Autos are not airlines. No one will buy a car from a company in Chapter 11 for a price comparable to a car from other companies.

If GM would go Ch 11, even their best cars (the CTS and the Malibu) will have to be sold at half price to attract potential Camry/German buyers.

Would I buy a CTS for half the price of Audi A6? Hell, yeah, even 2/3 of the price. Would I buy it for the same price as the new A6? Hell, no.

So, IMHO, they are kinda screwed.

Incidentally, when Ford established manufacturing operations in the UK and Germany back in Model T / A days, the ventures were new corporations in which, if I recall correctly, Ford had less than 100% ownership.

I’ve never heard whether GM retired the stock of acquired companies or held it as an asset. It seems likely the stock was retired, with GM absorbing the assets and liabilities. But apart from the nuisance of continuing to have multiple board of director meetings, etc., taxation and financial reporting (by issuing “consolidated statements”) is the same either way.

Finally, there’d be no legal obstacle to spinning off Buick, Pontiac, etc., even if those brands are divisions rather than subsidiaries. GM would just have to identify related assets and liabilities, assign those to a new stock, and issue those new shares to GM shareholders as a dividend. In theory the GM shareholders would be just as well off: in sum the two kinds of stock would equal the value of their previous GM-only shares. In reality, I would expect a torrent of lawsuits from quarters.

If Cadillac is extending the production run of the DTS, then where is it going to be built? Was not the plant currently producing that vehicle the one slated to build the Volt in 2010?

And, the news about the CTS variants and the SRX replacement is hardly hot news. They showed the SRX replacement as a concept last January in Detroit, along with the CTS Coupe. They killed off the engine which had been scheduled to replace the Northstar just before it was time to order tooling, ostensibly because it wasn’t a direct injection engine. It’s been reported that the 2010 DTS/STS/Lucerne replacement is on hold, if not outright cancelled – which appears to be corroborated by the AN report that DTS/STS production would be extended.

Apart from the rumored little car, that’s saying that GM has no new product in the Cadillac line up. The DTS is supposed to be the top of the Cadillac line, but will be a decade old platform this fall (as the platform was introduced originally in the ‘99 Seville/STS). The current STS has never sold well and DTS sales have tanked, because it is an old design and is viewed as having poor fuel economy.

Moreover, it’s a safe bet that most DTSs and STSs going out the showroom door have been leased, as the terrible resale value makes them unattractive as purchases, even compared to the CTS.

So, how, precisely does GM figure keeping these things around is going to improve matters?

All of this is a very strong sign that GM is just flat-out out of money. They appear to have absolutely no product plan for Cadillac, beyond the cars that are already set for introduction this fall. Putting off the DTS/Lucerne replacement is wishful thinking – if the case existed for building a RWD vehicle in that market slot, there would be no reason not to do it for introduction in 2010 as originally scheduled.

What I’m betting GM does, instead, is cease production of the current DTS and facelift the STS extensively, giving it a new set of letters, so that it replaces both the DTS and STS in the line-up, and giving a version to Buick, as well.

Driving Cadillac down market with a sub-CTS priced car is an enormous mistake. However, there is one good reason to think that it does fit the overall strategy you’re advancing in this post. Cadillac’s general manager told me that most Caddy dealers could not survive as stand-alone dealerships, unlike Lexus stores. So, if Cadillac is seriously contemplating a car below the CTS in price, that certainly fits with the notion that Cadillac dealers, if they are not to have Pontiac, Buick or Chevy, to pay to overhead, will need something else to sell to the less affluent.

Saab should go back to its niche of making quirky hatchbacks, but hatchbacks don’t sell well here, and GM will not support a niche maker, not in its current state.

So the way I see it,
1. Saab must come up with something new and exciting(Aero-X concept), which seems unlikely as their improved(one would hope) future offerings may not sit well with GM executives as the brand would perpetually be limited by the low-end Cadillacs in the coming years.
2. Saab must be sold.
3. Saab must die.

I’m hoping it doesn’t come to the third option, as Saab has a great potential for growth if it were not for the overwhelmed lumbering giant called GM holding the reins.

What about Saab?

Chevy and Cadillac would also be at risk of expiring if it weren’t for their past unforgettable cars like the Camaro and the Corvette; in Cadillac’s case, the V-16 of the 1930’s, the grand 1949 Series 62 and the flamboyantly-finned 1959 Series 62.

Pontiac seems to get it right with the G8, but God knows what happened after gas prices spiked and someone panicked and green-lighted the G3(a copy of the Chevy Aveo/Daewoo Kalos). Yet, no other brand within GM seems to have a clue of the values their own respective nameplates seem to stand for.

Buick doesn’t seem to remember the elegance that the 1963 Riviera inspired. AND NO, slapping “porthole” faux vents on the side of a LaCrosse DOES NOT count as a testament to its identity.

Saturn and GMC have NO individual brand identity whatsoever. Saturn was born as a result of brand dilution and will remain as an example of brand dilution(ironic) until death, unless their product managers drag their asses out of the overseas Opel/Vauxhall offices and think of something truly new and inspiring to offer the public.

GMC is just dead. I cant remember the last truck GMC sold that did not bear resemblance to its Chevy counterpart.
Kill it.
To its mourners: get over it and buy a Chevy truck.

This might be the only way to really save this auto-industry giant. By cutting the unnecessary weight that the blue GM badge bears, it opens up precious GM resources to focus on improving quality, development, and design in a more efficient manner.

Let’s say Pontiac has a bad year. The product offerings aren’t exciting and sales are slumping. On the other hand, Chevrolet has a great year. “Car X” is a hit and is selling like hotcakes! I believe profit will be taken from Chevy to support Pontiac during its bad times.

One Potential Problem (henceforth, O.P.P.), of course, is there are many brands going through hard times needing support by the few exciting market offerings. Who’s down with O.P.P.? GM, baby…

Sorry about that last Naughty By Nature pun – I had to do it!

“Subsidiary companies” can be sold off, can go bankrupt, etc., whereas corporate divisions are like that guy we all read about when we were young who was literally a siamese twin with his brother, in both literal senses. They can’t be divided out and become individual without major surgery, costing tons of money.

Interestingly enough, Saturn WAS a subsidiary company at one point and was morphed into a division as a cost-saving measure (interesting since I understand Saturn has never made a penny for GM – ever). Perhaps they should have said “as a reduction in money losing measure.”

Of course, now that Saturn is not a subsidiary (separate wholly owned) company, it is now tied to GM’s listing Titanic.

Plus the Saturn factory once touted as being so “Saturn different” is now not making any Saturn cars at all…

GM has ADHD.

I’m no attorney, but since you can’t buy stock in any one of the divisions, they are all one company.

They swim or sink together.

I have heard this argument over and over since about the time GM terminated Oldsmobile.

So, instead of biting the bullet and terminating brands at a cost of several billion dollars, GM is bleeding several billion dollars EACH and EVERY fiscal quarter.

This will go on and on until there is nothing left – excepted empty brands.

Umm no. its General Motors. For each brand they write off it will cost them Money (think billions per brand) The only thing they can do is sell off brands to who ever then go from there. But there would be a line of angry assembly workers and dealerships.

I thought the CTS was the 5-series competitor? If the CTS was supposed to be leveled at the 3-series and the G35/37…oooh boy! Is it possible they meant the 7-series?

How long before SAIC actually “owns” the remains of GM? Assuming GM can escape Chapter 7 bankruptcy?

My guess – is about 5 years. Or less.

Pontiac is getting virtually nothing, that’s true. I looked, but could not find, any mention of a second Alpha car, for any division. Shouldn’t there be one?

Even Chevrolet doesn’t seem to be getting much new product.

Overall, GM appears to be cutting way back on new product development, for all divisions. New small cars are coming, and new high-MPG powertrains, but little else. Just compare the future product chart in this week’s AN to those from past years.

Wait. Ummmmm……

3 or 4 would probably be best, Their Customer base would be so confused if they went from 8 to 2 in too quick of time. But Buick is already dead.

Plus GM’s product plans seem to change on a daily basis so I don’t know how you could take this as something that is for sure going to happen. I thought last week they were killing the DTS and NOT replacing it with the Zeta platform that is on again off again from month to month. It’s amazing how much money these guys waste because they don’t have a clear plan.

I suppose that Cadillac’s brand managers don’t want to be left holding the eight-cylinder bag if the market moves away from that entirely. If it was a movie, we’d probably call it “Cimmarron Revisited.”