 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / July 2007Semi OT: Domestics take another hit in market share
It looks like the domestic automakers still can't stop the bleeding. Maybe I am being too much of a pessimist but things are looking worse for GM, Ford and, to a lesser extent, Chrysler. One thing I noticed in this article is how Toyota's Tundra sales are increasing and Chevy's full size truck sales were down 25% compared to June 2006. IMO, Toyota is looking to rip the heart out of the Big Three by putting substantial resources behind their full size truck sales. Here's the article: Japan car makers lift US market share By Bernard Simon in Toronto Published: July 3 2007 20:07 | Last updated: July 3 2007 20:07 Japanese car makers took another sizable bite out of the US market share of their Detroit-based rivals last month, thanks to their strength in small and mid-sized cars and their relatively low dependence on the car-hire industry. Toyota, Honda and Nissan reported sales increases of 10.2 per cent, 11.5 per cent and 22.7 per cent respectively compared with June 2006. ADVERTISEMENT By contrast, General Motors’ light-vehicle sales tumbled by 21.3 per cent. “It was a pretty tough month for us”, said Paul Ballew, GM’s normally upbeat sales analyst. Ford reported an 8.1 per cent decline, and Chrysler a drop of 1.4 per cent. There was one more selling day last month than in June 2006. Both GM and Ford ascribed their declines partly to intentional cutbacks in low-margin sales to the car-rental industry. The two companies reduced daily-rental sales by a combined 181,000 units between January and June from a year earlier. Mr Ballew described overall market conditions as “challenging”, owing to the spike in fuel prices and the housing slump, especially in California and Florida. Mr Ballew estimated that industry sales were about 6.5 per cent lower in the first half of 2007 than a year earlier. Buyers are continuing to migrate from big sport-utility vehicles and trucks to smaller crossover vehicles and passenger cars. Crossovers look like SUVs but are built on car platforms. Nissan’s performance underlined the sharp shift in buying patterns. While its car sales surged by 55 per cent, SUVs and pick-up trucks contracted by more than 10 per cent. Ford’s crossover sales were 83 per cent higher last month than a year earlier. Another consolation for Ford is a steady revival of its luxury Lincoln brand, with retail sales rising for the ninth month in a row. Total Lincoln sales were 14.5 per cent higher in the first six months compared with January-June 2006. Industry sales last month were buoyed by discounts and other incentives. According to Edmunds.com, an online car pricing service, the six biggest carmakers all lifted incentives last month. While Toyota’s average incentives of $1,308 per vehicle are still far below those of its Detroit-based rivals, they have jumped by more than a third in the past year. Demand for the Tundra pick-up truck more than doubled last month, helped by perks totaling as much as $3,500 per vehicle. Toyota has described the Tundra, which arrived in dealerships last winter, as its most important vehicle launch in half a century. Mr Ballew said that GM had been surprised by the extent of its rivals’ incentives for full-size trucks. Sales of the Chevrolet Silverado, one of the Tundra’s main rivals, slid by more than a quarter last month." http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html Drove by the Pontiac dealer lot a couple of days ago and they had rows of SUVs just sitting there. >It looks like the domestic automakers still can't stop the bleeding. >Maybe I am being too much of a pessimist but things are looking worse [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] > >http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html This is the result of the domestics putting nearly all their R&D and marketing eggs in the SUV basket. They have as much foresight as I do without contacts or glasses. Say about 2 feet. > Drove by the Pontiac dealer lot a couple of days ago and they had rows > of SUVs just sitting there. [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] >> >> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html Hi Mike! The Big 3's problem is they have forever lost an entire generation of buyers -- the current 25-40 age group. (Most won't even consider a domestic.) They saw their parents get taken after buying inferior domestic models and were preached at/heard [from their parents] for years 'I'll never buy another GM, Ford or Chrysler product again'. On top of this, the Big 3 lost the youth market by not investing in entry level cars & entry-level performance cars. So instead of growing up worshiping Trans Am pony cars this generation grew up craving Evo's, Skylines, turbo DSMs and Supras. The result: the Big-3's market share will continue to slide for years to come. To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: 1) Heavily invest, and keep investing in, very GOOD entry-level cars. And then offer hotted-up perfromance models of these cars. Letting the Focus age, discontinuing the Neon/SRT-4, and not offering a competitive Cobalt is a huge mistake. 2) Make [more] desirable performance cars -- i.e. new Mustang and Corvette. 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. Cadillac is doing it, but where is Lincoln and Chrysler? 4) And, of course, make excellent "American" sedans. Chrysler's LX sedans pointed the way, but the Big-3 also need a RWD Impala and Ford sedan -- some good red, white and blue alternatives to the Japanese offerings. I suggest they read the Harley Davidson play book. Patrick > It looks like the domestic automakers still can't stop the bleeding. > Maybe I am being too much of a pessimist but things are looking worse [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] > > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html > Hi Mike! > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Skylines, turbo DSMs and Supras. The result: the Big-3's market share > will continue to slide for years to come. What I hear from people in the know at Toyota is the domestics leveraged themselves too far when buying other automakers and fringe businesses. They ignored their car lineup and now don't have the capital or repeat customer base to stage a meaningful come back. Toyota knows their customers and target markets then delivers what they will buy. They don't get distracted by unnecessary acquisitions. They also don't ignore their car line for years on end to push SUVs on their customers. The domestics handed the imports this part of the business for a decade and now they are seeing the results of this. Now guess what? The imports are going after the full sized SUV/truck market with a vengeance to deliver the coups de grace to Ford and GM. > To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Letting the Focus age, discontinuing the Neon/SRT-4, and not offering > a competitive Cobalt is a huge mistake. They don't have the capital for a broad based reinvention of their entire lineup. IMO, they also don't have the marketing savvy for pulling it off. > 2) Make [more] desirable performance cars -- i.e. new Mustang and > Corvette. It helps but it is bread and butter vehicles like the Camry, Taurus, F150 that pays the bills and generates profits. > 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. > > Cadillac is doing it, but where is Lincoln and Chrysler? This helps too but it doesn't pay the bills and increase overall market share, IMO. > 4) And, of course, make excellent "American" sedans. Chrysler's LX > sedans pointed the way, but the Big-3 also need a RWD Impala and Ford > sedan -- some good red, white and blue alternatives to the Japanese > offerings. I suggest they read the Harley Davidson play book. Bingo! Ford needs to concentrate of bringing a new Taurus to market that redefines the segment like the first one they offered. Then they need something like the old Escort. It wasn't pretty but they sold them by the truck load because it was what sold. it seems like the domestics have given up the fight for market share. They think there is a place for them as a niche builder and they are sadly mistaken, IMO. > Patrick > [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] >> >> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html > NoOptio...@aol.com wrote: > > The Big 3's problem is they have forever lost an entire generation of > > buyers -- the current 25-40 age group. (Most won't even consider a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Skylines, turbo DSMs and Supras. The result: the Big-3's market share > > will continue to slide for years to come. > What I hear from people in the know at Toyota is the domestics leveraged > themselves too far when buying other automakers and fringe businesses. > They ignored their car lineup and now don't have the capital or repeat > customer base to stage a meaningful come back. Toyota knows their > customers and target markets then delivers what they will buy. They > don't get distracted by unnecessary acquisitions. That was only a piece of it. A large part was the huge concessions to the union -- few paid as well as Ford, GM and Chrysler. > They also don't > ignore their car line for years on end to push SUVs on their customers. While the domestics certainly went overboard relying on the lucrative SUV/truck market, they certainly did not "push SUVs on their customers". Customers were demanding those big rigs. > The domestics handed the imports this part of the business for a > decade and now they are seeing the results of this. Now guess what? > The imports are going after the full sized SUV/truck market with a > vengeance to deliver the coups de grace to Ford and GM. They're trying. The Titan didn't score as big as Nissan had hoped, but maybe the Tundra could do better if it doesn't have any more recall issues. > > To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > entire lineup. IMO, they also don't have the marketing savvy for > pulling it off. Agreed. And I must add it's sad they don't know the youth market. > > 2) Make [more] desirable performance cars -- i.e. new Mustang and > > Corvette. > It helps but it is bread and butter vehicles like the Camry, Taurus, > F150 that pays the bills and generates profits. Yes they do, but they also have to offer "dream cars"/image cars -- cars that appeal to the youth market. Toyota realized that and introduced Scion. > > 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. > > Cadillac is doing it, but where is Lincoln and Chrysler? > This helps too but it doesn't pay the bills and increase overall market > share, IMO. They help like Lexus does. > > 4) And, of course, make excellent "American" sedans. Chrysler's LX > > sedans pointed the way, but the Big-3 also need a RWD Impala and Ford > > sedan -- some good red, white and blue alternatives to the Japanese > > offerings. I suggest they read the Harley Davidson play book. > Bingo! Ford needs to concentrate of bringing a new Taurus to market > that redefines the segment like the first one they offered. Then they > need something like the old Escort. It wasn't pretty but they sold them > by the truck load because it was what sold. Personally, I think the Focus was the best entry level ever offered by the Big 3. But Ford made the mistake of letting it age without significant upgrades/redesign. > it seems like the domestics > have given up the fight for market share. They think there is a place > for them as a niche builder and they are sadly mistaken, IMO. At this point, I can see at least one of them going under and the parts being sold off. Patrick > >> It looks like the domestic automakers still can't stop the bleeding. > >> Maybe I am being too much of a pessimist but things are looking worse [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] > > >>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html >> NoOptio...@aol.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > That was only a piece of it. A large part was the huge concessions to > the union -- few paid as well as Ford, GM and Chrysler. The UAW, GM and Ford are all circling the drain while they have each other in a strangle hold. Chrysler will probably go down with them. I think GM might be the only one to survive this whole mess. >> They also don't >> ignore their car line for years on end to push SUVs on their customers. > > While the domestics certainly went overboard relying on the lucrative > SUV/truck market, they certainly did not "push SUVs on their > customers". Customers were demanding those big rigs. True. The just quit fighting for those customers that wanted to buy cars. >> The domestics handed the imports this part of the business for a >> decade and now they are seeing the results of this. Now guess what? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > but maybe the Tundra could do better if it doesn't have any more > recall issues. The thing with the Japanese automakers is they will keep trying until they score a hit. Toyota is doing it with the Tundra. Mark my words, in 3-5 years they will have a substantial portion of the full size truck market. >>> To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: >>> 1) Heavily invest, and keep investing in, very GOOD entry-level cars. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Agreed. And I must add it's sad they don't know the youth market. Ford got a good start with the Focus and just gave up. I swear they must be brain dead over at Ford's marketing department. >>> 2) Make [more] desirable performance cars -- i.e. new Mustang and >>> Corvette. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > cars that appeal to the youth market. Toyota realized that and > introduced Scion. Toyota seems to do just fine though without a stable of dream cars. I will tell you though that they are cleaning up with the Scion in the youth market. They spend a lot all the way down to the dealer level to keep kids interested in the brand. I was impressed with what they offer for around $15k-$17k. Plus they have set prices for each model and trim level. There is no haggling on price so the dealers can't gouge the buyers. It builds loyalty and gives the kids a very good car at a decent price. The dealer makes just a few hundred dollars on a Scion sale. Plus, Toyota has one hell of an after market parts catalog for those cars. All the way from bling to serious blowers. >>> 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > They help like Lexus does. The thing is though Lexus buyers were likely previous Toyota owners and not vice versa. Ford never gets the customer initially to move them up to a Lincoln. Someone that can only afford a Taurus or a Fusion probably doesn't care how good the Lincoln or Mercury brand might be. IMO, they are two different markets but Ford sucks in both of them. >>> 4) And, of course, make excellent "American" sedans. Chrysler's LX >>> sedans pointed the way, but the Big-3 also need a RWD Impala and Ford [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the Big 3. But Ford made the mistake of letting it age without > significant upgrades/redesign. To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been named the "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off their bread and butter brand names like the Taurus, Escort, Focus, Contour, Probe etc. is one of the biggest marketing blunders of all time. Especially the Taurus brand. That car had one hell of a customers base that they just threw in the garbage. At least now they are trying to correct the error. We have a 2003 Sable with the Duratech engine and loaded with options and I can say without hesitation that it is a great car. Especially, having paid less than $20k for it. It isn't a Lexus or Acura but considering the price it has more than given us our money's worth. There is no reason the 500 couldn't have been the "All New Taurus". >> it seems like the domestics >> have given up the fight for market share. They think there is a place >> for them as a niche builder and they are sadly mistaken, IMO. > > At this point, I can see at least one of them going under and the > parts being sold off. If I had to make a prediction today I say that only GM will survive as an independent business entity. > Patrick > [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] >>>> of the Tundra's main rivals, slid by more than a quarter last month." >>>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html >>> NoOptio...@aol.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > in 3-5 years they will have a substantial portion of the full size > truck market. The Tundra was the only truck that came away with a 'Good' rating in the safety tests. >>>> To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: >>>> 1) Heavily invest, and keep investing in, very GOOD entry-level [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > a Scion sale. Plus, Toyota has one hell of an after market parts > catalog for those cars. All the way from bling to serious blowers. And _that's_ where the big dollars are. The Big 3 still don't realize that aftermarket is big profit. That and service. If a dealer's got a great service department, it feeds both sales and service. >>>> 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. >> [quoted text clipped - 108 lines] >>>>> quarter last month." >>>>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html >>>> NoOptio...@aol.com wrote: >>>>> The Big 3's problem is they have forever lost an entire generation [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > The Tundra was the only truck that came away with a 'Good' rating in the > safety tests. Toyota stumbled around with their full size truck in the beginning thinking it was just an extension of the compact line. Then they figured out what sells big trucks..... testosterone. They have a high quality vehicle, a great marketing strategy and and a fantastic reputation as an automaker. I tell you, Ford had better get ready for one hell of a fight with them in this segment of the market. Toyota has their cross hairs set dead on the F150 and they intend to put a bullet right between its eyes. IMO, this is one fight Ford can't afford to lose. >>>>> To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: >>>>> 1) Heavily invest, and keep investing in, very GOOD entry-level [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > that aftermarket is big profit. That and service. If a dealer's got a > great service department, it feeds both sales and service. Ford started the same thing with the Focus. Remember the V-8 conversion for that car. It was killer. They had the SVT Focus that got great reviews and ran like a scalded rabbit. Most of these kids can't afford to put a blower on their econobox but they do like to know the option exists. Like I said, Ford's marketing department must be brain dead and on a ventilator. >>>>> 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. >>>>> Cadillac is doing it, but where is Lincoln and Chrysler? [quoted text clipped - 99 lines] >>>>>> quarter last month." >>>>>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html >>>>> NoOptio...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> The Big 3's problem is they have forever lost an entire [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > bullet right between its eyes. IMO, this is one fight Ford can't > afford to lose. Not only Ford, but everyone else as well. Dodge and GM need to wise up right along with Ford. Lesson to be learned: Toyota did their homework, studied, and came away with a straight "A" product. That being said, however, I think they could improve the interior ergonomics a bit more. >>>>>> To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: >>>>>> 1) Heavily invest, and keep investing in, very GOOD entry-level [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > conversion for that car. It was killer. They had the SVT Focus that > got great reviews and ran like a scalded rabbit. Good example, yes, but they still need to get back to basics. IMO OEMs should do what the successful aftermarket companies are doing, but do it better. The whole idea is for OEMs to make customers to think of going to the dealer for aftermarket, not independents. > Most of these kids > can't afford to put a blower on their econobox but they do like to > know the option exists. Like I said, Ford's marketing department must > be brain dead and on a ventilator. Not only Ford's, but other American makers' as well. IMO they're all ignoring a huge profit segment in factory aftermarket. >>>>>> 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. >>>>>> Cadillac is doing it, but where is Lincoln and Chrysler? [quoted text clipped - 100 lines] >>>>>>> by more than a quarter last month." >>>>>>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html >>>> <snip> >> Toyota stumbled around with their full size truck in the beginning [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Not only Ford, but everyone else as well. Dodge and GM need to wise up > right along with Ford. I think Toyota knows that if they beat Ford then GM and Dodge is just a mop-up exercise. > Lesson to be learned: Toyota did their homework, studied, and came away > with a straight "A" product. That being said, however, I think they > could improve the interior ergonomics a bit more. IMO, things like minor deficiencies in ergonomics won't be a deal breaker for these type of buyers. Another area where Toyota is making inroads is with construction companies. It is no longer concidered a taboo to use non-domestic heavy duty and full sized trucks. It has already happened with heavy earth moving equipment but Catepillar isn't nearly as vulnerable as Ford and GM are at present in the truck market. >>>>>>><snip> >> Ford started the same thing with the Focus. Remember the V-8 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > better. The whole idea is for OEMs to make customers to think of going > to the dealer for aftermarket, not independents. You think Ford would have huge experience and inside know regarding the potential of after market parts sales from selling the Mustang for over 40 years. It is the king of after market parts. I also thing Ford needs a mid size and econo size car that can sell close to 300k units per year to remain a viable major player in the US market. They have this, for now, in the SUV and truck segments. They desperately need it in the car segment. >> Most of these kids >> can't afford to put a blower on their econobox but they do like to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Not only Ford's, but other American makers' as well. IMO they're all > ignoring a huge profit segment in factory aftermarket. You know, I blame it on lack of long term vision. Ford, Chevy, Dodge etc. will introduce a car and put all kinds of teasers out there about after markets parts and then never deliver. Then before you know it the car is no longer produced and the next new thing is being touted. Although this is the big problem with the domestic automakers, lack of long term strategy and vision. >>>>>>><big snip> > To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been named the > "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off their bread and butter [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > has more than given us our money's worth. There is no reason the 500 > couldn't have been the "All New Taurus". Well, it is. http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/taurus/ dwight >> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been named the >> "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off their bread and butter [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/taurus/ I knew they were bringing it back. I wonder how successful it will be having been off the market for two years. I also wonder how many sales it cost Ford marketing the car branded as a 500 instead of the Taurus for those two years. Now they need a good, slightly upscale, rear drive car called the Thunderbird. They also need to pick a name for their economy model and stick with it for a few decades. >>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been named the >>> "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off their bread and [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > called the Thunderbird. They also need to pick a name for their economy > model and stick with it for a few decades. Ford has way too many models, if you look at Edmonds, they should narrow it down. >>>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been named the >>>> "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off their bread and [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Ford has way too many models, if you look at Edmonds, they should narrow it > down. They have changed model names so often that I can't list, from memory, most of them. >>>>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been >>>>> named the "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > They have changed model names so often that I can't list, from memory, > most of them. These are a bit old, but nonetheless worthwhile to check out: http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4600&id g=1&idi=1 http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4600&id g=1&idi=2 http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4600&id g=1&idi=3 http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4600&id g=1&idi=4 http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4600&id g=1&idi=5 http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4600&id g=1&idi=6 They need to make it for '08 and name it 'Galaxie'. >>>>>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been >>>>>> named the "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > They need to make it for '08 and name it 'Galaxie'. You know, it is a good looking car but if it had no badging on it I would swear it was the latest variant of the 300C. IMO, it isn't distinct enough to really grab buyers. Ford needs a car today that was as revolutionary as the Taurus was when it debuted. This car isn't close to being revolutionary. I really think Ford should make an economy car hybrid that can be operated as a totally electric car which can be charged overnight at home. Give it an all electric range of 200-300 miles with a small two or three cylinder gas engine that is used to run a generator and not drive the car via mechanical means. I think it would be a hit. They need to do something radical that catches everybody off guard. The technology exists to make this car today. NiMh batteries can get the job done and using the gas engine in conjunction with a generator saves a lot of space and weight for extra batteries. Damn, I wish I were in a position to pull the levers at Ford. I would make this car happen in 2-3 years. I tell you it would be a grand slam home run if done right and marketed properly. >>>>>>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been >>>>>>> named the "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > You know, it is a good looking car but if it had no badging on it I > would swear it was the latest variant of the 300C. It's got that 300C look from the side - the "chopped" look. The front looks horrible, and the back looks like something from GM. I like the 400 horsepower and RWD though. > IMO, it isn't > distinct enough to really grab buyers. Ford needs a car today that > was as revolutionary as the Taurus was when it debuted. This car > isn't close to being revolutionary. True, but it's about time Ford put out a RWD sedan with some decent horsepower. Of course, as usual, it's about two years too late. > I really think Ford should make an economy car hybrid that can be > operated as a totally electric car which can be charged overnight at [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > happen in 2-3 years. I tell you it would be a grand slam home run if > done right and marketed properly. There ya go, Mike! Sell everything and start a car company. JMC - Johnson Motor Company. I like it. >>>>>>>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been >>>>>>>> named the "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > There ya go, Mike! Sell everything and start a car company. JMC - > Johnson Motor Company. I like it. Sorry but I already invested all my wad in land development. Have you noticed the state of the housing market lately? I can't even start a lemonade stand at this point. ;) >>>>>>>>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been >>>>>>>>> named the "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] > noticed the state of the housing market lately? I can't even start a > lemonade stand at this point. ;) Yeah, tell me about it. Down here it's even worse due to the homeowner's tax situation. >>>>>>>>>> To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been >>>>>>>>>> named the "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] > Yeah, tell me about it. Down here it's even worse due to the > homeowner's tax situation. Yeah, there are many people that can't get close to the assessed value on their hose should they decide to sell it. I'm convinced that the only good news for the housing market is a recession. Although they aren't historically high, the interest need to drop 1-2 percentage points to turn things around and the only way that will happen is through economic recession. Regarding land/housing value, everything is a.s backwards now and it is not in sync with the general economy. Property taxes up here have doubled or tripled the last five years. > >> They also don't > >> ignore their car line for years on end to push SUVs on their customers. > > While the domestics certainly went overboard relying on the lucrative > > SUV/truck market, they certainly did not "push SUVs on their > > customers". Customers were demanding those big rigs. > True. The just quit fighting for those customers that wanted to buy cars. Yep, they put all their eggs in one basket -- SUV/truck market. The lure of big profits clouded their judgment. > >> The domestics handed the imports this part of the business for a > >> decade and now they are seeing the results of this. Now guess what? > >> The imports are going after the full sized SUV/truck market with a > >> vengeance to deliver the coups de grace to Ford and GM. > > They're trying. The Titan didn't score as big as Nissan had hoped, > > but maybe the Tundra could do better if it doesn't have any more > > recall issues. > The thing with the Japanese automakers is they will keep trying until > they score a hit. Toyota is doing it with the Tundra. Mark my words, > in 3-5 years they will have a substantial portion of the full size truck > market. That's a given. > >>> To cut the length of the slide, the Big-3 need to: > >>> 1) Heavily invest, and keep investing in, very GOOD entry-level cars. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >> entire lineup. IMO, they also don't have the marketing savvy for > >> pulling it off. > > Agreed. And I must add it's sad they don't know the youth market. > Ford got a good start with the Focus and just gave up. I swear they > must be brain dead over at Ford's marketing department. The thing that gets me is the Big-3 pay their strategy/marketing people big money, yet they are so far off the mark most times you got to wonder how these people keep their jobs. Hell, they could round a few of us up from this NG and we could do a [much] better job. > >>> 2) Make [more] desirable performance cars -- i.e. new Mustang and > >>> Corvette. > >> It helps but it is bread and butter vehicles like the Camry, Taurus, > >> F150 that pays the bills and generates profits. > > Yes they do, but they also have to offer "dream cars"/image cars -- > > cars that appeal to the youth market. Toyota realized that and > > introduced Scion. > Toyota seems to do just fine though without a stable of dream cars. While they have, you have to remember Toyota got where they are selling "reliability" & "quality". But as the overall marketplace quality and reliabiilty gap has shrunk substantially over the years, Toyota is starting to realize they need an infusion of excitement to keep the cash register ringing at the same/faster rate. And that's why we see the new Scion line, a more aggressive looking Camry, and soon the LF-A super car: http://autos.netscape.com/story/2006/05/08/toyota-supercar-to-be-unveiled-at-200 7-japanese-grand-prix/ Styling, appearance, image, performance are getting to be THE deciders with buyers -- reliable but bland isn't cutting it anymore. > I > will tell you though that they are cleaning up with the Scion in the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > sale. Plus, Toyota has one hell of an after market parts catalog for > those cars. All the way from bling to serious blowers. And if Ford would have been smart they would have done the same with the Focus > >>> 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. > >>> Cadillac is doing it, but where is Lincoln and Chrysler? > >> This helps too but it doesn't pay the bills and increase overall market > >> share, IMO. > > They help like Lexus does. > The thing is though Lexus buyers were likely previous Toyota owners and > not vice versa. Ford never gets the customer initially to move them up > to a Lincoln. Someone that can only afford a Taurus or a Fusion > probably doesn't care how good the Lincoln or Mercury brand might be. > IMO, they are two different markets but Ford sucks in both of them. But that's the thing. Bring them into the Ford fold with the Focus, after they get married and have a few kids they go to a Taurus, and once the kids go off to college they buy a Lincoln. Mercury and Mustangs should be for those with a few extra bucks. Mercury for those who can do a little better than a standard Ford and Mustang for kids who want better than a Focus and for the older guy who wants a hot rod. Though up until this year/in past couple years (pre '05) it was aging Focus, a rental car Taurus, a really old Mustang and very competitive pickup. > >>> 4) And, of course, make excellent "American" sedans. Chrysler's LX > >>> sedans pointed the way, but the Big-3 also need a RWD Impala and Ford > >>> sedan -- some good red, white and blue alternatives to the Japanese > >>> offerings. I suggest they read the Harley Davidson play book. > >> Bingo! Ford needs to concentrate of bringing a new Taurus to market > >> that redefines the segment like the first one they offered. Then they > >> need something like the old Escort. It wasn't pretty but they sold them > >> by the truck load because it was what sold. > > Personally, I think the Focus was the best entry level ever offered by > > the Big 3. But Ford made the mistake of letting it age without > > significant upgrades/redesign. > To be honest there is no reason the Fusion couldn't have been named the > "All New Focus". I still say that Ford killing off their bread and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Acura but considering the price it has more than given us our money's > worth. There is no reason the 500 couldn't have been the "All New Taurus". As you probably read later in this thread the Taurus [name] is back. > >> it seems like the domestics > >> have given up the fight for market share. They think there is a place [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > If I had to make a prediction today I say that only GM will survive as > an independent business entity. I agree, that's the safest bet. Patrick >>>> They also don't >>>> ignore their car line for years on end to push SUVs on their customers. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > to wonder how these people keep their jobs. Hell, they could round a > few of us up from this NG and we could do a [much] better job. I really chalk it up to arrogance and denial. They have underestimated the Japanese and American buyer's loyalty to domestic brands. They honestly believed we would buy American even to our detriment. I think that mentality exists even today in Ford, GM and the UAW. There is still a lot of denial in GM and Ford's corporate offices. >>>>> 2) Make [more] desirable performance cars -- i.e. new Mustang and >>>>> Corvette. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > why we see the new Scion line, a more aggressive looking Camry, and > soon the LF-A super car: The Scions aren't really all that exciting, IMO. They look good, run decent but Toyota delivers the car at the optimum price point for first time new car buyers. They give a lot of value for the price and the car will give mostly trouble free service to the buyer. Ford and GM have lost two consecutive generations to the Japanese. I really don't know how they get it back other than selling better cars for way less money. It will take at least a decade to win back any appreciable market share they have lost. > http://autos.netscape.com/story/2006/05/08/toyota-supercar-to-be-unveiled-at-200 7-japanese-grand-prix/ > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > And if Ford would have been smart they would have done the same with > the Focus Actually they did for a couple of years. Then they were too busy plotting the death of the Focus to bother with it anymore. >>>>> 3) Make very competitive top-tier cars. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > kids who want better than a Focus and for the older guy who wants a > hot rod. For this to work though it requires good entry level cars or what I call bread and butter vehicles. If they never get these buyers then they won't have then moving upscale later. Ford and GM have ignored car sales for so long I think they have forgotten how to play the game. > Though up until this year/in past couple years (pre '05) it was aging > Focus, a rental car Taurus, a really old Mustang and very competitive > pickup. >>>>> 4) And, of course, make excellent "American" sedans. Chrysler's LX >>>>> sedans pointed the way, but the Big-3 also need a RWD Impala and Ford [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > As you probably read later in this thread the Taurus [name] is back. I think it is a good move. They need a Thunderbird too. >>>> it seems like the domestics >>>> have given up the fight for market share. They think there is a place [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Patrick >It looks like the domestic automakers still can't stop the bleeding. >Maybe I am being too much of a pessimist but things are looking worse [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] > >http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f665075e-2996-11dc-a530-000b5df10621.html A point many seem to ignore is the Asian psyche. Asian business will project where they want to be in 50 to 100 years. American psyche is operating on a 10 to 15 year basis (possibly even less today). The Asians have the patience to progress slowly in order to achieve their goals, and all levels of the corporation are dedicated to those goals. So, if the plan is to surpass and wipe out American car manufacturing by the year 2075, they will have that plan mapped out in order to achieve it. Along the way, they have already planned for set backs or leaps forward, and are ready to adjust the plan accordingly. >> It looks like the domestic automakers still can't stop the bleeding. >> Maybe I am being too much of a pessimist but things are looking worse [quoted text clipped - 79 lines] > achieve it. Along the way, they have already planned for set backs or > leaps forward, and are ready to adjust the plan accordingly. I don't think this is something the Japanese have a monopoly on. Many American companies have the same long term vision the Japanese. I honestly think the Big Three have suffered from arrogance and denial for all their existence. However, I do think they are starting to understand the graveness of their position. They thought the overwhelming majority of the American public would buy their products from a pure patriotic standpoint. They didn't need to compete for American buyers in earnest like the Japanese have done since WWII. Ford and GM are finally getting the message that buyers don't care if they go bankrupt and will purchase cars that they desire no matter what the impact may be on the domestic brands. My guess is that Ford is now in a fight for its very survival. GM will be too if they don't turn things around in the next five years. Ford and GM are also going to have to ditch the UAW somehow. The UAW is willing to take down the whole domestic auto industry to keep the status quo even if it means their eventual demise. Anymore I'm not sure if it makes a difference if we buy a Toyota or a Ford. Ford has so much of its manufacturing done out of the USA and Toyota has so many assembly plants here that they both have the same overall effect on domestic jobs, IMO. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.