This is my point exactly. There are plenty of options (most for the better) for people, not just with GMC but with Buick, Pontiac, and Saab, within the realm of Chevy and Cadillac. And if there aren't, GM could easily modify option packages for Chevy trucks to make them more "GMC".... have a "luxury package" to add the chrome HVAC vents for Pete's sake if people are going to be that bitchy.
Scott's response to my suggestions is about what I expected to hear from him. Again, I'm not trying to get into a fight with you Scott, but I think if you sat back and looked at all the overlap between divisions that still exists (despite what Bob Lutz said a few years ago that "badge engineering" the GM way was gone for good), it's hard not to think about seriously strealining all your product.
Let's all take our beloved Camaro for example. I see on many forums people still angry that there isn't going to be a Pontiac Firebird/TA to coincide on the same platform. I, on the other hand, am extremely glad and absolutely elated there isn't. Badge engineering is bad. Overlap between the divisions is bad. And don't tell me about Toyota getting away with it because the way they can take one platform and make 10 different vehicles with it is a key - while the underpinnings may be based on the same platform, there is enough difference in style, design, engineering, handling, tuning, features, and overall shape that to 99% of even car enthusiasts no one really knows.
Let's be honest: A Silverado and a Sierra aren't fooling anyone. Neither is a G6 and an Aura. Or a Cobalt and a G5. See a trend here? A couple of hours with a screwdriver and I could interchange them all to confuse everyone
(reminds me of the 1980's Regal, Cutlass Supreme, and Grand Prix. You could mishmash those cars like crazy)
Seriously, you have to at least acknowledge the overlap was dragging the company down years ago, long before we had such a crisis.
I've been saying in my opinion that Chevy and Cadillac are all GM's needed since the late 1990's.