![]() |
|
|
|||||||
| Register | Home | Forum | Active Topics | Media Gallery | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
GMI Staff Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SE Texas
Posts: 13,430
|
U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
Power Information Network Reports: Domestic Automakers Continue to Yield Market Share to Asian Automakers, Toyota with highest retail share in the industry
www.theautochannel.com WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif. - GM and Ford retail sales declined when compared to early January 2005 with GM down 28 percent and Ford down 25 percent in the first 15 days of January. DaimlerChrysler was also down 13 percent when compared to the same period in 2005. Among the nine multi-franchise new-vehicle manufacturers, Hyundai and Toyota have had the best retail performance thus far in January. Retail sales for Hyundai were up 19 percent and Toyota Motor retail sales were up 9 percent compared to the first half of January 2005, according to the Power Information Network (PIN), the industry's premier source for real-time automotive retail sales. In addition to the retail sales increase, Toyota had the highest retail share in the industry for the first 15 days of the month -- up 3.4 points versus a year ago to 18.8 percent. ![]() The domestic manufacturers follow Toyota with GM at 17.5 percent (down 4.2 points versus a year ago) and Ford Motor Company at 14.7 percent (down 2.8 points). DaimlerChrysler also saw a decline in the first 15 days of January to 12.8 percent (down 0.3 points). In contrast Honda, Nissan and Hyundai have all increased market share versus a year ago, with Honda at 12.3 percent (up 1.4 points), Nissan at 8.6 percent (up 0.7 point) and Hyundai at 5.7 percent (up 1.4 points). "The domestics continue to slip while the Asians gain ground," said Tom Libby, senior director of industry analysis at PIN. "To combat this trend, GM, for one, is counting on its aggressive price reductions, which just went into effect on the 11th." Full Article: http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...20/208012.html Also: http://www.wpbfnews.com/money/6462566/detail.html ![]() Last edited by Ming : 01-27-2006 at 06:21 PM. |
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |
Advertisement |
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
7.0 Liter LS7 V8
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: DC Metro Area
Drives: 58 Belvedere;
61 LeSabre; 96 Fleetwood; 07 SRX
Posts: 8,495
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
Chrysler is down? Oh well. Maybe they'll discount the Charger to where I can offset the resale value of the G6...
And it's nice to see Hyundai doing well. Too bad it doesn't seem to be at the complete expense of Toyota.
__________________
Used to own: 1959 Cadillac Series 62, 1960 AMC Rambler Six, 1998 Chevrolet Malibu, 2000 Saturn LS2, 2005 Chrysler 300C, 2006 Pontiac G6 GTP |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
GMI Staff Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SE Texas
Posts: 13,430
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
Quote:
I'm just amazed at the people who see this kind of news nationally and still decide to buy Toyota. If they are actually giving the home team a look first, then fine, but if not, it just seems suicidal if you're an engineer type and not looking for a minimum wage job on a Toyota factory line in Alabama or something. Before the Toyota guys here go nuts with that comment, its just my opinion, nothing moreI tend to actually not mind seeing Hyundai and the smaller fish do well. Competition is good when the field is diverse and balanced, I just don't like seeing GM and Ford toppled by Toyhondassan with all of the accompanying layoffs and exported engineering. Japan will always be the heart and home of Toyota, and the innovation and engineering will come from there, not from here --- so less jobs for us, time for me to get a 6-mat tatami apartment again in Tokyo... Last edited by Ming : 01-27-2006 at 11:48 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
4.4 Liter Supercharged Northstar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,394
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
I hope GM and Ford come back. But many, many people have been badly burned by these companies. I've personally been burned by both of them, GM back in the 1980s, Ford just a couple of years ago. They have no loyalty whatsoever to their customers. Anyone who thinks otherwise is dreaming. Customers merely return the favor.
Some detail might be helpful. GM case: When I was in my late teens I had a Pontiac Sunbird with the turbocharged I4. Because of a poorly engineered exhaust manifold this thing burned through the #2 or #3 plug wire every 10-12k miles, the others a bit less frequently. The first time this happened I wanted to take the car to the dealer, but they were backed up over a week. So I poked around under the hood and figured out that a plug wire core had turned to sand inside. The plug wires were covered under the emissions warranty, but I didn't want to be without the car over a week. So I spent ten bucks and bought a plug wire from parts. Put it on, still a misfire. Now clueless, I took the car to Precision Tune. Guy there puts the car on the machine, then takes off the "genuine GM part" I'd just purchased, pulls the end apart, says it's improperly assembled, put it back together, problem fixed. Precision Tune guy says the heat shields around the wire ends cause more harm than good, takes them off and throws them on the ground. My friend with me suggests I pick them up and hold onto them. Good thing. Two miles from Precision Tune the car starts misfiring. We make it back with all four wires now severely damaged. Precision Tune picks up the cost of new wires because they messed up. 10-12k later I'm through the wires again. This time I take it to the dealer. They refuse to warranty the wires because they're not GM parts anymore. I explain that the wires aren't the problem the design of the engine is the problem. This was soon rectified. The manifold cracked about this time, and the replacement manifold was a different design that allowed more air around the wires. The car also went through an alternator and transmission in its first 24,000 miles. Back to the main story. They want $70 for the new wires. I give them a choice. I'll pay the $70, but then I'll never again buy a GM car again. I'm 19. They say they'd rather have the $70. You might wonder why I was making such a big deal over $70. Well, this cuts both ways. If $70 wasn't much to me, it should have been even less for GM. And they had far more to lose. A couple months later my father's partner is set to buy the original 1989 Bonneville SSEi. I convince him the 1989 Nissan Maxima is a better car for less money. GM loses at least $7,000 in gross margins, 100x what they got for the wires. And that was just the beginning of what I cost them. Before this happened I had successfully pressured my father to buy a Pontiac 6000 STE--at MSRP--instead of a Saab 900 Turbo, and then a Lincoln Mark VII LSC instead of a Jaguar XJ6. I was huge on buying American. They gave this up for $70. Since then his primary car has always been a Lexus, and his second cars have also been Japanese. A few months after that I got a call from a GM person telling me about a rebate I could get as a recent college grad. I told them how I'd need my $70 back first. Their response: "We're sorry you feel that way." I did buy a used Olds Intrigue in 1999. It was a reliable car for the five years we owned it. But for a dozen years I avoided GM products. Now for the Ford. I was greatly satisfied with a 1996 Ford Contour SE until it suffered a severe loss of power around 66,000 miles. A light was on, and the dealer replaced that catalytic converter under the emissions warranty. Loss of power remained. Turns out compression was bad in three cylinders. The dealer said they weren't related. I learn from a Ford insider who knows a guy who knows a guy in a position to know that they likely were related. Seems that when the catalyst fails bits can get sucked back into the engine. Bits of ceramic aren't good inside an engine. Ford had recalled many 1996s to replace the catalyst because of this possibility. My car's assembly date fell soon after the cutoff date for this recall, so it had not been eligible. However, the cutoff date should have been based on the engine build date, or even the catalyst build date. Except they don't track that. So the engineers recommended recalling the entire model year. Management vetoed this suggestion to save money. To prove that this was the cause, I'd have to authorize a $1000+ engine teardown. If the teardown found that the catalyst was the cause, Ford would pick up the tab for everything. Otherwise, I'd pick it all up. Every dealer I talked to said they doubted it would go my way. I talked to a number of people within Ford seeking some help. I got as high as the admin for the VP of Customer Relations. They all said that there was absolutely nothing they could do. I explained that I write reviews read by thousands of people, that my Escape review at that time had been read by nearly 30,000 people. Still nothing they can do. Best they could offer was a roll of the dice with $1000+ on the table and the odds heavily against me. I could have truly caused some damage this time, but took the high road. I simply traded the car for thousands less than I could have privately sold one with a functioning engine. I traded it for a Mazda, so I didn't even punish Ford by going outside the family. My parents have lost multiple transmissions in Tauruses, plus the 3.8 head gasket issue. Multiply the above by millions of people. I hate to say it, but these companies deserve absolutely nothing from the average American.
__________________
truedelta.com More useful reliability research -- need more GM vehicles! Real-world fuel economy Price comparisons, quick and thorough Last edited by mkaresh : 01-27-2006 at 08:04 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) | |
|
5.3 Liter LS4 V8
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,465
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
Quote:
In any case, this is just a continuation of a trend that has been happening steadily for the past six months. It's gas price related, too. Gas prices have been on the way up again. Unless GM improves the Cobalt/Malibu/Impala/whatever to Civc/Accord/Corolla/Camry/Avalon levels of fuel economy, fit and finish, and reliability soon, and *is able to convince the general public that they have*, they are in a heap of trouble. Low selling sports cars (Solstice/Sky, Camaro) and huge SUVs (GMT-900s) will not cut it. This may be an impossible proposition at this point, especially with the fit finally hitting the shan over at Delphi soon. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
4.4 Liter Supercharged Northstar
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,306
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
I get so tired of reading anti-union posts here. But I think it's time the UAW steps up and begs (advertises) Americans to support their members AND GM and Ford (I say that because the UAW can get away with the "Buy American" card easier). It's time they do something to help the big two. What's good for GM and Ford can be good for the UAW.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) |
|
7.0 Liter LS7 V8
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Philadelphia Area
Drives: 08 CTS DI RWD Nav, 08 Sienna Limited AWD Nav
Posts: 5,639
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
I just hope that these persistent 25% sales drops when compared to the same period a year earlier end soon. Maybe this is still the after effects from the pulled forward sales that employee pricing spurred.
I don't see these comparisons improving until we're a year from comparing to the slow sale months (October 2005 and forward). The year over year comparisons against the start of employee pricing for everyone are going to be a bloodbath. If the sales trend is going down when comparing before employee pricing (and remember that June 2005 was about 40+% higher than June 2004), it stands to reason that until the improved products are on the lots, we'll see about that big of a drop. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) | |
|
6.0 Liter Vortec V8
Join Date: Nov 2004
Drives: 03 GMC Savana
91 Honda CRX
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) | |
|
5.3 Liter LS4 V8
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,465
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) |
|
5.3 Liter LS4 V8
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Drives: 2001 Chevy Silverado
Posts: 3,128
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
A couple quality products with design appeal and superior performance would turn this trend around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 (permalink) |
|
4.4 Liter Supercharged Northstar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,394
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
The major point of this story is just sinking in: take away fleet sales, and Toyota might now be #1 in the U.S.
__________________
truedelta.com More useful reliability research -- need more GM vehicles! Real-world fuel economy Price comparisons, quick and thorough |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 (permalink) | |
|
7.0 Liter LS7 V8
Join Date: Oct 2005
Drives: 2005 Cobalt SS
Posts: 5,917
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 (permalink) | |
|
Starship Enterpise
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,211
|
Re: U.S. Automotive Retail Market Share Picture Changing Dramatically
Quote:
I am going to go vomit blood now.
__________________
The moderation here gets an F for FAILURE. |
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |
Advertisement |
|