By on July 10, 2012

When Joel Ewanick left Hyundai and signed on as GM’s marketing top gun, some people asked when he would do something like Hyundai’s warranties. Others said GM won’t dare. Announcing two new programs, GM dares, carefully.

Buy a Chevy and you can return the car within 60 days of purchase, “if the cars meet certain conditions,” Reuters says.   This should get people in the showroom that are not quite so sure. GM is cautious also: The buyback option only is good for July and August.

Chevrolet also brings back “no haggle” pricing of Saturn lore.

They buyback option is called the “Love it or Return it.” The no-haggle pricing is named “Total Confidence Pricing.” It covers 2012 model-year vehicles at prices similar to what GM offers its auto parts suppliers. Says Jesse Toprak, VP of Market Intelligence at TrueCar:

 “The buyback program is an indication of how confident Chevrolet is in its’ new product line up.  It is a way to get people into showrooms and experience firsthand the significant investments the dealer body has made in the recent years. It is a smart and cost effective program that will work towards diminishing the perception gap of the Chevrolet brand particularly in coastal metropolitan areas where consumers have a stronger preference towards the import brands. No Haggle Pricing aims to eliminate the most stressful part of the car buying process, stressful negotiations. Although not nearly as attractive as the Employee Pricing, Preferred pricing based current program ensures every customer pays the same price with no haggle –same price GM offers to its’ suppliers. Similar programs have been quite successful in the past and we expect Chevrolet to get a decent boost from this promotion for the next couple of months.”



Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

30 Comments on “GM Gives You Your Money Back...”

  • avatar

    I don’t understand how, in this day and ago of over-information, anybody could go into a dealership “unsure” if they want a particular car.

    I took my girlfriend shopping after a week of reading articles and reviews. We narrowed it down to five cars, ended up only test driving 4 of them.

    The car she wanted was a Chevy Sonic. And though it pains me to say this as a Ford guy, the Sonic is world’s away a better car at a better price. The dealers are offering the 60 Day Buyback OR another $250 off of the price. But this is THE car she wants…I guess maybe have a little more faith in GM products these days. They KNOW they have to build better cars.

    • 0 avatar



      Are you looking through the lens of the 2% of the population that visit sites like this or the 98% that couldn’t explain how a Volt works, never heard of Fisker, and insist on going only to the Toyota dealer to get a Corolla because their college roommate had a ’98 and darn it must be a good car.

      That is how 98% of the car buying world operates. They don’t care. It’s an appliance, and they treat the transaction as such.

      We are the exception – not the rule.

      • 0 avatar

        Agree with APaGtth.

        Also, reading about a car is nothing like driving one.

      • 0 avatar

        I think this is a really smooth move on the part of GM. Then again, GM has to do something to get more people to even look at their new cars.

        But in the end, as always, the numbers will tell the story. The numbers of sales, the numbers of returns and the number of scams.

        Maybe if this works, GM will be able to repay the taxpayers for the bailout money rained on them. Maybe even with interest!

      • 0 avatar

        Ditto on APa. I think we need to remember that the average TTAC frequenter is more likely to be better informed than the average, middle-class joe who has limited disposable income and information to utilize come buy time. I only know of maybe a handful of people who actually LIKE going to a dealership to get a car. Buying a car for most is something people generally try to finish quickly.

      • 0 avatar

        APaGttH: we have a winner. The trouble with the blogsphere is that it takes itself too seriously. What you really find on most (if not all) sites, whether auto-related or a Dandelion Cooking site, you are guaranteed to get the polar opposite know-it-alls that represent, maybe, 3% of the people out there.
        My 11 years in the ‘biz were fairly depressing: most people could not tell you the difference between a tie rod end and a push rod: these are the target market for the likes of Toyota, Consumer’s Reports and the Lemon Aid Guide. Even the know-it-all punks, who were dragged into a GM show room by their hair, could be played by someone who actually knew their job. :)
        Three years ago, at the height of the GM bankruptcy scare, I worked in an office full of women – all import buyers, who strongly believed Toyota was #1, everywhere. I had to log onto and WardsAuto to convince them that Toyota was a distant 4th in North America. They were shocked (but unmoved) to learn that if the 1.5 million captive sales in Japan were taken out, Toyota was not even #1 in the world, which the Detroit doomsayers were trumpeting from the rooftops.
        Propaganda is alive and well. Whether it’s the Jane Jacobs disciples that won’t be happy until every city has returned to an 1830s small English town state of being, or the Global Warming Priests who believe the automobile is the Origin of all Evil in the Universe, Goebbles is alive and well in the 21st Century.

    • 0 avatar
      Volts On Fire

      “The car she wanted was a Chevy Sonic … this is THE car she wants.”

      Not dating her for her brains, I see.

      • 0 avatar

        I test drove the Sonic 1.4 turbo manual and it was an excellent vehicle. Great power and shifter.

      • 0 avatar

        Dating her for brains, you should talk.

      • 0 avatar

        Well since I’m not a zombie, no, I’m not dating her for her brains.

        That said, I think she made an excellent choice. I also don’t understand how anyone, save someone very wealthy, could make a major purchase like a car and not do at least SOME research on pricing and incentives.

        Then again…good point ApagtTH

  • avatar

    Car buying should be stressful for the seller or else you’re doing it wrong.

  • avatar

    This money back thing is only good for 60 days. How about a warranty that is good for 60 MONTHS?

    • 0 avatar

      They already do that 5/100 on a pretty darn generous powertrain warranty (read it over, kind of surprising what is covered)

      NO ONE is going to give a 5/100 bumper-to-bumper warranty.

      • 0 avatar

        Hyundai/Kia has a 5/60 B2B, but it’s limited in what it covers, and at certain mileage intervals things that are covered start to drop off.

      • 0 avatar

        After my then 18 month old Ford Focus required some rewiring, a new battery, and a new alternator at 35,000 miles – I called the Ford customer service hotline and after a nice, reasoned conversation – I was given a 5/100 bumper to bumper on said car. Good thing too – as 9 months prior to the 5/100 expiring – the interior wiring loom let all the smoke out. It never hurts to call customer service and be nice and reasonable. I managed to do the same with my wife’s old Malibu after transmission #3 was put in at 30k miles. As soon as we realized they were going to declare bankruptcy – we traded it in on a VW that has been… trouble free!

  • avatar

    harshciygar: “The dealers are offering the 60 Day Buyback OR another $250 off of the price.”

    I was expecting that… GM did something like this a year or two ago and if you took the satisfaction guarantee, you lost an extra $500 or so off the purchase price. Most people took the $500 and GM was able to proclaim that almost no cars were returned under the satisfaction guarantee program.

  • avatar

    No haggle pricing in the car biz means I’m getting screwed. Not sure why that’s a selling point.

    • 0 avatar

      Not anymore. My recent experience is that dealers are packing their cost so much that the salesmen have little room to haggle already. The GM guy spent 30 minutes trying to get my price quote by adding up all the demographic based discounts I could get. No haggling, but with wink and a nod, he could claim a few he knew might slip by..


    • 0 avatar

      mcarr, yeah it does mean you’re getting screwed if you allow it to happen.

      I have found the best approach to be to do your due diligence beforehand and then letting the dealer set the price they must sell it at. You’d be surprised at what they’ll offer you.

      Dealers have to make money to stay in business, but most of all they need to sell in order to make money.

      There have been plenty of deals that I walked away from because different dealers need to make different levels of profits to stay in business. They have a price for everyone, depending on how many vehicles they turned at any given time of the month.

  • avatar

    Meet the new GM, same as the old GM.

  • avatar
    Good ole dayz

    Given the (fundamentally unlawful) way that the UAW was handed ownership in GM and Chrysler, with the taxpayers paying the tab, and

    As the taxpayers will never get fully paid back (thanks to GM-UAW being allowed to retain the multi-billion tax-loss carry forward that non-UAW companies lose in bankruptcy), as a patriotic American I’m inclined to avoid any UAW-assembled vehicle. Period.

    I’d rather support honest / non-UAW American workers assembling vehicles without a taxpayer bailout-subsidy, thank you very much.

    Beyond that, given GM’s corporate culture of low quality (since the 1970’s), I’d be very, very afraid to subject myself to a GM vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      No, I did not support the bailout. However I think if GM and Chrysler had went REALLY bankrupt the auto producing states wide have augured straight into bankruptcy. Can you imagine how much worse the economy would have been? Can you imagine 4 or 5 states turning into economic deserts? Try putting the bailout in a total costs and common good perspective. It was an ugly decision and only time will tell if we were right. Yes, I own and wear a Reagan t-shirt.

      Are you insinuating that UAW employees are dishonest? I fail to see the logic between the bailout and the rank and file UAW members being dishonest. How about saying the UAW board in this case?

      GM’s quality has improved; it had to. I think GM’s quality has improved enough that it can compete in the mid size sedan market. IMHO the mid size sedan market is the toughest market.

      Personally, I think GM needs to run a nation wide ad stating: We were arrogant and we made mistakes; we listened, we learned, and we changed, come see the new GM. They have to run an ad like that to convince people who had a POS GM product to come back. Or at least go to a dealer and look. What kinda of nation wide ad should GM run would make a great TTAC blog.
      My Grandparents own a Buick (don’t be shocked) and the seat bottoms are too long for my stubby legs. I’d like to find the GM VP for seat design and kick him the gonads and tell bigger car=bigger seats does not work for everyone.

      • 0 avatar
        Good ole dayz

        >>Are you insinuating that UAW employees are dishonest? I fail to see the logic between the bailout and the rank and file UAW members being dishonest.

        For legal purposes the rank and file employees have selected a representative, the UAW. The UAW is the rank and file employees.

        The problem is that this was a politicized bailout to insulate and reward the UAW, not pursue “the common good.” If this had been a genuine Chapter 11 reorganization the unsecured creditor UAW wouldn’t have walked away with big ownership / equity interests in the “new” GM and Chrysler, nor would those “new” entities still be burdened with the legacy costs of UAW pensions.

        >>GM’s quality has improved; it had to

        I’m sure that the new stuff isn’t as bad as a Vega or X-car. But one look at Consumer Reports tells one that on a relative basis GM vehicles are still bottom-feeders.

        Think about it. GM / Ford / Chrysler are still saddled with the UAW: the union-slacker attitudes it fosters among the workers; the work rules and featherbedding in the contracts; the legacy costs of pensions. To try to offset the resultant higher fixed costs, those manufacturers have to cut corners elsewhere — component quality, lowest bidder for inferior quality supplier procurement, decontenting. Since lower quality is structurally inherent in their products, don’t you think that they’ll continue to lose market share over time and be back at the taxpayer trough?

    • 0 avatar

      A consumer who is willing to condemn a manufacturer for mis-steps made 30 years ago is just as bad a judge as someone who is willing to forgive another manufacturer almost any error, screw up or mis-step.
      The trouble with complex, manufactured goods is that just because a company has a bad year (JVC, 1989) does not make the entire company suspect. Even within a model line, there could be a bad batch. Forensic accounting has worked miracles in catching bad batches of parts before they actually break in a vehicle.
      As the auto industry went through 2 decades of turmoil, beginning in about the mid-70s, it was the industry leaders (Ford, GM) that had the volume sales and deep pockets to be exposed to new technologies that were being tried to meet CAFE ratings, bumper crash ratings and new pollution controls. The perfect storm. Perfect timing for the motorized skateboards made by Datsun, Honda and Toyota to swoop in and grab up 20% of the market in no time.
      But this is a dead issue. One should be focusing on the present, and it was sheer bad timing that the banks nearly went under, taking the auto loan business with it and vaporizing 50% of the American auto market over night. Make no mistake: many American banks were insolvent in late 2008. Nobody like government intervention, but given the information at the time, Bush and then incoming Obama really didn’t have much of a choice.
      With no viable auto industry, the United States would be finished as a world power. I cannot believe that the (for the most part) educated readers on TTAC don’t get that: the tool and die industry, plastics, rubber, glass, electronics – the list is endless, all depend on auto manufacturing. If Detroit had collapsed, who could have stepped in and scooped up GM and Ford’s patents? (Do not laugh: GM still has more patents that Toyota or Honda.) Why else was the Opel deal scuttled when Magna wanted to team up with a Russian backer?
      Isn’t it bad enough the Russians have to give American astronauts a ride to the Space Station? Will they have to fly them to Russia, too? Airbus is eating Boeing’s lunch,but it took all of Europe to gang up on it. Take away the Pentagon’s money, and Boeing likely would be gone, too.
      Japan Inc wrote the book, Korea wrote the jacket copy and China is going to write the epilogue on invasion without firing a shot. Well, perhaps invasion is too strong a word: after all, as the prime mortgagor, I suppose they indirectly own everything anyway.
      With the current state of the U.S. trade deficit, its foreign debt and manufacturing job losses, it is only a matter of time that China and the U.S. will meet in some frozen wasteland and trade pot shots over an oil or gas deposit.
      The question is: where will the troop carriers, tanks and trucks be built if Detroit is a dustbowl?
      I know: Detroit deserves to die and it is our entitled right to have access to 130 models of imported vehicles.
      Pass the popcorn: this Canadian is enjoying the show.

      • 0 avatar

        Let me know if GM’s ex-bondholders every see their money or if we taxpayers ever see ours.

        This is a nice soliloquy to a dishonest company that still has yet to transform itself the way it would have had it actually gone through a real bk. But let’s not get caught up in details, right?

        As usual, the deep pockets and those connected got bailed out, but small businesses and taxpayers will always take it on the chin.

        It’s sad you’re enjoying the show. Enjoyable isn’t what I would call this, but hey, different strokes, right?

      • 0 avatar
        Good ole dayz

        See my response to el scotto above, and …

        You are assuming that “Detroit’s” inferior quality ended 30 years ago. The current quality rankings say otherwise. And the presence of the UAW, once it begins feeling its oats again (i.e., can strike again in a few years), will mark the reversion back to declining quality to cheapen the product cost to help feed the insatiable UAW monster.

        There is a viable U.S. auto industry, but it’s located in the (for now at least) UAW-free Southeast. I know the argument is “but they’re foreign owned and the profits go overseas.” Well, in that case, we should not have bailed-out Chrysler and given ownership in it to the UAW and FIAT, which is foreign-owned, right? Either Chrysler counts as the domestic auto industry, or it doesn’t. And with FIAT having majority ownership, if Chrysler is considered part of the domestic auto industry, then so too are the Japanese / European plants spread throughout the Southeast.

  • avatar
    el scotto

    @ PrincipalDan you are welcome. Congratulations twice, once for the promotion and second for your nuptials. From bits and pieces, you’ve revealed on here, she seems like a great lady. You’ll be a “Big Person” to all those kids in more than one way.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • dal20402: It is definitely a good way to convert fuel into noise, which will be its primary application.
  • schmitt trigger: Have to give credit where credit is due: USA automakers are second to none in the design and build...
  • FreedMike: “…yes fear of guns and fear of repercussions stops crime.” Well, then, since we have...
  • ToolGuy: Does anyone still look at power-to-weight ratios? (Guess not, nevermind.)
  • pmirp1: Lou_BC: “LOL. I’m not going to shoot someone because they are stealing something out of my yard.”...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber