GM drops Yukon prices for 2007
As General
Motors moves towards "value pricing," it has announced that the 2007 GMC Yukon will come
in at $34,690 including $875 for destination; $890 less than the 2006 model. The XL
is $37,790, $840 less than the 2006 model. The Denali, which is the top-of-the-line model in the Yukon
stable, comes in at $47,990 and $50,490 for the XL; $2,070 and $1,220 less than
their respective 2006 predecessors.
The move towards lower pricing is part of GM's effort to rely less on incentives by moving the price of the vehicle closer to what it costs when it ultimately leaves the showroom.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Christopher 8:24AM (3/07/2006)
Is that in lieu of throwing in a full tank of gas? ;-)
Chris
http://amateureconblog.blogspot.com
Reply
Puff Chippy 8:49AM (3/07/2006)
Wow, $840 less this year when they sold for what, $7000 off MSRP last year? What a joke. They should drop MSRP by $5000 to start if they're serious but it's clear they're not. Bring on the incentives.
Reply
Finished.Law.School 8:54AM (3/07/2006)
And this summer there will be another fire sale of these crappy GM vehicles...
Reply
amp 8:56AM (3/07/2006)
What's with all the personal blog spam. Seriously, knock it off guys.
http://noOneWantsToReadYourCrappyBlog.blogspot.com
Reply
Source1 8:59AM (3/07/2006)
You are so right about incentives, price reduction, etc. I mean if GM really is basing their future on these trucks, they need to get them on the road quick and build momentum. I would think they would employ a stategy of 'reduce and move' and get these trucks into the hands of people who will buy a Honda, Toyota, or Dodge or whatever.
Reply
HJC 10:08AM (3/07/2006)
I think GM should raise the price on the XL to $62,790 and then rebate $25,000 That way the public would think their getting a great bargain :=)
Reply
Bob Miller 10:43AM (3/07/2006)
I agree, GM really needs to play hard ball with this new "value" pricing scheme. These GMT 900s are good trucks as far as I can tell, but if they really want to get them out on the roads at sticker price, they need to come off the 2006 prices by at least $5k or maybe even $7k to be taken seriously.
In January of 2004 I bought a brand new 2004 GMC Sierra Z71 (I had to sell it for personal reasons, but otherwise I loved the truck immensely). I believe the sticker was right around 34K (it only had the 4.8L, cloth seats, but nice wheels and other standard Z71 fare, etc..., etc...). Anyway, the dealer took something close to almost $8k off the sticker! So, in theory, if GM wants to get the sticker closer to real world transaction prices, the new 2007 GMC Sierra Z71 (similarly equipped to what my 2004 was), should be stickered closer to say, $26k or $27k. But, based on what they're doing with the SUVs, they're going to do this thing all wrong and only reduce the price about $1,000 or so. Not a good idea.
As much as I want to see GM be successful with this new pricing and these new products, I'm afraid there will still be big discounts later in the year.
BTW, I don't consider GM trucks or SUVs to be "crappy". I've had two late model Sierras in the last few years and both ran flawlessly (and they did duty as work trucks on construction sites in Colorado and Texas, and moreover, I put the Z71 through off roading hell on some trails around Durango, Colorado, and it never missed a beat). The interiors were outdated, I will say that, but GM fixed that problem with these new T-900s. GM just needs to get the pricing in line and they'll be fine.
Reply
Paul 10:47AM (3/07/2006)
the biggest problem with these is that they are made with sub standard american labor and design. as with all american products the quality control is so bad that no 2 are alike. sometimes they build a good product, you just have to get one built on a day where the line workers are not hung over.
Reply
Jon Lind 11:00AM (3/07/2006)
$35K is still crazy. My MINI Cooper S' payments are almost $500 per month, and it cost $10K less than this beast. It amazes me how many soccer moms out there can afford to stay home and watch the kids and afford a $700 car payment (not to mention gas and tires...)
Reply
Peter Johnson 11:02AM (3/07/2006)
Anyone who thinks these trucks are 'crappy' hasn't checked out the competition. These trucks surpass the competition in terms of performance (Car and Driver just tested a Yukon Denali that did 0-60mph in 6.2 seconds), they get better fuel economy and the interiors are great too. GM bashing use to be justified. Now they are actually building great cars and trucks. Go find another band wagon to jump on.
Reply
jamie 11:28AM (3/07/2006)
BAD-ge Engineering!!! Blah.
GMC has got to reinvent itself. It can no longer be Chevy-me-too.
Therefore GMC should drop all its Chevy clones and leave it to the master. That will be best for both brands.
But what will GMC do then?
Easy. First, HUMMER should merge with GMC. That solves the SUV problem. Then HUMMER should design a rad pickup to kick Chevy's a** as well as Ford and everyone else.
Vans? Import the the Opel Movano from Europe. This will help give GMC a whole new identity. Later when volume increases, the funky 2.5 diesel Movano could be manufactured in America. Just look at all the Dodge Sprinters that are popping up here in America. Quick, get on board GM before Dodge carves out the entire market again like they did with the minivan!
Reply
MikeW 11:44AM (3/07/2006)
I thought the price was $15,000. Look at the neato dual beam headlights, the honda civic doesn't even use dual beams, though the Fit does. Let me guess the 'new & improved' H13s. H13 are better than HB5/9007 but are still inferior to H4s
The reason the truck is so fast is the 6 speed automatic. Well duh, the VW touareg has had that for 3 years already. But the mileage still sucks.
Reply
Paul 12:03PM (3/07/2006)
#11
I agree. This thing is 3 years obsolete right out of the gate. what good is the 6 speed when they could not get the 4 speed right. Not a bad looking vehicle if you like uncreative bland design. The underpinnings are 1965 Power Wagon junk.
Reply
Jim 12:18PM (3/07/2006)
It never ceases to amaze me as to the amount of ill informed people who believe anything American is bad, including its engineering. If American cars and trucks are so bad, why does Ford sell over 1 million F-150s alone each year against the competition. Its easy to slam what you have a bias against, not intellignet, only easy.
Reply
Bob Miller 1:02PM (3/07/2006)
#13
Honestly, I think a lot of the domestic car bashers just like to stir the pot to get everyone hyped up and ticked off and see what kind of reaction they can stir. On this note, I've yet to see very much truely interesting and/or compelling discussion happening in too many of these blogs, but oh well. Every manufacturer has its problem children, but I think it's just easy and trendy to pick on the home team. Admittedly, GM and Ford have made some real junk over the years, but they also have made some real cool stuff too, and continue to do so. (read Mustang GT, Chyrsler 300C, Cadillac STS and CTS, new GM Trucks). Oh well.
Reply
Paul 1:30PM (3/07/2006)
#8
$35K may be too much for this beast. but why would you compare it to your Mini Cooper. And $500 a month sounds like a lot for a Cooper, maybe you should check your sale docs, I think you've been had.
Reply
Fabulo 2:26PM (3/07/2006)
Paul, maybe Jon decided to go with a low downpayment and a shorter loan. Like 3 years, so not only you can enjoy the car, but after 3 years you can enjoy it even better without a car payment. $24,000 msrp, $3,000 down, 3 years term @ 6% = $491 monthly payment.
Typically these monster trucks get financed in 5 years (6, 7?) or even better: leased.
Reply
Ed 3:55PM (3/07/2006)
If there were a betting line on this issue, I would wager every penny I have that GM will be doing rebates, red tags, GMEP for Everyone, or some other lame gimmick by August.
There is absolutely no way on Earth they are going to be able to hold firm on a $38k sticker for a Yukon XL. Anyone willing to fork over that much for this vehicle should email me immediately. I have some land and a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Reply
Paul 4:24PM (3/07/2006)
the correct price on these is around $25k. about on par with the korean equivilent. even then the Korean models will outlast them and get better mileage. plus you dont have to suffer the embarrassment of driving an american car.
Reply
mikesright 4:32PM (3/07/2006)
To you guys who think that GM will red tag the SUV's, you're wrong. Just look at the sales so far. The Tahoe is on the verge of being the best-selling SUV in the land. Some dealers haven't even gotten one yet and the turn rate on these is less than a week.
To the guys who think that this is a piece of american made trash, you better look again. I personally looked at the new Tahoe and Lucerne, and measured how big the body gaps were, how the panels fit, etc, against the Avalon and Highlander. You might be shocked to know that I saw absolutely perfect fit-and-finish and interior materials from both the GM models, while I kept noticing inperfections with the Avalon and Highlander. In particular, see the front fenders and hood, and the bumper on each to see what I mean. But, it must be those hung-over Japanese causing this!
Also, the pricing for these SUV's is less than the competition's, re: Toyota and Ford, and apparently, I guess, if you have been out of the loop for the last DECADE, people are more than willing to pay north of 50K for these SUV's. Quite simply, Ed, you don't have enough land and bridges to sell, and you again, quite simply, don't have the brain to think about the automotive market. I guess Toyota and Nissan are retards for investing, in OH MY GOSH, big SUV's and Trucks!
Don't be surprised if GM starts making money this year, as it will be because they ignored the retard posters on this blog.
Reply