this stuff to escape from that drivel, not to wallow in it. Post to Fox or Drudge, please.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          Everything GM does only serves to underscore that bailing them out was the wrong thing to do. They failed because this is who they are. The UAW is central to how they got as bad as they are, but they aren’t all that is rotten in Detroit. Corrupt politicians buying votes from incompetent, vile people is not a recipe for success and is a threat to all of our human rights in the medium term.

        • 0 avatar
          thelaine

          They still owe me 10 billion dollars.

        • 0 avatar
          LALoser

          +1for tonycd

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Personally, I find it amusing that there are those among us who will happily regurgitate cliched talking points from World Net Daily and FOX, all while lauding themselves for being “independent.”

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          tonycd, the handouts started under Shrub! That was where the first mistake was made; to keep GM alive for 90 days beyond Dec 31, 2008.

          Just because YOU love O**** and the UAW doesn’t mean everyone else does too.

          If that works for you, more power to you. It doesn’t work for many millions of other AMERICANS who are paying for all this fraud, waste and abuse.

          And you know what? It didn’t work for the people who were killed because of GM’s error in judgement either.

          Maybe you would think differently if someone you cared about had been killed because of a bad car. And GM knowingly made bad cars. Has been doing so for many decades. And a history of litigation supports that.

          • 0 avatar
            challenger2012

            When your ideology is driven by Paranoid and Delusional thoughts, you see writings like that from Highdesercat. (They don’t call him “high” for nothing.) But I am amazed at the concern for those who might have been killed by a GM ignition switch, yet nothing for the thousands of US citizens killed in Iraq based upon Republican lies. (Note: both of these events occurred in the same time frame i.e. early 2000) Why the concern for one and not the other?

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Because I am a retired career military man. I understand that wars are a necessity. No one likes war, but only lilly-livered cowards run away from it.

            Without war, without the revolution, there would be no America, a country founded upon beliefs many of us still hold dear.

          • 0 avatar
            geeber

            You mean those “Republican lies” that were also believed by virtually all Democrats, too? It wasn’t quite as simple as you make it out to be.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            geeber, it never is simple. Challenger’s comment raises a point that many like him seem to overlook, or down play. Many Democrats, Liberals and Libertarians will actually go to war if they are threatened.

            One excellent example was John Fitzgerald Kennedy. He believed in the just cause which is America.

            What strikes me is how America has lost its moral compass to where America is what it is today.

            That said, we each have our value system. I’ll stick with mine.

        • 0 avatar
          challenger2012

          Well said Mr. Tonycd. But it you have a Tea Bag for a brain such as (highdesertcat), you spout crapola without a second thought.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            It means that my comment has impact and hits the proponents of bailouts, handouts and nationalization where it hurts.

            I’m always surprised to find that my comments have been read, and even more surprised when someone takes the time to offer an endorsement or retort to my comment. I read a lot of comments because I enjoy reading most of the topics on ttac. But I offer few reactions to comments posted by others, unless they have merit.

            I am proud to be an Independent, with equal disdain for both the Republicans and Democrats. But being an Independent also means that I can have my own beliefs in what is good, and what is not, for our country.

          • 0 avatar
            Rich Fitzwell

            Here is a list of the Democrats that could not wait to go to war in Iraq.

            http://americablog.com/2013/03/in-memoriam-the-iraq-war-how-they-voted-in-the-senate-why-you-should-care.html

            Tell me again, why are you libs so angry all the time? You had the White House, and both houses of Congress for two years, you got and are getting everything you want, yet you are miserable and always calling everybody names.

      • 0 avatar
        billfrombuckhead

        Bailouts, handouts and nationalization seem to work well for Hyundai/KIA and Nissan/Renault

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          I agree! But, last I checked, it wasn’t the American taxpayers’ money.

          Foreign countries, their governments and national pension funds are heavily vested and invested in their industries. America is not.

          If America’s economic policy is to endorse and provide handouts, bailouts and nationalization, then it should be done across all industries — not just a few companies selectively chosen for political purposes or to repay a debt of gratitude for electing someone to high office.

          I don’t believe this has ever happened before in the history of the United States since 1776.

          • 0 avatar
            Ion

            You might want to double check that. Plenty of states and local governments glady hand out tax breaks and incentives to foreign auto makes. It’s not just the automakers plenty of other businesses take hand outs as well.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Ion, I have no idea how to go about that or to parallel it to the bailouts, handouts and nationalization that were applied to GM and Chrysler, Banks, Mortgage Lenders, Investment Houses, etc.

            I’m quite familiar with “incentives” used to draw businesses to areas or locales, like when America went begging, hat in hand, at Honda and Toyota to open assembly plants in the US because their imports were killing our auto industry and provided very few jobs in return for all the sales of their foreign-made cars.

            So, I leave it up to the bright and resourceful writers at ttac to research this topic and offer us all an unbiased, clearcut editorial for our edification.

          • 0 avatar
            billfrombuckhead

            Let’s turn over all major industries to state socialist companies legroom JapanInc and KoreaInc and eventually the Peoples Liberation Army Inc.

    • 0 avatar

      Ford can’t even see them in the rear view mirror (camera?), it’s a whole different throne.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        The 1/2 ton GM twins outsold the Ford F150 last year. Who’s staring at who’s tailgate?

        • 0 avatar
          geeber

          In 2013, Ford sold 469,515 half-ton pickups, all of them Fords.

          GM sold 542,535 half-ton pickups. That includes:

          382,185 Silverados
          142,842 Sierras
          16,526 Avalanches
          1,972 Escalade EXTs

          I don’t believe that Ford is crying about being number two in 2013, given that it was able to hit over 450,000 in sales with ONE truck.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      We’re #2! We’re #2!

  • avatar
    gtrslngr

    Ahhhh … yes . Typical GM strategy . Can’t produce a competitive product . Unwilling to fix what ails the product thats not selling . So …. lower the price to the point of … oh …. gee … Once again Losing money left and right on each and every sale .

    GM . SNAFU and SSDD to the max . Learning absolutely nothing from their multiple bailouts over the decades . This being one of the main contributors to GM’s constant downfall

    And people wonder why GM’s always on the financial ropes and on the verge of bankruptcy . Well … excepting the very deluded [ or more likely manipulated ] investors . They don’t seem to wonder or be aware of much of anything .

    • 0 avatar
      alsorl

      Truth be told GM is probably still making a profit with the $8000 rebate. They are made in mexico. GM could probably take off another $6000 and still make a profit.

    • 0 avatar
      jjster6

      @ gtrslnger… GM could make a nuclear powered truck that towed 30,000 lbs, weighed 2,000 lbs, did 0-60 in 3 seconds, was more luxurious than a Bentley, and cost 15 grand. And you would still find fault.

      Why are you such a bitter troll?

    • 0 avatar
      VCplayer

      To be fair to GM, it’s not like they can just go and put a new truck out tomorrow. They have new ones coming out in 2018 if all goes to plan, which is light speed in the automotive world.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    They’re gonna hafta make it “Truck Year”. But if the don’t drop a better truck for less coin soon, “Truck Decade”.

  • avatar
    Domestic Hearse

    “The 1980s called. They want their marketing strategy back,” said GM’s Jim Cain. “It’s really easy to deeply discount your truck, mine the subprime market and offer cheap deals to buy market share.”

    Jim, the 1980s called. It’s time for a reactionary, panic-stricken, knee-jerk, me-too response from GM to out-incent the competition to stem steadily eroding market share.

  • avatar
    Dan

    That max half ton discount works out to $34,000 before taxes for a moderately equipped 4WD extended cab with a meh engine. That’s a long way from old GM’s fire sales.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      Exactly.

      The two things GM got wrong in the refresh of the Silverado/Sierra are huge.

      1) Design – boring – the interior they got right (and GM has done a lot lately to get interiors very right) and its crazy quiet, the ride is good, and the fuel economy is spot on even if saddled with an “ancient six speed transmission.”

      2) Price. They are priced WAY to feckin’ high. Insanely high. Saw a 2015 4WD 2500HD Sierra crew cab with a $65K sticker price. That isn’t with ADM either – that’s the darn factory sticker. That is darn nice luxury car Cheddar. That is with tax breaks almost to a Tesla Cheddar. Ya I get it – a Tesla can’t tow 10K pounds – my point is on the price in general, I’m not comparing a Tesla as a tow vehicle. But lets face it, for many consumers these are vanity purchases, and what has more cachet.

      We also know that GM is no where near as dependent on truck sale profits, or North America for that matter to be profitable. GM is focusing more and more on China as their future – and doing quite well there (still waiting for Bertel’s Chinese market collapse that he predicted month, after month, after month, after month, after month…)

      The cash on the hood sure isn’t giving these trucks away. We already know there is massive profit in them, and with heche en Mexico, we know the cost structure has continued to drop. Also, with nothing really huge in the R&D department, this wasn’t as costly of an update of say GMT800 to GMT900, or even the GMT900 refresh – which was a huge endeavor.

      The problem is point number two requires a lot of cash on the hood to address – they should have been priced realistically for the market in the first place.

      The sad reality (peoples Exhibit A is JC Penny) American consumers are dumb as bricks, and they eat up cash on the hood like fish food in a pond. The “right” thing to do is reset the price points and send a shockwave through the market and put small incentives to at least compete a bit. Will never happen – because the drooling masses that don’t read TTAC (99.5% of buyers) just see $8000K DISCOUNT!!! WOW! WHERE DO I FECKIN SIGN!!!!

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        Most of the masses who buy GM trucks aren’t stupid either. They know the MSRP on a GM truck is a BS number and they should shoot for 20-25% off that. It is easier to wait for a sale sometimes than to dicker back and forth with a sales guy. When I bought my ’04 Sierra HD that truck MSRP’d for over 42K. My company had supplier pricing with GM. I got it for 33K, no hagling, no cash on the hood or other incentives. It just goes to show you how much profit they make on light duty trucks as I’m sure they still made money on mine.

      • 0 avatar
        LALoser

        I understand this method though. Certain commodity suppliers give a standard pricelist with multipliers to give deducts. This allows for quick pricing adjustments for overall value and better/worse buyers.

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        I don’t recall Bertel predicting any Chinese market collapse, just the opposite. He went out of his way to knock down market collapse predictions by the B&B, citing the lack of saturation and room for growth in China vs. the mature western markets.

  • avatar
    carguy

    The new pricing structure they rolled out with the current gen Silverado was always optimistic. $6-7K discounts were common before the announcement of further discounts so I am assuming we’re now in $10K discount territory.

  • avatar
    Pebble

    Forget GrubbishM, buy a RAM Tradesman panel truck instead.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    The B&B can be so amusing at times.

    Toyota comes out and says they will do, “what ever it takes,” to maintain the number leader position on the Camry – so they send over 60K examples to rental lots, have the lowest ATP, and Ford Fusion grade cash on the hood. Heck, the ATP is lower than the maligned Chrysler 200.

    They don’t come close to the number one “retail” sale in the segment, and the Camry, although not a bad car, is not class competitive.

    But all of THAT is apparently good business.

    GM uses the same playbook – the horrors! The horrors I tell you! The horrors…

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      60K to rentals? Out of close on to a half million cars? Is this supposed to be somehow alarming? Especially when figures show that other cars are more likely to end up on rental lots? GM seems to have entire product lines dedicated to rental lots.

      Low ATP on their biggest seller? Is this actually hurting profits? Last year, on roughly similar unit volumes, Toyota made 3 or 4 times as much money as GM. Toyota’s dividend checks totalled about as much as GM’s profits.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        They actually do, those being the Captiva and W-Impala.

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        400K isn’t “close to half a million cars” – that is a variant of about 20% – 20% isn’t close. And the number I quoted was conservative (the exact number is closer to 65K). Lets go back to 2008, when Camry fleet sales were single digits.

        Lowest ATP isn’t a good thing in general as it indicates you’re having to sell on price, not the merit of the product. Was the Camry the low ATP leader 10 years ago?

        Because if suddenly fleet sales to rental lots are good for business, GM sure was stupid to stop making W-Bodies that are fully amortized from an R&D stand point, cheap to build, and cheap to maintain. They were dumping between the former dead brands and still living ones well over 100K a year to the rental lots when you combined them.

        A lot of money left on the table.

        McDonalds does quite well as a company and serves billions of burgers a year – does that mean a McDonalds hamburger is good???

    • 0 avatar
      mikey

      When Toyota has a policy of not laying off workers, it’s somehow a wonderfull thing. Perfect labour relations, from a responsible corporate citizen.

      What to get a reaction out of the B&B?.. Mention “Job banks”

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      We don’t care about Toyota. It is impersonal when it comes to them.

      We care about GM, even if we hate them. “Chevy runs deep” and all that.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      “They don’t come close to the number one “retail” sale in the segment, and the Camry, although not a bad car, is not class competitive.”

      I have to disagree….the Camry is competitive, just not class leading except perhaps in reliability.

      Getting into a Camry is like walking into a McDonald’s on the other side of the country…you know exactly what it tastes like before you even buy it.

      And I see so damn many of them, it’s hard to pass visual judgement anymore.

  • avatar
    johnhowington

    continuing the hot sweaty debate of blinged out wheelbarrows grown men try to justify spending half a hundred thousand dollars to keep their manhood intact.

    oh but i can ‘GETEM by getting 14k off sticker!! yeah, and who is left walking to the bank with the money.

  • avatar
    mikey

    @johnhowington…..I happen to like ” blinged out” trucks. I really like a BMW 6 series convertible. I can’t afford to buy,maintain,or put gas in either one. Others can. I’m okay with that.

    Money in the bank, is certainly nice to have. If you have a method figured out, to take the money with you when you go. Please share it with us.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      When you die – they could use the cash you have to light your funeral pyre. If you have enough, then the remaining ash can be set free – if you can’t be all consumed, your rotting half burned corpse of a soul will wander the planet forever.

      Huh – the church of money — I have a new business, errr religion idea…

  • avatar
    Bill Wade

    Sure used to be a nice site when it was about all aspects of vehicles.

    Now it’s turning into a cesspool of political BS, trolling and personal attacks.

    Truly a shame.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    There is some truth in that statement. Add a 4×4 sticker,bling wheels, and heated handle grips.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India