Next Solstice CANCELLED?

[imaj]

5) re-introduce the car under the FIERO nameplate, while you're at it, redesign the thing so it has a respectable drag coefficient, you can even use something that you've thought of before, like "mako shark", I noticed that corvette mako shark has a Pontiac arrow on the hood,,,go with that

[bradyb]

I second killing the emoticon paint colors, that is so "alternative lifesyle".

[mena661]

6) Expect to lose one customer if the car is renamed "FierGheyo" or "Gheyko Shark".

[silversolstice]

Originally Posted by mena661 6) Expect to lose one customer if the car is renamed "FierGheyo" or "Gheyko Shark".

that's hilarious

[bigblau]

Here's some more of what Wall Street Jounal is saying.

GM recently said it hopes to cut $10 billion in costs over the next 18 months. Frederick "Fritz" Henderson, GM's president and chief operating officer, has ruled out closing or selling any of GM's eight brands besides Hummer, which GM has put up for sale. But he hasn't ruled out getting rid of some of its slow-selling models.

They also stated that.

GM has problems on many fronts, including high gasoline prices, falling truck sales and billions in losses. The G8 illustrates one problem that's often overlooked: The auto maker's lineup contains many vehicles that deliver barely any bang for the buck.

Unpopular Models Slow Down GM - WSJ.com

[POTFH]

Originally Posted by Fformula88 +1 The only real danger is regulations that could antiquate the current platform. If major changes end up being needed for crash worthiness or whatever, and GM has not moved forward with development, GM may be forced to cancel production in the future if the current platform no longer meets federal regulations.

I agree, just makes a reason to really think about who gets voted into congress in the future. Since I am not saying which party or person, just that it is important to make sure we are voting fully informed, not on emotion.

[SCISOLSTICE]

GM loses $10000.00 on each Kappa. So says Autoweek. To keep it in production the expensive Hydraform may have to be discontinued and use a less expensive method.

[perris]

Originally Posted by SCISOLSTICE GM loses $10000.00 on each Kappa. So says Autoweek. To keep it in production the expensive Hydraform may have to be discontinued and use a less expensive method.

it's an expesive process that saves money

I believe what is going on, they couldn't produce he shape of the sheet metal with conventional hardware and keep it within budget, so even though the hydra form is an expensive process, it is less then doing the same thing conventionally

sort of a contradiction of terms but it makes sense, this is why you only see these really sweet shapes on very expensive cars

[Fformula88]

Originally Posted by perris it's an expesive process that saves money I believe what is going on, they couldn't produce he shape of the sheet metal with conventional hardware and keep it within budget, so even though the hydra form is an expensive process, it is less then doing the same thing conventionally sort of a contradiction of terms but it makes sense, this is why you only see these really sweet shapes on very expensive cars

That's my understanding as well. Hydroforming the body panels is more expensive on the production end, but the tooling is much cheaper than that for conventional stampings. Since the volume of panels produced is low, the extra cost to make them combined with the cheaper tooling ends up being more cost effective than creating expensive conventional tooling to make cheaper panels.

[BellaVerde]

Originally Posted by perris 1)discontinue the solstice for all of one year, sort of like star trek kept getting discontinued but the fan base kept it going-perris; me-...nah. I like it that the 'vette has been in continuous production...keep the Sol going, even if sales volume drops to 4000/year. 2) announce that due to the unprecedented customer loyalty, you will be RE introducing "the kappa platform"-perris. Me-...let the customers know production will always continue as long as there is a Pontiac nameplate. 3) GET RID OF THE "SOLSTICE" NAMEPLATE, it is clearly ONE of the biggest marketing guffaws that could possibly be made but see number "4" for THE biggest-perris. Me-...nuthin' wrong with the Solstice name, but I like astronomical terms...Solstice works for me, but avoid stringing names, i.e. "Solstice GXP Fi Coupe SST"! The brits led the way with Mk1, MkII, etc. Honor the name over time and it will return the favor. 4) stop lsitening to morons on a TEEvee show who know NOTHING about the auto indusry, STOP treating the owners of this performance art as though they are teenagers in a fraternity or sorority, the silver is "silver", the black is "black", got it?-perris. Me...I understand you at GM spend a lot of money on color consultants, and it is important to some that their car be "Firethorn" instead of "Metallic Red-Orange". Not listening to morons is always a good idea...not listening to customers is always a bad idea. 5) re-introduce the car with a balls to the wall nameplate, while you're at it, redesign the thing so it has a respectable drag coefficient, you can even use something that you've thought of before, like "mako shark", I noticed that corvette mako shark has a Pontiac arrow on the hood,,,go with that-perris. Me...I love the Mako Shark name, but it does belong to the 'vette. I also love the Solstice name and want you to make it a household name, like the 'vette. Annual improvements can include drag coefficients, but not so much to change the basic design. Making drag king (queen?) has given us all the same-looking vehicles on the road today..."is that a toyota, saturn, nissan or honda?" 5a) release the car with the 300 horsepower the ecotech can easily handle and PROMISE stage kits that will get it to at least 400 horsepower-perris. Me...RIGHT ON, perris! 6) PUT THE FRIGGING WINDOW BUTTONS ON THE CENTER CONSOLE-perris. Me-...Nah. The doors are really more intuitional for window controls, IMHO. 7) add some pads to the center console, the door and the knee-perris. Me-...Sounds like a good idea to me...a general improvement to the appearance to the interior materials would be welcome. Bring back steel/sand option. 8) split the gas tank and get some more trunk space-perris. Me-...do SOMETHING! Make the tank a fuel cell and put it back between the rear axle and bumper...make a folding support for the top that will go flat when the top is up. 9) fix the frigging top-perris. Me-...DITTO! 10) do something cool with the front fender instead of the ridiculous dent-perris. Me-...I like the dent in the quarter panel...just make it functional!

perris has some good points here, but he does speak for himself. I piggybacked on him because I'm just in a lazy mood...

[rob the elder]

I am sorry but I dont think that anyone who makes suggestions like above will be taken seriously by anyone who understands bringing a product to market. Actually, I dont want to sound crass but you are pretty much bringing the average IQ in the forums down a notch or two with these kinds of irrational suggestions. If you were making a joke then I missed it, sorry.

First of all, the production line takes years to start up and transition to full production. Its not like you can ever just shut it down for a year and then start it up again. They have hundreds of suppliers all of whom have suppliers and it takes flow time to get everyone to produce the required piece parts on time and to spec.

Second, there are hundreds or thousands of employees who depend on that production line for their income. How would you react if your boss came to work tomorrow and said "gee whizer we had this great idea. All of you go home for a year and twiddle your thumbs, then come back NEXT year ready to go back to work again. And oh by the way, we will not pay you for not working for a year." ? Not too bright. And to make it even more interesting there are usually union agreements in place that say you have to PAY them to not work for some period of time. So you are paying for no productivity. Sell that one to a cash strapped GM in a declining market share situation.

The plant and tooling represent sunk costs that if not in use will cost you loads of overhead dollars with NO return.

No manager would ever just say lets absorb a few tens of millions of dollars additional cost AS A MARKETING PLOY. LOLOLOLOL

The fact is that as was discussed in another part of this thread, the costs for the production line are sunk costs. They are paid for. The cost of parts, tooling maintenance, labor etc are all operating costs but they are recouped by the profit from selling the cars. They would be better off to sell the cars at $5 a car profit then to ever shut down the production line.

As other pretty smart people have said, they can continue to build the same car with no changes for years and even if the total numbers fall they will continue to make a profit. If they follow the long term, limited production model that really applies to this car and make evolutionary changes during a continuous production lifecycle they continue to sell new cars to new and old customers, the cars continue to get better and everyone wins.

As to the name. They have many millions of dollars invested in the Solstice and Sky name branding and they would be idiots to just throw that away because some person on an obscure weblog does not like the name. Its a great name and most people who actually have a real job and enough expendable income to actually buy a Sol or Sky are fine with the names.

I must go take a cold shower now.

[StevieG]

Originally Posted by Fformula88 Actually, it would be 2010, as the 2006 model year Solstice went on sale in the 3rd quarter of 2005.

MY 1 2006
MY 2 2007
MY 3 2008
MY 4 2009
MY 5 2010

5th Anniversary is MY 5 is 2010 calendar year which would be released in fall 2009. That is the 5th Anniversary as you state.

[StevieG]

Originally Posted by Fformula88 I own a 1988 Fiero Formula. It is the last model year of the car, and just over 5200 of this model were made. It's nice to have a limited model of the last year of the car such as this... but I'd be lying if I didn't admit that I would trade it tomorrow to have had GM keep making, and perfecting this vehicle. Same for the Solstice. If it were to go out of production, the excited, loyal community and owner base will still be there. However, the car has by no means reached it's peak in potential, and I'd far rather see that peak be realized than see the plug get pulled to make those on the road seem more "exclusive." Exclusivity is nice, but so is being able to drive and enjoy your car, and know you can replace it in 5 years if the need arises with another that includes everything you love about this one, with a majority of the things you wish were better having been addressed.

Amen. Improve the interior. Make the switchgear of better quality. Improve the top mechanism and make it virtually leakproof. Add suspension and handling upgrades as well as higher output I-4 variants and beefier internals. Make it a true world class performance roadster that has a cult following like the AC Ace or Cobra. I don't need to drive a "future classic" when I am driving the classic car I want to drive today. I don't need exclusivity to enjoy my car, I just need to drive it.

[StevieG]

Originally Posted by LiquidPT Right OK, I agree... 2011 model year, likely released in Fall 2010. There, everybody happy?

Nope, correct 5th MY would be 2010 and released fall 2009. It is the MY concept not the release date that is tripping this one up. MY 1 was 06 but released in late summer early fall of 2005.

[perris]

Originally Posted by rob the elder I am sorry but I dont think that anyone who makes suggestions like above will be taken seriously by anyone who understands bringing a product to market. Actually, I dont want to sound crass but you are pretty much bringing the average IQ in the forums down a notch or two with these kinds of irrational suggestions. If you were making a joke then I missed it, sorry. First of all, the production line takes years to start up and transition to full production. Its not like you can ever just shut it down for a year and then start it up again. They have hundreds of suppliers all of whom have suppliers and it takes flow time to get everyone to produce the required piece parts on time and to spec. Second, there are hundreds or thousands of employees who depend on that production line for their income. How would you react if your boss came to work tomorrow and said "gee whizer we had this great idea. All of you go home for a year and twiddle your thumbs, then come back NEXT year ready to go back to work again. And oh by the way, we will not pay you for not working for a year." ? Not too bright. And to make it even more interesting there are usually union agreements in place that say you have to PAY them to not work for some period of time. So you are paying for no productivity. Sell that one to a cash strapped GM in a declining market share situation. The plant and tooling represent sunk costs that if not in use will cost you loads of overhead dollars with NO return. No manager would ever just say lets absorb a few tens of millions of dollars additional cost AS A MARKETING PLOY. LOLOLOLOL The fact is that as was discussed in another part of this thread, the costs for the production line are sunk costs. They are paid for. The cost of parts, tooling maintenance, labor etc are all operating costs but they are recouped by the profit from selling the cars. They would be better off to sell the cars at $5 a car profit then to ever shut down the production line. As other pretty smart people have said, they can continue to build the same car with no changes for years and even if the total numbers fall they will continue to make a profit. If they follow the long term, limited production model that really applies to this car and make evolutionary changes during a continuous production lifecycle they continue to sell new cars to new and old customers, the cars continue to get better and everyone wins. As to the name. They have many millions of dollars invested in the Solstice and Sky name branding and they would be idiots to just throw that away because some person on an obscure weblog does not like the name. Its a great name and most people who actually have a real job and enough expendable income to actually buy a Sol or Sky are fine with the names. I must go take a cold shower now.

rob, I am very surprised at the tone of your post, ususally what I've read from you is constructive, this post of yours however has absolutely nothing to offer and worse, the entire post demonstrates pedestrian understanding of marketing at best, I have to now re-evaluate the former high opinion I had of your posts and knowledge

and yes, the post was tongue in cheek and no, gm will not be reading this post, however if they did they would SURELY recognize the mistakes I am certain they have discussed themselves alrady

No manager would ever just say lets absorb a few tens of millions of dollars additional cost AS A MARKETING PLOY. LOLOLOLOL

you're joking here?...you're laughing at this as if you don't understand the concept?

marketing is NOT a "ploy" it's a business expense and if you don't think big business makes investments in marketing, taking loses in one arena to show gain in another, well, there you have it, pedestrian would be a kind description of your understanding

then you go on to say this gem;

They have many millions of dollars invested in the Solstice and Sky name branding and they would be idiots to just throw that away because some person on an obscure weblog does not like the name

errr...you have never heard of bad marketing concepts I see...interesting you have convinced yourself you know something about marketing

here's a news flash for ya;

the BIGGEST mistake they made with this car was the name, as car makers have made mistakes in nameplates in the past, they did it with this car and they know it, now you seem to think it's "throwing millions of dollars away" if they get rid of a marketing concept that in fact throws millions of dollars away, you are an interesting fellow

Its a great name and most people who actually have a real job and enough expendable income to actually buy a Sol or Sky are fine with the names.

so, who is it you suppose doesn't have "a real job"

of course there are people "who are fine with the name", I am telling you more people would have bought the car if they came up with a better name

now, if you don't like my suggestions, I understand, and believe me,I knew some people wouldn't like my suggestion, I see you are among them.

that's fine, make your own to turn this car into a sucess however "leaving it the way it is" when what they have done was clearly not enough (they do have to retire the car don't they" is CERTAINLY not the way this car can remain on the market

so you have answered my pseudo expertise with;

nothing

wonderfull