C10/gmc Sierra Short Bed,awesome Condtion,hot Rod,baby Blue With Pear White Wrap on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Trucks and tidbits from GM's earnings report

General Motors announced this morning that 2018 was a good year for it financially, thanks in large part to the company's performance in North America, which was predicated, according to the company, on "strong pricing, surging crossover sales, successful execution of the company's full-size truck launch, growth of GM Financial earnings, and disciplined cost control." GM reported full-year income of $8.1 billion and EBIT-adjusted income of $11.8 billion. Crossover sales in 2018 were 1,034,808, an increase of 7 percent compared to 2017 deliveries. Throw in the body-on-frame SUVs and the ute number is a total 1,295,700. But let's face it: It is the trucks that really matter. The Chevy Silverado and Colorado, the GMC Sierra and Canyon. Altogether, GM sold 973,463 pickups in the U.S. in 2018. Although Ford gets bragging rights for F-Series sales, GM gets to point out that it has a greater aggregate number. An important factor regarding the trucks and the reported income is that during the last quarter, more than 90 percent of the new 2019 trucks were crew cabs (which have a higher sticker), and at GMC more than 70 percent were Denali and AT4 models (which have even higher stickers). According to reporting by Bloomberg, GM's pickup trucks combine for $65 billion in annual revenue. Clearly when the 2018 sales of the Silverado — 585,581— dwarf the combined sales of both Buick (206,863) and Cadillac combined (154,702), pickups are what matter to the overall health of the company in a way that it is difficult to otherwise achieve. The "disciplined cost control" is something that is very much in the public eye right now, as the company is taking out thousands of its workers, and there is still the "unallocated" plant situation and other plants that will remain under capacity. The numbers in GM's earnings report probably made Unifor members' heads explode in consternation, coming fresh off their Super Bowl ad: " GM, you may have forgotten our generosity, but we'll never forget your greed." But there are a couple of curiosities in the full GM earnings release. One is that so far as its autonomous efforts go, it mentions only that (1) in the first quarter of 2018 Cruise introduced a production-ready autonomous vehicle, and (2) Cruise attracted $5 billion in external capital from SoftBank and Honda. Not a whole lot of love for autonomy. Good thing they have the trucks to fund the program, to say nothing of the external capital.

General Motors and EVs: No stranger to firsts, but where's the leadership?

2015 is already shaping up to be the year of "affordable, 200-mile EV" concepts. Nissan and Tesla have each been talking about them for some time, the latter promising to unveil its Model 3 at the North American International Auto Show in January before balking when the time came. Instead, Chevrolet beat them all by unveiling the Bolt concept at the same event, followed shortly thereafter with suggestions of a 2016 launch – potentially offering the first nationwide EV with anything close to that range. It was the ballsiest EV-related move General Motors has made in a quarter century. But will it remain so? Exactly 25 years before the Bolt rolled up onto the turntable, then-Chairman Roger Smith unveiled GM's last ground-up EV concept, the even-more-unfortunately-named Impact, at the Los Angeles Auto Show in January 1990. A few months later, he surprised most of his colleagues by announcing its intended production in honor of Earth Day. It was the first modern foray into electric vehicles for the US by any automaker, one that was rewarded by the State of California with what is now known as the Zero Emissions Vehicle mandate. The program not only forced other automakers into competing with Roger's pet project, but inspired all of them to fight it like small children against bedtime. Some years later, the drivers themselves weighed in, with a biting documentary about that obstinance and the leadership it cost both GM and the country. Within months, GM was first back into the fray of plug-in vehicles. Many criticized the company for starting with a PHEV rather than jump straight back into EVs. The choice wasn't totally out of the blue – even EV1 was meant to be followed by a PHEV. And especially on the heels of Who Killed the Electric Car?, some skittishness was understandable: even a successful EV would invite a "we told you so" public reaction, underscoring their mistake in ending the EV1 program. If a new EV didn't do well, they'd be convicted in the public eye as serial killers. All while seeking a federal bailout. For all the flak, the resulting Chevy Volt was and is a better car than GM has ever gotten credit for. But the company seemed to grow weary of having to overcome its varied past, and while the current owners remain happy, much of the stakeholder and community engagement that so effectively built early goodwill and sales growth faded not long after launch. Marketing has been spotty in both consistency and effectiveness.

Chevy Bolt name just might get through US trademark office

UPDATE: GM told AutoblogGreen on June 1 that, "Our Chevrolet Legal team has been working closely with the USPT on the Chevrolet Bolt trademark. As of last week, our legal staff received consent from Yamaha to use the Bolt name. According to our legal team, our USPT application is back to active status." Also, it appears that GM has further trademarked Bolt EV and Chevrolet Bolt EV. Chevy wants to sell a 200-mile electric vehicle for around $35,000 in a few years. The Detroit automaker wants to call that car the Bolt, not to be confused with the company's other plug-in, the Chevy Volt. Unless something changes, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is going to crush GM's Bolt-flavored dreams. The USPTO has suspended GM's trademark application. The USPTO said in its suspension that there was a "likelihood of confusion" with another Bolt trademark, No. 4429759, which applies to a Bolt trademark filed by Yamaha on August 09, 2012. That's well before GM's effort to trademark the Bolt name in 2014. GM's application will remain suspended, the USPTO said, "until the earlier-filed referenced application(s) is either registered or abandoned." Maybe GM will use this setback to respond to the many criticisms of the Bolt name we've heard since it was first announced. There is another page on the USPTO's website that says GM's Bolt application is still live, but we assume that just hasn't been updated yet. Related Video: