GMC's Purpose Can Be Boiled Down to One Word - Denali

by Steph Willems

Published: February 18th, 2017

gmc s purpose can be boiled down to one word denali

In the dark days of the recession, as General Motors was frantically attempting to save itself from the abyss, many thought it odd that the automaker’s GMC division was saved while a storied brand like Pontiac met its executioner. As for Saturn and Hummer, well, let’s just say far fewer tears were spilled over those deaths.

Clearly, GM saw long-term profitability in its carless brand — a prediction that has since panned out. From a low point in 2009, GMC sales doubled to 558,697 units by 2015. However, it isn’t the number of vehicles sold that’s the sweet spot for the automaker — it’s the number of GMCs sold in top-end Denali trim.

At GM’s utility brand, luxury versions of non-luxury vehicles are proving increasingly popular.

According to Motor Authority, Denali-badged vehicles now account for 25 percent of the brand’s sales. Not only does the brand enjoy the higher profits built into the price of a utility vehicle, it also nets the premium markup. No wonder GMC now offers Denali trim across its model range.

The trim first appeared on the flagship Yukon in 1999, but now can be found on lesser midsize Canyon pickups and the Terrain crossover. As such, Denali has become a de facto fourth brand in GM’s utility offerings, slotted above Chevrolet and GMC, and just below Cadillac. Greater profits come from the fact that the trim is just a big ol’ luxury appearance and convenience package, not an off-road package with piles of new hardware.

Two years ago, the trim accounted for 20 percent of the brand’s sales. It’s in GM’s best interests to boost that percentage ever higher.

While the brand plans to pretty much stay the course in the near future, one product mystery remains. GMC wants to muscle into the Jeep Wrangler’s territory with a small off-road SUV, though we’ve seen precious little evidence of it so far. That model could appear for the 2020 model year.

[Image: General Motors]

#GeneralMotors #GM #GMC #SUVs #Trucks

Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 112 comments

Philadlj on Feb 20, 2017

Is it just me, or has GM actually LEARNED a few things since the recession and bankruptcy? They are focusing on transaction prices, not market share; quality, not quantity, and reducing fleet sales. They're trying to get out of Europe, which will only get more unpredictable as the UK leaves (and if/when more countries leave) the EU, where they've never made money. They're still a strong contender in China. Every new model is a vast improvement over the previous ones, with actual effort put into the interiors and exteriors. And after a generation or so of overweight (if solid) models, those models' replacements were put on diets. They've beaten the Model 3 to market with the Bolt. Heck, they're even trying to pick up the US clean diesel ball VW dropped...and they're presumably NOT lying about the emissions.

Like Reply
Caboose on Feb 20, 2017

The strongest use case for the Denali trim are the 'Burb & 'Hoe... erm... Yukon XL & Yukon Denali. On those big family SUVs, the Denali trim is more than just "a big ol' appearance and trim package". It's also the cheapest way into the big engine. The 6.2 make those big trucks capable of getting up to speed in Interstate traffic.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?