Saturn is known for excellent dealer service so I am perplexed by your comments that you cant put up with the dealer experience at Saturn. If you have driven the 2008 Malibu than you have essentially driven the Aura since they are the same size and perform in the same manner. No need to do a separate test drive. The 2007 Malibu is substantially different from the Aura however.

The only other sedan I realistically considered is the Altima. I am not crazy about the tailights, the car is ubiquitous in the Phila area and the price was too dear with the options I wanted. For $3k more I would have gotten dual zone auto AC, pushbutton start and a rear armrest. I would’ve lost 18″ wheels, remote start, Onstar and $3k. Not worth it in my opinion. I like the Mazda 6 but its old and underpowered. I like the Fusion except for the interior. All midsize sedans are capable so the idea that I missed out on something by not driving 5 of them is misguided. I didn’t need to drive the Camry or Sonata or Galant because I knew from the start I wasn’t interested. Not because they are “bad” cars but because they dont fit my requirements for style and performance.

Marketshare is stable to slightly up on the year. Enough said about that for now. It’s hard to make a point about declining marketshare when their share slide has stopped. It was the highest of the year in the last few months. Next.

“I have to question that. You didn’t realize that the lion share of last-generation Malibu sales were destined for rental lots. You don’t seem to know that rental fleet sales for the transplants (with the notable exception of Hyundai and Kia) are far below those of the domestics. And you clearly don’t understand the impact of fleet sales on the overall bottom line.”

The devil is in the details. Like it or not, all fleet sales are not equal. Thats a fact. Furthermore, I am fully aware of what fleet sales can mean in terms of lower resale value and public perception. Thats why I’m wondering why you can rent Altimas and camrys at Enterprise. I asked you explain why those cars are not worthless even though they can be rented but every GM model that is sold to fleets is crap. Never got an answer. Import fleet sales are going to be lower than domestics for many reasons. One is their models are priced higher. Two, they dont have estabished relationships with rental agencies and corporations. Three, government agencies typically only buy Big 3 vehicles. Toyota wouldn’t mind selling some camrys to municipal fleets but bid specifications for new cars can be written in such a way that unwanted vehicles do not qualify.

“The comparison should tell you that Saturn is an established brand that has no established nameplates. It should tell you that the Saturn badge is not a badge that is compelling enough to motivate a lot of buyers. It never created enough brand equity with any of the earlier products to make those nameplates worth keeping or to create a reputation that could help it to generate decent sales volumes. Just a bit more writing on the wall for you.”

Doesn’t tell me anything. In fact, its the first time anyone has ever tried to make a point to me regarding the Aura by using the Jetta. They are in different size and price classes. The Jetta starts outu about $3k less than the Aura and has only four cylinder engines. Jetta has been aroudn for decades so the fact that VW is using generous incentives and a lowered MSRP to move more units than the Aura says more about VW than Saturn. Not sure why you are so obsessed with Saturn bashing but last time I checked crappy Saturn, the brand with no appeal, has sales comparable to VW. Care to explain? The writing is on the wall indeed, Saturn is making the best vehicles they have ever made thus far. You arent going to acheive momumental sales gains overnight when you are entering new segments. Ask Vw, they should know after the failure of the Phaeton. Ask Acura, they should know with the failure of the RL. It takes time to build credibility in new markets. Period.

Oh and I forgot to add Mazda to the list of cars I have driven. The Mazda6 in both 4 and 6, but I actually liked the 4 better. And the Mazda3 in base level trim. Oh and just so you don’t think I haven’t actually experienced American cars I drove the entire lineup of Ford and Chrysler back when I worked for Budget in the late 90’s. The Continental and New Yorker I liked, cab forward was fun to drive but ugly, the rest was crap.

That’s meaningless to me, I don’t know your brother. For all I know he is a well versed 13 y/o who reads all the car mags. Being aware of all the cars in a segment does not mean you are familiar with how they drive, the interior, etc.

Yes I am familiar with this segment and some other segments as well. See I enjoy test driving cars and really evaliating them so I deal with the salesman so I can get some wheel time. But to be honest I don’t like wasting my time in this process so the worst of the domestics are often left out in the cold, like the Sebring which I couldn’t put up with the sales dick so I left after 5 minutes.
I have driven the new Malibu in base trim, the Jetta with the new crap 5 cylinder, Golf with the 1.8T, ‘08 Subaru WRX, ‘07 Impala(passenger but that was enough for me), ‘07 Accord V6(passenger but I have driven ’05’s and it’s the same), ‘07 Toyota Camry(passenger again too boring for me to want the wheel in my face), and we own and ‘05 Subaru Legacy GT. Not brand new cars I have driven would be the Altima 2.5 and 3.5, BMW 328, Audi A4 3.0, Acura TSX, Acura RSX(regular and Type-S), Infinity G35, 350Z, Sentra Se-R Spec V, I know I am missing some but I can’t remember all of them right now.

I have been in a lot more cars that I didn’t have the chance to drive mostly because I couldn’t put up with the dealer experience, like the 300, Magnum, Aura, Sonata, Fusion and G6. I have been trying to drive the new Focus but no dealer seams to sell that ugly thing around here.

To be fair I am going to ride out to the Saturn dealer and drive that Aura and see if it’s any better than the Malibu I drove. It’s a pain in the butt to test drive a car when you ride up in a motorcycle.

And no you didn’t answer my question and I was not trying to be patronizing I just wanted to know what your evaluations of the competition were when you went car shopping, but it doesn’t look like you really shopped around. Saturn’s no haggle pricing has it’s benefits for certain kinds of customers.

No need to be patronizing. I know more about cars than anyone I know except my brother. I am aware of every vehicle for sale in this segment. Are you?

what I find funny is that you would react in such a manner to someone actually liking the Aura when it has gotten many good reviews. It’s not like we are talking about the Sebring here.

for the record, I would never buy a Camry because I’m too young. The 2008 Accord wasnt out but I wouldnt have gotten it anyway. Altima is nice but too expensive with the options I wanted and its too common. Nothing wrong with any of those cars just as there’s nothing wrong with the Aura. Not sure if that is an acceptable answer on a site like this.

No, I pointed out that declining market share indicates that the products are not “competitive.” Competitiveness is determined by the market, not by you or me personally.

I am fully abreast of GM’s reliance on fleet sales.

I have to question that. You didn’t realize that the lion share of last-generation Malibu sales were destined for rental lots. You don’t seem to know that rental fleet sales for the transplants (with the notable exception of Hyundai and Kia) are far below those of the domestics. And you clearly don’t understand the impact of fleet sales on the overall bottom line.

Lets see: Jetta is an established nameplate with a following, VW has incentives on the car and VW recently lowered the price and content to get it under $17k due to slow sales. Basically, that comparison tells me nothing.

The comparison should tell you that Saturn is an established brand that has no established nameplates. It should tell you that the Saturn badge is not a badge that is compelling enough to motivate a lot of buyers. It never created enough brand equity with any of the earlier products to make those nameplates worth keeping or to create a reputation that could help it to generate decent sales volumes. Just a bit more writing on the wall for you.

considering the name of this site I feel compelled to tell the truth. GM’s share is flat to slightly up this year. In the last few months GM has posted better monthly results than Toyota. That is what the public is saying my friend. In additon you should know that public opinion always trails the reviews. The press was saying Hyundai was making decent vehicles before the public caught on and gave Hyundai a chance. The same applies here. You went from arguing about the vehicles to arguing that that declining marketshare proves that GM makes crap. In actuality falling marketshare proves that GM’s reputation isnt where it should be and a certain % of people who bought their older products were not fully satisfied. Any company that is turning around has to make better product consistently to get credibility. That is what GM is doing as we speak. I dont argue that GM’s rep isnt great, but I do argue their current products are better than average. I recommend vehicles based on price, styling and capability not whether or not it’s considered cool by other parents at the PTA meeting. If you are concerned with public perception of your vehicle choices than I wholeheartedly recommend you stick to Honda and Toyota.

I am fully abreast of GM’s reliance on fleet sales. The question is whether or not those numbers would have been worse if we looked at MY06. The question is are those numbers better if we look at what has happened in 2007. The trends are clear and anyone with a shred of sense knows one of the main reasons GM’s overall sales are down this year is lower fleet sales. GM’s retail sales (aka the PUBLIC) have actually been up most months this year. Its not open for debate, its just a matter of whether you are willing to accept the facts.

As for GM’s imminent collapse, we have heard it all before. They were supposed to be bankrupt two years ago. And in 1992. And probably in 1982 as well. Let’s see: better products + better productivity + better press reviews+ better labor contract= GM imploding Makes perfect sense to me.

“Consumers even prefer the relatively unpopular Jetta to the Aura, which should tell you something.”

Lets see: Jetta is an established nameplate with a following, VW has incentives on the car and VW recently lowered the price and content to get it under $17k due to slow sales. Basically, that comparison tells me nothing. Aura is outselling the Maxima. That should tell you something.

The public has, and has been saying so for some time. Sales are falling, and market share has been falling with it. Consumers vote with their dollars, and the election isn’t looking good for GM. Consumers even prefer the relatively unpopular Jetta to the Aura, which should tell you something.

Look at those retail sales and fleet percentages that I posted above. The writing is on the wall. The question isn’t what it says, but whether you are willing to even bother to read it.

actually its not debatable. The press nearly unanimously believes GM is making the best American cars these days. Its not even close to those who look at the actual products. It may be debatable to anyone who hates GM however. I wouldn’t know since I just base my statements on the vehicles.

“GM doesn’t need to worry much about Ford. It needs to beat Honda and Toyota at the lower end, and BMW, Mercedes and Lexus at the higher end. When it is capable of doing that, then you’ll have something to talk about.”

and who said they arent competing with Honda and Toyota? You? I havent heard any GM exec say they are not concerned about those two companies. When the CTS wins COTY over a dozen imports and the Malibu makes 10Best and All Stars and the altima and camry do not that tells me GM is designing vehicles that can stand on their own merits vs the imports. Same with cars.com pronouncing the Vue superior to the RAV4 and Rogue. Or the CTS beating the LEXUS (thats a Toyota brand) IS350 and MERCEDES C350 in an Edmunds comparo.

The facts are obvious. Its up to you to accept them.

That’s debatable, given GM’s prominence on assorted lists of unreliable cars.

But even if it was true, fighting about GM’s place in the pecking order among the Big 2.8 is about as reasonable as arguing about which dumb kid in the class is the best “D” student.

GM doesn’t need to worry much about Ford. It needs to beat Honda and Toyota at the lower end, and BMW, Mercedes and Lexus at the higher end. When it is capable of doing that, then you’ll have something to talk about.

The Aura doesn’t need to be better than an Ion, it needs to be better than an Accord. Improvement doesn’t count; leadership does.

So eloquent and yet still inaccurate. You can ignore the evidence as long as you chose but the facts remain the same. GM is making the best vehicles out of the Big 3 and the best vehicles it has ever made. Its been recognized by anyone who can see, touch and drive. I can take the word of virtually every respected automotive publication on the market or I can listen to you. Guess which one I chose? You can usually tell when someone is out of constructive criticism when they resort to using words like “suck”. There is definitely someone who “doesn’t get it” but I’m sure if its the GM execs.

[W]hy in the world would a GM exec drive a Saturn if they could get a Cadillac or Buick for free? Dont get it.

Neither do the GM execs, apparently…

And that is exactly the problem — if GM vehicles suck, that is why.

First of all I was comparing G6 sales to Fusion sales and both cars sell to fleets in volume. The fusion is a fleet queen compared to accord and camry. BTW, I dont “twist” data. Just because I report facts you dont like doesnt mean I am manipulating data. For the records, fleet cars are paid for by someone and are wanted by someone or some entity. To say that you can simply siphon cars from the factory to a company fleet makes no sense to me. Governments, companies and rental agencies need cars and they pay for those cars. GM has cut back on fleet sales but the business that exist in this country need vehicles and have to buy them from someone. Since fleets are a dumping ground for POS vehicles I want to know why the Altima, Sonata and Camry are increasing their reliance on them. BTW, since Toyota is much smarter than GM shouldnt they be able to produce the amount of cars people want and stop selling to enterprise?

“That would be impressive even for Honda who is currently the fastest in the industry. ”

Most Hondas are on a 5 year cycle. Most GM cars are on a 5 year cycle. More misinformation. Impala was supposed to be RWD for 2010- they claim its up in the air but that is doubtful. If not they will probably do a epsilon2 based Impala. Either way I would expect a new car in 2009 or 2010. Honestly I dont care because the Impala will still sell in the end. I dont have a problem with Chevy having the two cars, you do apparently.

Profitability of a vehicle is GM’s problem, not mine. I dont buy a vehicle based on how much money I think the manufacturer is making. I merely said that its quite possible that Saturn may be able to make money on the Aura. But then when I considered GM is losing money in NA due to many factors its really kind of pointless to try and figure out which models are profitable and which are not.

why in the world would a GM exec drive a Saturn if they could get a Cadillac or Buick for free? Dont get it.

If you didn’t claim they would get conquests then what does that last statement mean. And for them to meet the substantial sales numbers you claim they have to get customers from somewhere, if not domestics or imports then who?

And the proof of that is where? GM offers the 5year/100k powertrain warranty, not Toyota. GM offers roadside assistance and loaner cars during that period, not Toyota or Honda. While I know there are some smart people at GM I dont think they are smart enough to make vehicles that magically fall apart on the first day of the 6th year when the warranty expires.

Exactly how do you think they determine how long to make those warranties. They have armies of people who know exactly how long each and every part is going to last in there cars, if they didn’t they would be going out of business, oh wait they are. And I am sure we can find many people that have real life stories of there cars falling to shit shortly after their warranty expired. Doesn’t really matter since GM rarely honors their warranty. Everything is “normal operating condition” no matter how faulty the car runs and drives.

For your lofty forecasts to be accurate, Chevy would need to generate six figures’ worth of conquest sales to make your six figure sales forecast. Unless you plan on National and Hertz remaining their largest customer, GM would have no choice but to get substantial conquest sales from Toyota, Honda and Nissan if your forecast is to be accurate.

A quick glance at CR shows that most GM products get stellar reliability ratings in all the major cost categories like engine, engine cooling, transmission, electrical systems, etc.

A quick glance at CR shows that 51% of the 2007 GM lineup has reliability scores of “below average” or worse on the reliability survey, with the Solstice being the least reliable car in the survey.

Not all fleet sales are negative. rental fleet sales are the worst.

And rental sales drive much of the domestic market. Some examples in the midsize sedan class for the first half of MY2007:

Vehicle / Rental as %age of total sales / Fleet as %age of total sales / Retail sales
Chevrolet Impala / 30.0% / 53.9% / 68,565
Chevrolet Malibu / 41.4% / 58.8% / 26,435
Ford Fusion / 15.7% / 26.8% / 48,838
Pontiac G6 / 35.0% / 36.2% / 45,380
Saturn Aura / 22.8% / 23.7% / 20,888
Honda Accord / 3.9% / 4.9% / 155,556
Nissan Altima / 15.3% / 16.4% / 106,705
Toyota Camry / 4.7% / 7.7% / 177,431
Subaru Legacy / 14.0% / 15.5% / 33,232

My “kool-aid” comment was not an insult, your posts come across as though you are a GM exec. Do any of them drive Saturn’s? Just look at you last post twisting the sales data to say who knows what, since the G6 is a huge fleet queen. You contradicted yourself about the profitability of the platform also. How can it be relevent at the beginning of your paragraph and then be irrelevent at the end because they don’t make a profit in NA. You claim they have changed internally but later show how they yet again failed to see what the market wants by screwing up the Aura launch by not having a having a 4 cylinder model at launch. Sure eventually it will have one, but late to the game as usual.

And I thought GM still hadn’t decided where to put the drive wheels on the next Impala. Isn’t that going to be decided after they work out the new CAFE regulations. So I guess they are going to design, engineer, test and produce the next Impala in 2 years so the current one wont have been on the market forever. That would be impressive even for Honda who is currently the fastest in the industry. I guess if the Volt can be done that way why not the Impala.

Never made such a claim. Conquest sales are difficult and those on anti GM vendettas are the last ones who would ever trade in their imports. As for no haggle pricing anyone who bothers to check the pricing will see that Saturns are priced lower than their GM counterparts to compensate for no haggle pricing. When you factor in rebates saturns are often cheaper than comparable GM models, not to mention imports.

“And I was impressed with how smooth the 4 speed in the Malibu was, the engine is noisy but so are some others. It’s their habit of building self destructing cars I take great offence to. The parts you can’t see that cost a lot of money to fix out of warranty. If the cars were cheap to start with where do you think the cost savings to pay for that nice new interior or spiffy new V6 are coming from, cost cutting the parts you don’t see. ”

And the proof of that is where? GM offers the 5year/100k powertrain warranty, not Toyota. GM offers roadside assistance and loaner cars during that period, not Toyota or Honda. While I know there are some smart people at GM I dont think they are smart enough to make vehicles that magically fall apart on the first day of the 6th year when the warranty expires. Furthermore Hummer, Buick, Cadillac and Saab have 4 year bumper to bumper warranties. If anything GM (and Ford, Chrysler, Hyundai) has been expanding, not reducing its warranty coverage. Not a move usually made by a company who designs disposable products as you suggest. A quick glance at CR shows that most GM products get stellar reliability ratings in all the major cost categories like engine, engine cooling, transmission, electrical systems, etc.

Sorry that they burned you but that doesn’t make the Malibu an unreliable car as you claim. As for repairs, I have never known domestic vehicles ot be more expensive to repair than imports. Try telling this to my mother in law who just spent $400 getting a mass airflow sensor replaced on her camry.

I understand that too many GM models were problematic in the 80s and even into the 90s but the evidence is there that things have improved considerably. That may not be enough to sooth someone who has sworn off domestic cars for life (in spite of ample evidence that imports are not infallable in quality) but it’s reality.

I didn’t say anything about fit and finish or poertrains either. I actually thought the interior of the Malibu was very nice, hate the front but that’s my opinion. And the CTS is competitive for it’s class. And I was impressed with how smooth the 4 speed in the Malibu was, the engine is noisy but so are some others. It’s their habit of building self destructing cars I take great offence to. The parts you can’t see that cost a lot of money to fix out of warranty. If the cars were cheap to start with where do you think the cost savings to pay for that nice new interior or spiffy new V6 are coming from, cost cutting the parts you don’t see.

Actually I shouldn’t include myself in that possible pool of conquests since I am currently shackled to one of GM’s POS cars and I am a die hard member of the Never Again Club.

The Fusion barely outsells the old Malibu, in fact I’m not sure the Fusion eclipsed the Malibu in 2006. You are mistaken if you believe the new Malibu is going to sell in the 12k units per month range like the Fusion. The G6 sells more than that most months and Pontiac lacks Chevy’s dealer network or huge ad budget. Continue to predict Malibu failure if you wish. I think you will be disappointed. Most recent GM models that have replaced an existing model of the same name have outsold their predecessors. CTS is an example, as is Impala as is Lucerne.

“The Aura was supposed to save GM, too, and we know how that turned out. ”

According to you, not GM. A new brand from the 3rd smallest GM brand cannot save GM. Common sense dictates that for those who chose to use it. On top of that Aura production capacity could never touch that of Accord or Camry. In fact, even the Malibu at 250k doesnt have the capacity to overthrow those two. Now Malibu + Impala sales are a different story. They already outsell Accord and in 2008 I think they can outsell camry as well.

“The Aura would need to sell in far greater numbers for it to be profitable. ”

Feel free to provide proof. The cost of Aura’s platform is amortized over many brands and models. GM sells over 300K epsilon cars in the US alone and many more in Europe. Your statement is without basis and is likely untrue. Even if it is true, its irrelevent since most GM models arent turning a profit in NA. Not sure what all the anti Saturn commentary is about but your personal feelings aside Saturn is making some nice cars.

According to the Fleet Central website, 58.8% of the Malibus sold during the first half of MY2007 went to fleet.

Counting retail sales only is a cop out to make the car seem less successful.

I will not rehash here why fleet sales at that level are bad, but suffice it to say that they are. The leaders in this segment — Accord, Camry and Altima — don’t have fleet sales anywhere close to that level. Maybe you don’t want to believe that, but no one in the industry views high fleet numbers as a positive.

The Aura is a new nameplate from a brand that has 400 dealers. Its sales can never compete with ALtima, Camry or accord when you look at the facts.

As of October, Saturn sold about 50,000 Aura’s this year. Compare that to the Jetta, which is very much a low-volume niche car in this segment — it sold over 82,000 during the same period. The Fusion, which has been a disappointment for Ford, is selling about 124,000, with fleet numbers similar to those of the Aura. Meanwhile, Honda sold about 333,000 Accords. On the landscape of midsized sedans, the Aura is barely a blip. The fleet numbers that Geeber quoted accurately tell you that Saturn built more Aura’s than they could sell at retail.

Saturn has never generated a profit for GM and has never come close to meeting its sales projections. The Aura would need to sell in far greater numbers for it to be profitable.

Given the history and the market, I can’t imagine that Malibu sales are going to start nipping at the heels of the Accord anytime soon. The Aura was supposed to save GM, too, and we know how that turned out.

Geeber makes some valid points, and I would agree that I would also expect that the Malibu will outperform the Aura. (Based upon my 100,000 retail sales guesstimated forecast, I myself expect that its retail sales will about double those of the Aura.) Still, I don’t see it being a massive hit. Based upon my forecasting guesswork, it will slightly outsell the Fusion in retail sales, which given the styling improvements seems about right.

The facts are what they are. You can speak of “kool aid”, throw insults, twist facts, disregard every major auto publication that contradicts your assertions or anything else you chose and the facts will remain the same. Everyone has the right to hate GM, but let’s not act like their products havent improved.

BTW, when I got my car there were few 2007 XR’s (thats the more expensive model) left around and the salesperson confirmed that the lower trim car was selling slower and thats why it had the better incentives. Thats interesting since according to you no self respecting person would ever got to Saturn to get a car thats more than $20k.

Honestly sj1204 you don’t need numbers or memos from God to see that nothing has changed in this company. Just look at what they say and do(all of it not just what you pick and choose) and compare it to the past. If you see history repeating itself nothing has changed, period. Take a break from the kool-aid and you might see what we are talking about.

Saturns image has been upgraded over the last two years or so. Saturn wouldnt sell any cars if their current buyer didnt care about performance, styling and handling. when they sold nothing but S series cars and the Vue your sentiments may have been correct. Not in 2007 however.

“Saturn was selling the L-Series in this segment earlier in the decade, and the Aura hasn’t beaten that car’s sales, even with almost a quarter of Aura production going to fleet customers. ”

as with many GM cars in the past the L series sold based on price, it was one of the cheapest cars in the class and had a V6 that was the weakest on the market. Thats why it sold. The Aura launched without a 4 cylinder engine when most cars in this segment are sold with such engines. Yet another reason the Aura did not match those sales. When the L series went on sale there was no Vue, Sky or Outlook. Yet another reason it outsold the Aura. The Aura is also larger and more expensive than the L series.

did GM want more sales in the first year for the Aura? Yes. Is the car the huge flop that PCH01 claimed? No. It’s pretty simple.

“I would be very surprised if the new Malibu experiences a huge increase in total sales, unless GM keeps fleet sales at currently high levels. ”

again, lets use the CTS for reference. The CTS is in a competitive segment and sales have been up big time. Facts always come in handy when trying to dismiss something as a pending flop. The CTS has gotten great reviews and a few awards. The Malibu is getting great reviews, has been named an All Star and to 10BEst and has a hug ad campaign. I would be shocked if that doesn’t lead to 200k sales in 2008.

As for the Impala, its larger in every way, has a V8 engine option and doesn’t offer a four cylinder. Saying Chevy shouldnt sell both cars is like saying Toyota should ax the Avalon or Honda doesn’t need the TL now that the Accord is larger and more powerful. The Impala will take a hit, but it will survive. Besides, it will be replaced with a RWD model in 2 years or so.

I totally disagree with your claim that the Malibu is only good enought to get sales from other domestic brands. While CR is likely to call the car mediocre because its from GM, other sources have called the car a legit alternative to the camry and accord and the styling is expressive. No domestic car will ever get mass defects from import owners but the Malibu is good enough to do well in that category.

Interesting discussion here, and you raise many good points (as always). I do believe, however, that the Aura’s track record may not directly reflect on the Malibu’s chances for success.

From what I’ve seen, Saturn sells vehicles to people who want competitive prices and the no-haggle sales experience. These customers do not care about style, performance or handling (otherwise, why would they be buying a Saturn in the first place?).

When they see the Aura, they see a car that costs considerably more money than they are willing to pay, despite its attributes. Those buyers who want those attributes aren’t likely to be visiting the Saturn dealer in the first place, and GM’s spotty approach to marketing this car isn’t helping.

Chevy at least has SOME buyers who will consider trading in their old Malibu for the new one. Plus, it will appeal to domestic diehards. I can see it stealing sales from the dreadful Chrysler twins (Sebring and Avenger). Not so much from the Fusion and Milan, as those cars have at least earned the Consumer Reports’ stamp of approval, which is important in this segment.

From GM’s standpoint, a retail sale is a retail sale, whether it comes out of Toyota’s hide or Chrysler’s.

After looking at the Malibu and the Impala this Sunday at the dealer, I see a bigger problem. Namely, there aren’t any reasons to buy an Impala instead of a Malibu. GM can lower the Impala’s price, but that car is supposed to be more expensive than the Malibu. Once again, we see the effect of GM selling too many models through too many divisions. So GM may end up stealing a fair number of sales from…itself.

sj1204: Seeing as though Saturn was selling ZERO midsize cars in July 2006 I would say selling 5k Auras a month isnt too bad.

Saturn was selling the L-Series in this segment earlier in the decade, and the Aura hasn’t beaten that car’s sales, even with almost a quarter of Aura production going to fleet customers.

I would be very surprised if the new Malibu experiences a huge increase in total sales, unless GM keeps fleet sales at currently high levels.

This market segment is fiercely competitive. Plus, it looks as though car sales are getting hammered by the fallout from the collapse of the housing bubble. We’ll find out in about a year.