All the major high-end[*] compact point-and-shoots have been refreshed recently:
None of them have GPS built in. There's even retrenchment: the G15 announcement came right alongside the Canon S110 announcement, and they took GPS away relative to the S100.
This question would be unanswerable by outsiders if only some of these lacked the feature and we weren't seeing retrenchment. It seems the industry as a whole doesn't want this feature in that class of camera. Why? There must be an objective answer to the question.
I can think of many things it cannot be:
It can't be battery life. It's a feature you can turn off.
It can't be cost. We're talking about cameras costing up to US $800 here. Besides, many cheaper ultracompacts have the feature. The chips to do it have to be getting pretty cheap, too.
It can't be poor reception. A camera isn't going to perform any worse than a cell phone in this regard.
It can't be space constraints. We're talking about relatively large camera bodies here, several times the size of a smartphone.
I ask because I'm looking to replace a D-Lux 3. Every generation, I tell myself the feature I'm waiting for, the one that will push me to replace a perfectly fine and functional camera, is GPS. I've gotten very used to having automatic geotagging due to the past few generations of smartphones, and I'm tired of manually applying GPS tracklogs. More, I'm tired of forgetting to start the tracklogger app on my smartphone, then getting home and having to geotag my photos by hand.
It boggles my mind that this isn't a standard feature in 2012.
[*] High end compact = raw format, big sensor, fast lens, manual controls...