![Bugatti Bird-gate Followup: Driver identity revealed <b>[*UPDATE:</b> Now with actual crash video!]](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/11/bugatti-veyron-swim-1258147199_143x85.jpg)
GM doubles incentives on light truck lineup
It's only been a few days since Paul Ballew, GM's executive director of global market analysis, responded to Toyota's high Tundra incentives with "game on". Now we know what games GM has in store, as the General has doubled Silverado and GMC Sierra incentives to $2,000 for extended cab versions. Regular cab models still have $1,500 on the hood.
GMs sales were down considerably in June, and one of the big surprises was the slow sales numbers for the General's all-new trucks. While $2,000 is a far cry from the $5,000 Edmunds estimates Toyota is spending on Tundra incentives, it should still help send Chevy and GMC dealership traffic northward. GM's new round of incentives is scheduled to begin July 10.
[Source: Automotive News (Sub. Req.)]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
h8rain 9:40AM (7/10/2007)
I was recently in the truck market, and while price was a big factor for me, another big factor for me was the treatment as the actual dealership. I don't do any work on vehicles myself, I will *generally* let the dealership handle. Below is my experience at a local GM/Chevy dealership (I know this is just one dealer, but it resulted in one less sale for them).
I arrive, and there is no place to park, because their lot if filled to brim with cars (this particular dealership has literally hundreds of cars on site). I finally make my own spot. I proceed to walk around the trucks, and no one approaches me (which sometimes I like, other time I don't so that is a wash). I eventually go and ask for help. Well through the course of the guy showing and telling me about the truck, he just (without asking) lights up a cigarette. Which I probably would not have minded if he at least asked if I cared. I just thought it was rude. My wife and I really like the truck, so we started the process of finding out the negotiated price of the truck and my trade in. To make the story short they wanted to give me 8k BELOW KBB trade in value for my car, and sell me the truck 3k below sticker, including rebates (it at the time had 2k in rebates). I said forget it and left.
I then looked at the Nissan Titans. I found the exact one I wanted, and went to that dealership. I looked up the TMV for the truck and was prepared to haggle down to that. The *FIRST* offer they came back with was $300 LESS than what I wanted to pay, and they offered full KBB trade in value for my car.
Guess what is sitting in my driveway?
Back on topic,......Rebates are nice, but a crappy dealership is still a crappy dealership. I was more impressed about the story about Toyota wanting to improve the quality of service.
(Apologies for long rant, but I thought this was a relevant place to tell it)
Reply
Johnny Rocket 2:34PM (7/10/2007)
I've experienced the same problems as you; my case was at a Ford dealership near Atlanta. I could see why you'd get a better deal on a Titan--it's an older pickup, and Nissan hasn't built the name Ford and Chevy have. The Silverado and Tundra sales problems are just further proof of the market shift.
FermitTheKrog 2:34PM (7/10/2007)
h8rain : Did they give you the good or fair value? Just curious.
h8rain 2:41PM (7/10/2007)
They gave me excellent value (it only had 14k miles and not a scratch, a babied sports car). Now granted it was a Nissan 350z, and I was trading it into a Nissan dealer, but I could not see why a GM dealer would not give me at least "fair" value.
I would have not traded it in, but I could not justify a new(er) sports car and a new truck. I have always wanted a truck, and my wife and I are thinking about starting a family, so I went ahead and got the truck, so it would be paid off, by the time we would have a child.
FermitTheKrog 2:45PM (7/10/2007)
I had a honda dealer insist to me that dealers only give "fair" kelley blue book on vehicles, so I was curious. I walked on them, but wanted to see how else other people faired. Thanks.
h8rain 2:56PM (7/10/2007)
Yea I got Excellent Trade in value of $26,700 for my '05 350z 35th Anv. with navigation.
mbarnard07 10:26AM (7/10/2007)
So, how is $2000 double the current rebate of $1250 on the Sierra? unless you are comparing the $1000 AND 0% financing available...
also, dont forget BC5, which is $500 bonus cash so right now, the previous rebate was $1750, or $1500 and 0%... hopefully BC5 stays.
Reply
Erger 11:42AM (7/10/2007)
Chris Shunk, shame on you. For you to say folks buy Prius's because they are "Posers" is not only funny to me, but a typical arrogant American response. I own a Prius because IT IS THE MOST TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED CAR IN PRODUCTION, AND, IT BEATS EVERY OTHER PRODUCTION CAR ON THE PLANET FOR MILEAGE, AS WELL AS LOW EMISSIONS. Now go drive your huge truck and SUV and use your childrens and grandchildrens gas, while you polute and feel LIKE A BIG MAN in YOUR BIG TRUCK.
Sarabjeet 12:11PM (7/10/2007)
Erger, neither of those claims is true.
AMGoff 12:19PM (7/10/2007)
Erger, why are your panties in a bunch. His article about the Prius was about a research study that pointed to the reasons why 50% of Prius owners buy them - to make some sort of statement. If all Prius owners were so concerned about the environment they would do a little research and find out what exactly goes on to make these wonder-cars. If you're happy with your Prius, good for you. Let me know how it holds up 5-10 years from now. The technology is not fully proven and since they are still so new no one really knows what the long term, overall costs for these cars will really be. If I were that concerned about mileage I would go buy a diesel VW, at least then I would know I was getting proven technology that will last for years while providing great fuel economy.
Jeremy 12:24PM (7/10/2007)
Erger, you're an idiot. First off "IT IS THE MOST TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED CAR IN PRODUCTION" is completely relative to your opinion and based on what aspect you're referring to in advancement. Secondly, the Prius not the most economical because the "61 mph" is typically over rated by about 20-25mpg, which brings it down almost to versa/avea/civic/rio/prism/yaris/corolla territory. Secondly it has been proven that the energy required to product the batteries is more harmful than the emissions of a Tahoe to the environment. Also, the Tahoe (and many other large trucks) are available in e-85 variants which produces much less emissions.
If you want to drive your Prius, then by all means go ahead. But don't rant on to people because we actually NEED a larger vehicle to carry stuff.
Besides, the Tundra (also made by your beloved Toyota less we forget) and the Ridgeline get equal mileage to the American trucks/SUVs and I believe that Nissan is the only to offer the environment "saving" E-85 fuel. So go buy your Prius and brag about Toyota as they continue to push for 200,000 Tundras by the end of the year, which (I might be wrong about this) is quite a bit more than they are pushing the Prius. They, like EVERY OTHER CORPORATION are in business for one thing, and one thing only:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
pbrown 12:24PM (7/10/2007)
1500 is a far cry from Toyota or Ford,come on Chevy games on but your in 3rd place
Reply
h8rain 2:00PM (7/10/2007)
To Jeremy:
My Titan is E85 compatible, but GM is really pushing their trucks with E85 ability. Will I ever use E85, probably not because it is a joke. (Cost per *mile* is higher with E85, but as far as E85 being "better" for the environment, I would like more proof that it is truely better, b/c I burn will more E85 fuel to go the same distance).
Reply
Bruno 6:10PM (7/10/2007)
All the reports of various incentives and MSRP's and such are not really as useful as they might appear at first. What really matters is:
a) what each truck costs to produce
b) what each vehicle sells for, net, after adjusting for incentives and financing, etc.
Obviously selling more units lowers the per-unit cost. It's all a pretty complex calculation. Only their accountants really know for sure how they're doing.
$5,000 in incentives on a vehicle that costs $20,000 to make and is sold to a dealer for $25,000 after incentives is a $5,000 profit for GM or Toyota. Whether its msrp is $35,000 or $31,000 isn't all that important in the end. Of course they hope for more profit and fewer incentives. But it's not "failing" if you set the prices high to begin with and come off them some. And who really expected ANY pickup truck to sweep the nation and become a vehicle in high demand now, with gas prices so high?
But to treat this all like a football game, rooting for your particular team, isn't useful.
Reply
pjungnitsch 6:44PM (7/10/2007)
In the last incentive article Edmunds quoted $5083 for the Tundra, and $3700 for the Silverado.
GM adding another 1000 bumps the Chevy up to 4700, so they are pretty much even now.
Why would Autoblog quote Edmunds 'total incentives' for the Tundra and compare it to 'on the hood' incentives for the Silverado?
Reply
TimothyB 5:40PM (7/21/2007)
Re: The Prius...
"Secondly it has been proven that the energy required to product the batteries is more harmful than the emissions of a Tahoe to the environment."
I'm not a Prius owner, but I -am- an EV enthusiast so I know a little bit about the production cycle of NiMH batteries, and this statement is a bit misleading.
The amount of Nickel used to produce ALL NiMH batteries (including all of the ones in rechargeable devices) is less than 5% of the world's nickel production. Almost all of it goes into alloys, like Stainless Steel, and so on. Stopping using it in batteries would only make the price go down a bit, and the gap would be taken up by more alloy production. So no net loss in pollution from not using them.
Secondaly, talking about the amount of Energy used to produce the battery is also misleading since we have no way of knowing what the source of that energy is. Is it Nuclear? Fossil Fuel? Renewable? Turns out its a bit of all of these.
The Prius is a step in the right direction, however what needs to be understood is not how much energy and pollution went into manufacture of a battery, but how much pollution was -avoided- as a consequence of using one. That turns out to be a rather large number.
Don't listen to these Hybrid/EV bashers. The major concerns are doing everything they can to discredit EVs, and even now, as the Hybrids are being forced into mainstream, they refuse to consider Plug In Hybrid technology.. which is already available using Lithium batteries and would give you the equivalent of 100+ MPG (without fudge factors) in return for plugging in at night when you park. LiFePO4 batteries, by the way, are biodegradable.
The ultimate machine for todays market is a Plug In Hybrid, in my estimation.
Reply