You raise another question that might have been better for my initial post: should GM kill GMC? I already thought the answer was yes, and after reading your answer I’m even more convinced.

All of which leads me to the really big question: is GM making the hard, hard decisions it should be about its brand portfolio?

The non-commercial truck market is contracting rapidly. GMC was marketed as a more upscale truck (Denali series) compared to its identical Chevrolet product. In comparison, Ford uses special editions (Eddie Bauer, King Ranch, Platinum, Cabela’s) to capture those truck buyers seeking a higher end version of their basic truck. GM could have done the same without having to support a separate distribution channel. Chevrolet-branded trucks handily outsell the GMC versions, so Chevrolet is not going to cede the truck business to GMC. I’m not sure what the rationale behind keeping GMC was, other then that it was dualed with Buick at dealerships and neither brand can survive alone as a single distribution channel.

Provided GM kept the Chevrolet and Buick price points fairly separate and the models distinctive to each brand, I believe Buick has a place in North America. In fact, it would thrive. The Enclave and new LaCrosse are strong and unique models within GM. Developing an entire range of Buick vehicles, like we once had, would put GM back on the same track of cannibalizing sales between divisions.

With Cadillac going bold, as it should, a nice well appointed stylish sedan and crossover makes sense in GM’s portfolio. Perhaps there is even room for a stylish mid-sized coupe. Leveraging premium products developed for China or other markets would control costs.

I think there’s a place for Buick, but there needs to be a different strategy from what we’re seeing today.