A marketing man's opinion about the non-success of the 2004 GTO - PY Online Forums

urbanredneck · #1 05-08-2004, 08:57 AM

This is of course assuming it really is a flop and many folks are suggesting. It sure smells like a flop to me. I live in Orange County, CA, a big metropolitan area with lots of car enthusiasts and money sloshing around, and my 2004 GTO is the only one I have ever seen on the road.

I applaud Bob Lutz's decision to import the Holden Monaro. I wrote a letter to GM about four or five years ago asking that they import the Holden Ute SS, and insisting that while GM lost me as a customer a long time ago, a new El Camino would bring me back onto the lot. Well, I never got that new El Camino (it's okay, I have a '66), but the GTO did indeed make me a GM customer again.

The 2004 GTO is a fantastic car: ask anyone who has driven one. So why isn't it doing better?

To put it simply, I believe they should never have called it a GTO.

Time after time I have heard people say of the new car, "That's the new GTO? That's not a GTO," then not even look any closer at the specs. The styling is all wrong, not so much for a modern performance coupe, but for a car you badge as a GTO. People are so put off by it they don't even look any more closely to make the connections ("Whoa, that's a Corvette coupe!") that would make them more interested in the car.

I bought the car because of the specs. I don't give a toss what they call it. I'm not crazy about how it looks, but I suspect it will grow on me. So GM got a new customer in me, but I am a pretty weird guy.

This is becoming a big marketing failure.

What should GM have done? Classic sales technique: manage customer expectations. They probably thought they were doing that by badging a new GTO which performs better on any measure than the original GTO, but they failed with styling. Here's what I think GM should have done with the car:

1. Introduce it as the 2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, or 2004 Impala. GM has already got folks used to the idea that modern Monte Carlos and Impalas look horrible. What if for 2004 the Impala or Monte Carlo was to be a real RWD muscle car? No one would care about the looks anymore (and in any case as bland as the 2004 GTO's styling is, it still looks a lot better than a late model Impala or Monte Carlo). They would fly off the lots.

However, I can see where perhaps a high performance coupe like the Monaro might not have fit whatever market niche GM has assigned to the Impala or Monte Carlo. Also, I gather that GM is trying to remake Pontiac as some kind of performance division. So if the car HAD to be a Pontiac, I would have proposed:

2. Import the car into the US as the Pontiac Monaro, a completely new model no one has ever heard of which is nonetheless the most exciting new sport coupe introduced by GM in decades. No expectations to manage except for performance, and there the Pontiac Monaro would excel. The success of this car would give Lutz & Co. the courage to invest in a retro-style GTO (a la the 2005 Mustang) a few years down the line, if they were so inclined.

I really think they stepped in their dicks with this one. And as a big downside, it could mean the end of Lutz's experiment with RWD performance.

But I love my 2004 GTO.

urbanredneck · #2 05-08-2004, 08:57 AM

This is of course assuming it really is a flop and many folks are suggesting. It sure smells like a flop to me. I live in Orange County, CA, a big metropolitan area with lots of car enthusiasts and money sloshing around, and my 2004 GTO is the only one I have ever seen on the road.

I applaud Bob Lutz's decision to import the Holden Monaro. I wrote a letter to GM about four or five years ago asking that they import the Holden Ute SS, and insisting that while GM lost me as a customer a long time ago, a new El Camino would bring me back onto the lot. Well, I never got that new El Camino (it's okay, I have a '66), but the GTO did indeed make me a GM customer again.

The 2004 GTO is a fantastic car: ask anyone who has driven one. So why isn't it doing better?

To put it simply, I believe they should never have called it a GTO.

Time after time I have heard people say of the new car, "That's the new GTO? That's not a GTO," then not even look any closer at the specs. The styling is all wrong, not so much for a modern performance coupe, but for a car you badge as a GTO. People are so put off by it they don't even look any more closely to make the connections ("Whoa, that's a Corvette coupe!") that would make them more interested in the car.

I bought the car because of the specs. I don't give a toss what they call it. I'm not crazy about how it looks, but I suspect it will grow on me. So GM got a new customer in me, but I am a pretty weird guy.

This is becoming a big marketing failure.

What should GM have done? Classic sales technique: manage customer expectations. They probably thought they were doing that by badging a new GTO which performs better on any measure than the original GTO, but they failed with styling. Here's what I think GM should have done with the car:

1. Introduce it as the 2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, or 2004 Impala. GM has already got folks used to the idea that modern Monte Carlos and Impalas look horrible. What if for 2004 the Impala or Monte Carlo was to be a real RWD muscle car? No one would care about the looks anymore (and in any case as bland as the 2004 GTO's styling is, it still looks a lot better than a late model Impala or Monte Carlo). They would fly off the lots.

However, I can see where perhaps a high performance coupe like the Monaro might not have fit whatever market niche GM has assigned to the Impala or Monte Carlo. Also, I gather that GM is trying to remake Pontiac as some kind of performance division. So if the car HAD to be a Pontiac, I would have proposed:

2. Import the car into the US as the Pontiac Monaro, a completely new model no one has ever heard of which is nonetheless the most exciting new sport coupe introduced by GM in decades. No expectations to manage except for performance, and there the Pontiac Monaro would excel. The success of this car would give Lutz & Co. the courage to invest in a retro-style GTO (a la the 2005 Mustang) a few years down the line, if they were so inclined.

I really think they stepped in their dicks with this one. And as a big downside, it could mean the end of Lutz's experiment with RWD performance.

But I love my 2004 GTO.

70455RA · #3 05-08-2004, 09:13 AM

I don't think they should have called it a gto either.I think it would have made a great gp with three seats in the rear. Also welcome to perf. years. I thought it was funny you bought the gto and don't really care for the looks of it. I bought my cobra and I'm not crazy about the looks of it but the acceleration makes up for that.

Goathead · #4 05-08-2004, 09:38 AM

To put it simply, I believe they should never have called it a GTO.

Must be my first cousin...

The Who · #5 05-08-2004, 10:51 AM

the 2004 grand prix looks a lot better then the 2004 GTO.

svede1212 · #6 05-08-2004, 05:19 PM

Ya, welcome to Past Years, the place where the people on the 2004 GTO board hate the 2004 GTO and post it ad-nausium. Most of course haven't bought one, many have never driven one either and some, with an eye for lost youth, think the old goat was some sort of sacred relic.Your suggestions my have some merrit but you have to remember that whatever they called it, by agreement with the UAW and production capacities, they could only make 18,000 and in fact this year several thousand less than that.
a flop? depends on your definiton. if there are gobs of them left at the start of the new model year then maybe. if they have to offer rebates to move them then we can call most of the cars out there flops because a lot of models have them. if it fails to delite YOUR driving senses then it is a flop for sure. By all means take a look at the posts here. you'll find scant of actual 2004 GTO experience but a lot of the "mythical" past.

juliod · #7 05-08-2004, 06:29 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Import the car into the US as the Pontiac Monaro <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That probably would have been a good idea. In Australia they have a Monaro GTO (and GTS) that are special upgraded models. They could have done that here too.

They couldn't have brought it in as a Chevrolet because Pontiac desperately needed a new car after the loss of the Firebird.

And a GTO that can be beat badly by a Cobra is not attractive.

DanZ

Bunz53 · #8 05-08-2004, 06:55 PM

Who cares about the success of the car in sales besides Pontiac. If you don't own stock in the company, why do you care. Apparently the only folks who actually like this car love it, because they are the ones who either bought it or want it. This car has evryone hate it, which I love. I means I will have a unique car. This was not my reason to buy it, but I'll take any additional pleasure that I can. Sorry all you old GOAT guys. I was never partial to that car. I am only 33, so I was too young for the muscle car era, but the car just doesn't float my boat. The Judge was a neat car, but the appearance 64, 65 is not one that I feel is very impressive. I know this is a new time, and it seems awfully funny to me. The original car was not very much to look at, niether is this one. The issue is , they both hauled ass compared to there competition. The old guys don't need to like my GOAT. Guess what? I'm not really going to care for there old GOATS. It's like your wife. Other people may ask you why you love her, you just know why. Don't drive too fast unless you got the cash.

KVman389 · #9 05-09-2004, 03:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Bunz53:
Who cares about the success of the car in sales besides Pontiac. If you don't own stock in the company, why do you care. Apparently the only folks who actually like this car love it, because they are the ones who either bought it or want it. This car has evryone hate it, which I love. I means I will have a unique car. This was not my reason to buy it, but I'll take any additional pleasure that I can. Sorry all you old GOAT guys. I was never partial to that car. I am only 33, so I was too young for the muscle car era, but the car just doesn't float my boat. The Judge was a neat car, but the appearance 64, 65 is not one that I feel is very impressive. I know this is a new time, and it seems awfully funny to me. The original car was not very much to look at, niether is this one. The issue is , they both hauled ass compared to there competition. The old guys don't need to like my GOAT. Guess what? I'm not really going to care for there old GOATS. It's like your wife. Other people may ask you why you love her, you just know why. Don't drive too fast unless you got the cash. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Never mind, it's not worth responding to.

Goat luver · #10 05-09-2004, 04:19 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Bunz53:
Who cares about the success of the car in sales besides Pontiac. If you don't own stock in the company, why do you care. Apparently the only folks who actually like this car love it, because they are the ones who either bought it or want it. This car has evryone hate it, which I love. I means I will have a unique car. This was not my reason to buy it, but I'll take any additional pleasure that I can. Sorry all you old GOAT guys. I was never partial to that car. I am only 33, so I was too young for the muscle car era, but the car just doesn't float my boat. The Judge was a neat car, but the appearance 64, 65 is not one that I feel is very impressive. I know this is a new time, and it seems awfully funny to me. The original car was not very much to look at, niether is this one. The issue is , they both hauled ass compared to there competition. The old guys don't need to like my GOAT. Guess what? I'm not really going to care for there old GOATS. It's like your wife. Other people may ask you why you love her, you just know why. Don't drive too fast unless you got the cash. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Couldn't have put it better myself.

This GTO is by far the best muscle car I have ever owned.... and I have had quite a few!
Performance wise it blows all the others away.

urbanredneck · #11 05-09-2004, 04:26 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by ozzy:
This GTO is by far the best muscle car I have ever owned.... and I have had quite a few!
Performance wise it blows all the others away. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what makes its poor acceptance so surprising.

I guess people really are shallow and obsessed with appearance over substance.

Big Injun · #12 05-09-2004, 10:29 PM

Well...

I just spent the last week behind the wheel of Jim Wangers' '04 GTO. To drive the new GTO is to love it!

I was out with the professionals of AMCI on Wednesday while they were performing acceleration tests on the car; 0 – 60 MPH ET, 1/4 mile ET and MPH. For now I’ll just say that this bone stock GTO out performed most of the magazine testing already reported. I also got to run the car on the test grounds and ran the car up to nearly 130 MPH rowing through the gears, barking the tires going into fourth gear...what fun.

I have driven a few quick cars in my time and this is a great performer stop light to stop light or lock to lock on a mountain road…it is a lot of fun. The car is what it is. If you don’t like it being called a GTO because it does not look like your (or my) old goat, that is each one’s prerogative. But from a pure performance standpoint it represents all and more of what the GTO stands for...pavement pounding performance.

jwmbishop · #13 05-11-2004, 02:04 PM

SAy what you want about the car. I look at it from simple math. They are making 18000 of them. With 7 colors (four of those have a choice of 2 different interiors) and 2 choices in transmissions this means that there are 18 different combos or 1000 of each - If the options are divided equally - which being a marketing man you KNOW there are more Black, Red, Dark blue and white than there are the other colors so by all means my Barbados Blue with 6 speed is at worst ONE OF A THOUSAND. It looks and drives great now but when parked next to my 72 Nova SS 396, 75 Hurst Olds, 78 Silver Ann. Vette, 85 Buick Grand National Turbo, 02 Caddy DHS Centennial Edition and 03 AM General H2 (all of which I am the original owner - none of which have had any bodywork or major modifications and are under 50k mileage) it makes quite an impact. I am only fifty so can look forward to seeing all of these great vehicles return more to my children when they inherit them than I ever paid for them. Would love now to have a 64 GTO but the appreciation has already occured at OVER 1000% so will not be in my mid risk portfolio anytime soon.

phendee · #14 05-13-2004, 08:10 PM

One of the main reasons you don't see a lot of GTO's is because they are not that readily available. My dealer had two. I just bought the Yellow Jacket 6 speed. This car rocks.
The old style GTO's rocked, so what the hell is the big deal about calling it a GTO. Who said it has to look like the old ones. For those of you who do not have a GTO, find one and drive it. You won't give a rats ass what they call it because this car for the money can kick ass
and take names. It opens a big can of whoop ass on the competition. Chill out about the name and enjoy this beast! Later.

EBJudge · #15 05-14-2004, 07:59 AM

Yellow Jacket:
I see that this is your first post.
Welcome to PY!
I've looked at the one that each of the two dealers in our area have had. One is a Silver w/Red int. and the other is a Black/Black and both are A4's

, I got to check out the Silver one pretty good, but couldn't test drive it. (It hadn't been unpacked yet and the gauges weren't hooked up) It's a very nice car!
Both dealers still have them, but we need to get a bigger vehicle this year (2+2 is too few!) so a GTO is out of the question. Maybe next year.
I think that a lot of the complaints about naming it a GTO is based on styling (no hood scoops, for one) and space (2+2 vs. 5-6 seater, and very small trunk). It's really more like a Firebird than a GTO, IMO. Not a bad thing, just an interesting point, I'd still get it if I could, and might next year. Styling is subjective, but how are you going to get the slicks to the track?

The only test drives I've done this year are a Safari and a Montana.

Oh, well at least it's for the wife's daily driver, not mine.

FLORIT · #16 05-19-2004, 08:34 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>...<snip>...Styling is subjective, but how are you going to get the slicks to the track?...<snip>... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funny you should mention that. I have engineered a solution to that very problem. By removing the trunk floor, the spare, and the jack, I can stand up two 245/45/17 Nitto 555R tires mounted on the stock wheels. This leaves room on the sides for my (small) floor jack, two jack stands, and a (small) toolbox. I can drive to the track on my 18” street wheels (if they ever get here!) and change out to the drag radials at the track. When this “pit stall in the trunk” mod is complete, I’ll be posting pics. I’m trying to decide how to dress up the trunk. Should I paint it or install carpet or install insulation?

Minimal advertising, high dealer mark ups, and unpopular styling are all contributing factors to the GTO’s poor sales. Lack of performance cannot be a factor, EXCEPT that some dealer’s are limiting or even refusing test drives. That’s just nuts, because you really have to drive this car to appreciate its value.

The 2004 GTO is not, however, a “top performer.” Cobra’s, Vette’s, BMW M series, Mercedes CLK series… they all outperform the GTO. Even the ’04 Mach 1 is a “dead even” match. But considering the “bang for your buck” equation, the GTO is a great value. It is roomy, comfortable, handles well, and has plenty of power to play with. It is also very “upgradeable” and probably more “owner friendly” than any of those others. I mean this is a car any shade tree mechanic can actually WORK on. I’ve changed my own oil and changed my own plugs and wires. Even my ’95 Grand Am requires a partial tear down to change the plugs.

I’ve said this before. Anyone who doesn’t like the GTO because of its appearance is entitled to that opinion. Anyone who doesn’t like the GTO because of its performance probably hasn’t driven one. And anyone who doesn’t like the GTO because of its price tag does not see the outstanding overall value the GTO offers.

HUMBLER · #17 05-19-2004, 12:02 PM

Amen to the dealers not allowing test drives, a salesman made the comment to me after I asked his supervisor about a test drive, "you can go test drive a 60000 Mercedes but he won't let you drive a GTO, doesn't make sense." NO CHIT!

Goat luver · #18 05-19-2004, 05:26 PM

Amen to the dealers not allowing test drives, a salesman made the comment to me after I asked his supervisor about a test drive, "you can go test drive a 60000 Mercedes but he won't let you drive a GTO, doesn't make sense." NO CHIT!

As an owner of a 2004 GTO I say it is a wise decision for the dealers not to allow random test drives.
Reason:
Would you like to buy a "new" GTO that has been "tested to the limit" by someone that has has no intention of buying it but just wants to see "what it can do"?.

The dealers have the right to check you out to see if you are serious or not, in fact in my area you must be pre-qualified financially before they will let you out on the road. In my oppinion that is a good thing.

I know they could set aside one car for test drives... but who would want to buy it after 50 or so test drives.... not me!

HUMBLER · #19 05-20-2004, 05:02 AM

My only thought on that is they could have at least one that is test driven and they could always ride along to prevent the "tested to the limit" scenario. They know something that I don't because to be that tight and still have the $5000 LOA on them, I don't get it. Did I mention that the LOA was off the cars for awhile and now it is back on? Odd?

Also, "seeing what it can do" is what this car is all about. Pontiac needs to let the people know because pictures, commercials, movies, shows and articles don't seem to be working!

70455RA · #20 05-20-2004, 05:22 AM

I read of one cobra guy w/3000 miles on his car. He had the dealer make a list of warrenty work that had been done on his car. Foud out it had a new engine put in at 80 miles and he bought it with 112 miles. Evidently tested past the limit.