Wow GM cut the prices on its cars - or did they?

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../602200356/1148

I had a feeling that this would happen. Glad that someone was paying attention because it looks as if GM actually raised the prices on some cars. The Cadillac DTS Luxury II, for example, now costs almost $7,000 more than it did in October 2005:

"The magazine found that 64 percent of GM models now have lower sticker prices, with the average price cut of $2,000.

"But on some models, such as the Cadillac DTS and some Buick LaCrosse sedans and Terraza minivans, prices were lower last fall during GM's 'Red Tag Event.'"

We should start a pool to predict when GM goes back to their old rebates option out of desperation

Very cute Jack. Just can't stand the General doing something right can you. The 2006 DTS is a restlyed/engineered car. Not comparing apples to apples as usual.

why do you need to pay extra for some colors on DTS?

Premium paint process. The practice of extra cost paints is fairly common in the automotive industry.

What do you mean? How am I blocking posts?

:lol: sucks being a mod. The moral for me, I guess, is to not mention malorn or GM ever again. Of course, we follow GM in this town more than most because it's so much a part of our community so I'm always finding stuff about them that really should be posted but now I know how to maintain a malorn-free environment

Great Jack, it is always very stimulating for you intellectually to continue to preach to the choir day after day after day:

GM is bad.....yeah!!!!!
Toyota is great......yeah!!!!!
Ford is bad......yeah!!!!!
Jim Press is always telling the truth and never spins any comments.....yeah!!!!
The heads of GM and Ford are all liars and never stop spinning......yeah!!!!

I didn't know it was so difficult for you to react to an actaul challenge now and then. 2006 or 2007 will see the Zenith of Toyota's market share in the US for a number of reasons. Toyotas whole business model has been built on large year after year growth very much like Japan Inc was up until the early 1990's. I can't wait to read the posts on here when that worm turns.

so when that happens you will read those posts and you will laugh then, why do you feel a need to trash a person for posting an article and expressing his/her opinions?

Because a lot of what gets posted on here is not the truth when it concerns GM and Ford. Just because it has been written does not mean it has any basis in fact. If only facts and opinions are posted on here about GM and Ford and they are separated honestly I am fine. A great example is what Jack quoted inth DET news earlier, not fact just twisted numbers and opinion.

Did you hear that Jack?
The man with ultimate knowledge said so

We should form a committee to study this issue. Let's meet in Hawaii.

I know the nature of PC is to express opinions, partake in discussions and help with advice, so I retract my statement which generated your response. Point well-taken.

I will. But first, I need to find some specialists to declare me a specialist.

As far as price "cuts" does anybody think they represent the "true" cost of financing built into every vehicle? I've never believed claims of 0% financing, as it should be patently obvious you can't lend money for less than prime without losing your shirt.

For example: most of the credit unions in Winnipeg offer car loans for around 6%. Depending on model, most Toyota's have financing around 7%, some as "low" as 3%. GM, Ford, DC, claim 0% for financing.

In 2000 when I ordered my GMC Sierra, there was almost a $4,500 difference between the financed price and the cash price. The dealer took off $1,500 from MSRP if I went through GMAC Canada, but he took $6,000 off MSRP when I whipped out my checkbook and told him I was paying for the damn thing.

To satisfy Malorn, I will note the imports play the same game. It's a Ponzi Scheme.

Jayman is right on. Generally the incentives are either cash backs or low financing. The low financing is provided by GMAC, Toyota motor credit etc, after the rate is bought down by the manufacturers. Instead of receiving a $3000 rebate on a vehicle the customer receives 0% and the $3000 is provided by manufacturer to the lender.

GM made a critical error in the summer of 2002. GM did the right thing with 0% financing after 9/11, that move jump-started the economy. The heavy incentives were working and business was relatively good in the summer of 2002. There was much dialog at GM and Ford near the end of June about rolling back the incentives and what effect it would have on sales. GM and Ford should have rolled the incentives back to moderate levels at that point and the industry would not be having the MAJOR adjustment it is currently in.

great idea Tony.

sometimes it seems everyone thinks they're a specialist on everything.

maybe we should have a panel of specialists to supply certification to our designated specialists. it would be a panel of 5 people, because anything less than n=5 is insignificant. each of these specialists must be independently certified by noone less than the most well known person in each respective field, and the most well-known person in each field will not only be up for debate by all but carefully scrutinized under all angles.

punishment for not following procedure would be grounds for immediate suspension of your "custom member title" privileges, if applicable. your new member title would be "person who is not to be taken seriously on any occasion"

red tape would be applied generously.

awesome! :blink:

Geez I love it when you talk dirty ... um ... statistics, that is! I volunteer to run the Chi Square and to check for heteroscedasticity!

:lol: that sounds a lot like DC lingo!!!