Ghosn says Nissan may stop Titan production; Chrysler LLC alliance claimed

Ghosn says Nissan may stop Titan production; Chrysler LLC alliance claimed

Automotive World; by Glenn Brooks; 17 December, 2007

Nissan officials have denied that the company has made such a decision, but in an interview in the latest issue of Newsweek magazine, the OEM's chief executive, Carlos Ghosn, states that production of the company's full-sized pick-up truck may be axed.

Nissan officials have denied that the company has made such a decision, but in an interview in the latest issue of Newsweek magazine, the OEM's chief executive, Carlos Ghosn, states that production of the company's full-sized pick-up truck may be axed.

"The name of the game is going to be more fuel-efficient cars," Ghosn states. "And when you make your product plans for the future, you can't say, 'I've always had a pick-up truck, so I'll just keep improving it.' If you can't make it profitably, you have to get out," he adds.

The Titan, launched in 2003 and facelifted earlier this year, is scheduled to be replaced in 2010. Nissan builds this rival for the Chevrolet Silverado, GMC Sierra, Ford F-150, Dodge Ram and Toyota Tundra at its Canton, Mississippi plant. Although sales have held up relatively well this year despite the continued rises in the price of gasoline, the Titan has a 5.6-litre V8 as standard, while rivals offer six-cylinder base model variants.
The company's own data shows Titan sales totalled 60,961 for the year to the end of November 2007, down 8.8% from 66,617 year-on-year. In the same period of 2007, the company imported 72,159 units of the Murano SUV, its best-selling light truck and a model that has been in its last year of production with the replacement recently unveiled.

In possibly related news, the 15 December edition of Japan's Nikkei newspaper claimed that Nissan and Chrysler LLC are currently in talks to set up a vehicle cross-selling agreement. The story was also carried by The Financial Times in its weekend edition. The London-based broadsheet stated that the alliance would benefit Chrysler in Russia while both partners could gain from plant-utilisation efficiencies in North America.

Under the terms of the alleged agreement, each of the two constructors would sell the other's vehicles under its own brand, the Nikkei reported without naming sources. The cross-selling agreement could also be a prelude to a broader partnership between the two groups, which would involve the sharing of production sites, the paper continued.

With the Michigan-based OEM set to release a new generation Ram full-sized pick-up in 2008, sources have speculated that Ghosn's statement may be a precursor to Dodge building the next Titan for supply to Nissan North America.
Under an existing deal, Chrysler LLC is set to manufacture a version of its Chrysler Town & Country/Dodge Grand Caravan minivans for Volkswagen of America from 2008. The company already builds a rebadged Dodge Dakota mid-sized pick-up for Mitsubishi, while Nissan is to supply Suzuki with a rival model, based on its Frontier pick-up, which is also US-built, from next year.

I've no idea if this information is accurate or not but it would be an interesting turn of events.

Ever since Chrysler was sold by Diamler:mad:...I was afraid they'd slowly drop out of the "BIG 3" category.....seems this may be the start of that.

Eh, whatever....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/PacerX/fail_boat.jpg

AS PREDICTED HERE.

60,000 is just a bit short of the 100,000 target. Enough to kill that POS dead.

Tundra, you're next.








MUAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can't say this is suprising at all... :shrug:

Oh, I forgot to mention the best part...

Buying a re-badged Chrysler.

Excellent.


Maybe GM will be nice and let Toyota re-badge a Silverado so that Toyota can actually have a truck to sell also.

Then Ford will give Honda a truck...

And maybe Terex will give BMW a truck...

I guess that would mean no more Armada either? I doubt it's true, but who knows?

I guess that would mean no more Armada either? I doubt it's true, but who knows?
That would mean no more Armada or QX; at least not on that platform. Whether any of the "names" would survive is a separate question.

I think there will always be a market for a full-sized truck based SUV, especialy in the luxury end, but that market is likely going to continue to shrink - any manufacturer who doesn't act accordingly will not like the consequences.

Last I read, the Titan/Armada/Infinity QX were profitable due to platform sharing.

This would be nothing more than GM/Issuzu, Ford/Mazda, Dodge/Mitsubishi, right? Previously, there has only been sharing among small/midsize trucks (except Silverado/Sierra). Be interesting to see how a Ram would look reskinned as a Titan.

Oh, I forgot to mention the best part...

Buying a re-badged Chrysler.

Excellent.

Isn't this all just part of doing business in today's world? Why not buy a re-badged Chrysler? After all, Chrysler already has a re-badged Mitsubishi and two mildly re-engineered Mercedes as Chryslers. I'm sure that Cerberus are looking at ANY way they can cut costs at Chrysler right now. and if Nissan could trade some car expertise and platform sharing (which might make up for the lost Mercedes hardware) for a replacement Titan, why not look into it? Now, this is provided that it's a better transformation than the extremely forlorn Mitsubishi Raider. Although the Dakota is way uglier than the Ram to begin with.

I'm surprised they even sold that many titans considering we had 3 or 4 of them when I worked at Enterprise and I don't know I've seen more than 2 or 3 of them outside of rental lots.

Isn't this all just part of doing business in today's world? Why not buy a re-badged Chrysler? After all, Chrysler already has a re-badged Mitsubishi and two mildly re-engineered Mercedes as Chryslers. I'm sure that Cerberus are looking at ANY way they can cut costs at Chrysler right now. and if Nissan could trade some car expertise and platform sharing (which might make up for the lost Mercedes hardware) for a replacement Titan, why not look into it? Now, this is provided that it's a better transformation than the extremely forlorn Mitsubishi Raider. Although the Dakota is way uglier than the Ram to begin with.

Hey, I'm all for Nissan buying rebadged Chryslers.

Titan has been a sales flop. This makes sense for Nissan. Why invest big money into a vehicle that is competing in a very very competitive segment that is also a shrinking segment. They would probably be better off making a 4cyl diesel for the Frontier. I see the pickup market going back to the size it was in the 80's in the next 5-7 years.

I actually like the Titan unlike the Tundra.

Either Nissan throws the towel in now or stays patient cause this is a VERY tough market/segment to crack. I don't know if a rebadged Ram is the solution cause in that case...why don't i just buy a Ram??

Hey, I'm all for Nissan buying rebadged Chryslers.

Sorry, Pacer. Misread your sincerity! :D

Sorry, Pacer. Misread your sincerity! :D

No sweat! :cool:

Last I read, the Titan/Armada/Infinity QX were profitable due to platform sharing.

This would be nothing more than GM/Issuzu, Ford/Mazda, Dodge/Mitsubishi, right? Previously, there has only been sharing among small/midsize trucks (except Silverado/Sierra). Be interesting to see how a Ram would look reskinned as a Titan.
They have been and are profitable.

However, as is often the case, especially in the autmotive industry, it is just a matter of whether a particular vehicle is making a "profit"; but rather is it making "enough" profit - if it isn't making "enough" (whatever the curent management defines as "enough") then you look for other places to spend your money.

Of course such thinking has its own consequences - the big 2/3 put most of their resources into full-sized trucks and SUVs because they were the most profitable at the time and all but ignored cars; we know what the consequences of that was.

However, as is often the case, especially in the autmotive industry, it is just a matter of whether a particular vehicle is making a "profit"; but rather is it making "enough" profit - if it isn't making "enough" (whatever the curent management defines as "enough") then you look for other places to spend your money.

Correct, Why invest $900 Million to get a 4% return when you can geta 15% return on another product.


Of course such thinking has its own consequences - the big 2/3 put most of their resources into full-sized trucks and SUVs because they were the most profitable at the time and all but ignored cars; we know what the consequences of that was.

Just goes to show how important diversification is.

The rumors of the imminent demise of the truck market are greatly exaggerated. Got a boat or a track car? Snowmobiles? Need your driveway plowed? Got a half dozen kids? Did you just buy a 96" flat-panel TV or a Barcalounger? Ever moved?

If you have answered "yes" to any of the above, you're gonna need a truck...

Both IRN and JD Powers have GM selling better than 1,200,000 trucks for the foreseeable future.

Oh, and one further note:

There's NOTHING more profitable than a truck in the automobile industry. NOTHING. The economies of scale are literally staggering when your volumes push north of 1,000,000 units.

Both IRN and JD Powers have GM selling better than 1,200,000 trucks for the foreseeable future.

What do they expect gasoline prices to be over the next 5 years? I have a hard time believing that $5 gas won't slow that segment dramatically. Maybe I'm wrong.

What do they expect gasoline prices to be over the next 5 years? I have a hard time believing that $5 gas won't slow that segment dramatically. Maybe I'm wrong.

IRN and JD Powers' whole purpose in life is to take those things into account.

Is the segment down?

Sure. GM's looking at 1,200,000 instead of 1,500,000. Ford will truncate their numbers a bit also.

Fact remains, people are going to need trucks - and Nissan apparently can't build one worth enough to survive in the market, so it looks like they're getting out.

What do they expect gasoline prices to be over the next 5 years? I have a hard time believing that $5 gas won't slow that segment dramatically. Maybe I'm wrong.


Gas prices won't hurt the truck market, but what gas prices do to the overall economy might.

Full-size SUVs are another story.

Gas prices won't hurt the truck market, but what gas prices do to the overall economy might.

Full-size SUVs are another story.

Exactly. People who NEED trucks are going to buy trucks. And if your plumber or contractor has to pay 5 bucks a gallon for gas, you're going to be paying him a lot more per hour.

Maybe GM will be nice and let Toyota re-badge a Silverado so that Toyota can actually have a truck to sell also.
What about a trade?

GM builds the Tundra for Toyota as a rebadged Silverado/Sierra; and in return Toyota builds the Colorado/Canyon for GM as a rebadged Tacoma.

:D

What about a trade?

GM builds the Tundra for Toyota as a rebadged Silverado/Sierra; and in return Toyota builds the Colorado/Canyon for GM as a rebadged Tacoma.

:D

Nah, I'm pretty sure GM would want a truck in return.

Nah, I'm pretty sure GM would want a truck in return.
:D :bow:

Nah, I'm pretty sure GM would want a truck in return.

OMG :lol: I about spit my Dr. Pepper at the screen :lol:

You knockin my Tacoma?

OMG :lol: I about spit my Dr. Pepper at the screen :lol:

You knockin my Tacoma?Actually I was being serious. I've never had an issue with the Tacoma, period.

It was funnier than hell though. :D

Exactly. People who NEED trucks are going to buy trucks. And if your plumber or contractor has to pay 5 bucks a gallon for gas, you're going to be paying him a lot more per hour.

How many people driving a $40K 1/2 ton Crew Cab pickup fall into that labor category. Not many, but I'd agree that W/T and 2500/3500 sales would stay level at $5. A good amount of people still drive pickup as a fashion statement or a daily driver that can handle their once a month weekend projects. Why wouldn't the % of pickup to total new vehicle sales fall to levels of that of 1990? or even 1985?

4x4 can't be used as an excuse to buy a pickup over a car anymore because even the Ford Taurus and Fusion have AWD today. (along with Dodge/Chrysler large and midsize cars and many imports)

Most of the contractors I know drive diesels anyway. :D

Actually I was being serious. I've never had an issue with the Tacoma, period.

It was funnier than hell though. :D

I thought so too :lol:

The rumors of the imminent demise of the truck market are greatly exaggerated. Got a boat or a track car? Snowmobiles? Need your driveway plowed? Got a half dozen kids? Did you just buy a 96" flat-panel TV or a Barcalounger? Ever moved?

If you have answered "yes" to any of the above, you're gonna need a truck...

Both IRN and JD Powers have GM selling better than 1,200,000 trucks for the foreseeable future.

Oh, and one further note:

There's NOTHING more profitable than a truck in the automobile industry. NOTHING. The economies of scale are literally staggering when your volumes push north of 1,000,000 units.
That’s more armchair wishful thinking than a legitimate assessment of where the market is heading.

Most of the growth in the full-sized truck/SUV market over the past 20 years has been from those who wanted one far more than they truly needed one – those are the same people who will stop buying full-sized trucks/SUVs if gasoline pump prices, which have been artificially low for many years (far below the rate of inflation over the same period), stay at, near or rise above the $3-$5/gallon mark.

In a relatively short period of $3/gallon prices we’ve seen a significant shift in buying habits; and unless gasoline process fall soon and stay there, the changes will likely become more and more the norm.

There will always be some people who truly need (not just have a casual need for or occasional use for) a full-sized truck and they will continue to buy them…there will also always be people who will buy them simply because they want them and they have the financial wherewithal to pay the price (both for the vehicle and the fuel) and not need to worry about it. But, those two groups are not where the significant growth came from (the growth that fueled, not pun intended) the domestic’s revenue’s during that time and those two groups will not sustain that market segment at the level needed by GM, Ford or Chrysler to keep their heads above the red ink.

Here is what someone who knows more than you or I had to say in a recent DetroitNews article –

Many in the industry say the dominance of trucks will wane even more in the years to come. "We're not going to delude ourselves," said Ford sales analyst George Pipas. "Once we get beyond the next couple years, there's not going to be much new product, and manufacturers are going to have to line up capacity with demand." Pipas points out that crossover vehicles, which marry the ride and styling of passenger cars with the functionality of SUVs, are the fastest-growing segment in the U.S. market.

That’s more armchair wishful thinking than a legitimate assessment of where the market is heading.


Ummm....

Do you know who/what IRN is, and what they do?

Because if you don't, joo need to go do some reading.

I read a year or two ago somewhere that GM barely breaks even on Aveos, makes a couple grand off of the Malibu and Impala, BUT make 6-8K per TRUCK/SUV!

I really like the styling of the Titan. I kinda hope it sticks around.

Ummm....

Do you know who/what IRN is, and what they do?

Because if you don't, joo need to go do some reading.

Ummm...well gosh…no, never heard of them…thanks for the heads-up.

IRN is a for-profit company trying to sell their service; sometimes they are right and sometimes they are wrong; in any case, they certainly don’t have a lock on knowing the future (neither do you or I).

What can be guaranteed about the future is that if a person only looks at information/groups/organizations that say what he/she wants to be true; he/she runs a very high risk of exchanging real analysis and thoughtful predictions with wishful thinking.

IRN and JD Powers' whole purpose in life is to take those things into account.

hmm. I wonder if they expected Oil prices to increase 900% from 1998-2007. If so I got to get a job there just for the investment advice.

Ummm....

Do you know who/what IRN is, and what they do?


Yea, and like any other forecasting service, it's really wise to take what they say with a grain of salt.

With regards to the heavy-truck market, my thinking is that more competition isn't really necessary. To date, the largest players are doing a great job keeping their customers happy. I do think there's probably a niche market (relatively speaking - 200,000 units/year would be serious volume in most other segments) for buyers who won't consider anything but an "import" pickup truck.

I don't buy what the original story says at all. Ghosn has been trying to whore himself out for the last three years. Since the Nissan/Renault plan started to falter. He's been trying to tie up with a domestic ever since.

He was able to delay the inevitable when York and Kerkorian blew smoke to drive the price up on GM stock by suggesting GM tie up with Ghosn. Of course because GM's board Wagoner had no choice BUT to "explore" it. It was a dead duck from the get go.

I'd take Ghosns' word with less than a grain of salt. He has no friends on the domestic side of things. That being GM & Ford.

I wouldn't discount Chrysler though, due to Cerberus' mentality. Buy. Invest. Dump. Chrysler has turned into the bastard child of the Big 3. Whoever is willing to take them.....please sign up.

I do think there's probably a niche market (relatively speaking - 200,000 units/year would be serious volume in most other segments) for buyers who won't consider anything but an "import" pickup truck.

Right, but that's barely enough to justify any single player bothering, let alone if it's divided by two, or three...

Ummm...well gosh…no, never heard of them…thanks for the heads-up.

IRN is a for-profit company trying to sell their service; sometimes they are right and sometimes they are wrong; in any case, they certainly don’t have a lock on knowing the future (neither do you or I).

What can be guaranteed about the future is that if a person only looks at information/groups/organizations that say what he/she wants to be true; he/she runs a very high risk of exchanging real analysis and thoughtful predictions with wishful thinking.

The entire components industry bases it's planning off of IRN and JD Powers. Your attempt to discredit them is... well... entertaining.

The numbers are the numbers. If you've got a better source, you go ahead and post that there one up, because the idea that you're singly capable of a more thoughtful and better researched analysis than IRN and JD Powers is a hoot.

Let's say... hypothetically... that you're right. If so, I would welcome you to begin publishing your market research data. My company would be happy to buy it, and you could make a killing.


On to the more important points:

1) Nissan and the Titan got their asses whipped. A good old, down home, Detroit-style ass-whipping.

2) The idea that trucks are somehow less profitable than small or midsize cars is laughable. One could make a case that on a vehicle for vehicle basis large luxury cars are nearly as profitiable, but the volumes pale next to the trucks. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS that Nissan can't build a profitable truck - not that anyone else can't.

3) Nissan isn't giving up on trucks, they've just realize that they can't build a competitive one - so now they're trying to get Chrysler to do it for them.

4) The truck market isn't going away. It may truncate, but all indicators at this point are that if it does so, it won't push GM under 1,000,000 units for a long, long, long time.

I love how you read threads; claim people said the complete opposite of what they did say and then all but call them idiots because they don’t agree with you.

No one is putting down IRN; what was said is that no one and no company, at least not one that wants to stay in business, can afford to look only at data that supports what they want to believe – if the entire components industry uses IRN and JDP for the basis of their planning perhaps that’s why so many component suppliers that existed three years ago don’t exist today.

No one said the Titan isn’t profitable; quite the opposite in fact, but as was already said; the question is how much profit – GM and every other manufacturer axes vehicles all the time; not because they didn’t make a profit but because the profit isn't worth the continued investment; I hope the finance folks in your company understand that concept; if not we'll all probably be reading about your copany filing for Chapter 11 in the not so distant future.

No one anywhere in this thread said that the truck market isn’t profitable as a whole or is “less profitable” than small or midsize vehicles (I don’t know where you got that statement) - the truck market is profitable; that profitability is the overriding reason GM and Ford and Chrysler even made a profit in the last 10-15 years which is why even a small downturn in truck sales has all but put them down for the count.

Ford’s survival is more than questionable; what will eventually happen to Chrysler is still up in the air as well (I look for them to be a non-union manufacturer by the time the next contract rolls around if they last that long)…GM has the best chance for surviving and even thriving but if things go as is being predicted by a variety of sources, things are not going to be good for the industry as a whole for quite a while; at least not until after 2009 and GM can’t afford many more years of a flat market or of loosing share to other manufacturers in any market segment.

No one said the truck industry is going away – if you think anyone did how about quoting the specific post.

3) Nissan isn't giving up on trucks, they've just realize that they can't build a competitive one - so now they're trying to get Chrysler to do it for them.

I think they built a competitive truck, They just couldn't sell one. :lol: Ford and Chevy buyers just have no reason to jump ship. Nissan's truck wasn't bad but it didn't offer any reason to switch. Now if they took the same truck, and swapped out the gas pig V8 that is in there now for a small diesel with say 450tq that got 24 hwy, then they would have had a product that could steal sales instead of being an also-ran.


No one said the truck industry is going away – if you think anyone did how about quoting the specific post.

I did...kind of. I think the fluff and foo foo truck market is going away or at least will decrease considerably in the next 5-10 years. I base this on two things, #1 trucks are the flavor of the month, and that status doesn't last forever, just ask the BOF SUVs, minivans, and station wagons before them. #2 prices of fuel will keep climbing, there will be no reason to buy a $40K crew cab truck for a daily driver when gas is $5-$8 a gallon.

I love how you read threads; claim people said the complete opposite of what they did say and then all but call them idiots because they don’t agree with you.

If the dunce cap fits...



No one is putting down IRN;

Oh... well then forgive me for misunderstanding your claim above that you have equivalently useful knowledge. As quoted here:


...they certainly don’t have a lock on knowing the future (neither do you or I).

I'll be the first to admit IRN and JD Powers have superior knowledge relative to mine.

You, on the other hand, seem to believe that your predictions are worth as much as theirs. That being the case, I am inviting you into the opportunity of a lifetime:

"Robert's Market Analysis" or "RMA" for short.

You'll publish your predictions of the market and foolish Tier 1 suppliers like me will send your thousands upon thousands of dollars a year for it.



what was said is that no one and no company, at least not one that wants to stay in business, can afford to look only at data that supports what they want to believe...

Oh, so what we're SUPPOSED to do is ignore the data entirely and believe you, and individual with no data whatsoever.

Gotcha.

Like I said, if your insight is so crystal clear, we'd be happy to pay for it.



No one said the Titan isn’t profitable; quite the opposite in fact, but as was already said; the question is how much profit – GM and every other manufacturer axes vehicles all the time; not because they didn’t make a profit but because the profit isn't worth the continued investment;

Please.

Spare me the "Business 101" lecture, killer - mostly because it should be re-titled "How to Be Wrong in WAY too Many Words".

1) Car companies do not kill profitable programs until the point comes that they are no longer profitable (sometimes due to legislation, such as with the Camaro).

2) As a rule, for companies that can ACTUALLY BUILD A TRUCK, trucks are the most profitable thing going.

3) Nissan is obviously not making enough money of the Titan to justify it's existence, meanwhile - GM and Ford sell somewhere north of a million trucks a year EACH.



No one anywhere in this thread said that the truck market isn’t profitable as a whole or is “less profitable” than small or midsize vehicles (I don’t know where you got that statement)

Right here:


it is just a matter of whether a particular vehicle is making a "profit"; but rather is it making "enough" profit

The ACCURATE statment is that Nissan's "truck" can't make enough profit to justify it's existence. If they could, they wouldn't be begging Chrysler to give them a truck they can slap a badge on... apparently Nissan believes that a RE-BADGED DODGE CAN MAKE ENOUGH PROFIT TO JUSTIFY IT'S EXISTENCE - which is very, very telling.

Meanwhile, GM and Ford build north of a million trucks a year.

Again, since you just can't seem to catch on:

1) There is nothing more profitable in the industry than a truck.

2) If you can't make good enough profit for a truck program to justify it's own existence - you're either incompetant... or your truck sucks... or both.

Which leads us to the questions (and I'll make sure not to be drinking my coffee when you answer, because it's probably going to end up on my keyboard...):

What exactly does Mr. Ghosn think is a more profitable market to be in rather than pickups? Small cars? Oddly enough, Mr. Ghosn's competition seems to make more than enough money off of their trucks to justify their existence... Golly gee, why can't Nissan?

Could it be... possibly... that the Nissan "truck" just up and got it's ass kicked to the curb by universally superior products from the Big 2.5 to the point that Nissan is going to now replace it with a SMALL or MIDSIZE CAR on the idea that they can make more money off of that than a pickup truck unless CHRYSLER engineers and produces it for them? Hmmmmm???





No one said the truck industry is going away – if you think anyone did how about quoting the specific post.


I see the pickup market going back to the size it was in the 80's in the next 5-7 years.

IRN and JD Powers beg to differ.

"RMA" thinks diff'ernt, and Robert invites you to subscribe to his service. For a few thousand dollarz a year, "RMA" will send you... erm...

A link to this website?

His thoughts artfully penned upon a slightly used Shoney's napkin and a set of Ginsu knives?

If the dunce cap fits...
I should take lessons from you on the “fit” of that dunce cap, you’ve worn yours long enough that I’m sure you could give some pointers.


Oh... well then forgive me for misunderstanding your claim above that you have equivalently useful knowledge.
If you want to believe that my saying “they (IRN) certainly don’t have a lock on knowing the future (neither do you or I)” as a personal claim of equally useful knowledge on my part well then everyone has the right to be wrong (but your interpretative language shills leave a lot to be desired).

Most people would would understand that all I was implying was that IRN is hardly the only source for data and has no special window into the future; neither does JDP or any other organization - most in the industry would hold the same opinoin.


I'll be the first to admit IRN and JD Powers have superior knowledge relative to mine.
Smart move on your part. That said, "superior knowledge" to the knowledge you or I possess does not mean they have the best knowledge of all that is availble nor does it meant they have infallible conclusions.


You, on the other hand, seem to believe that your predictions are worth as much as theirs
No, I just don’t limit myself to one or two sources of data nor do I limit myself to only those sources that say what I want to believe.


Spare me the "Business 101" lecture
I would but it seems as if you really need one.


1) Car companies do not kill profitable programs until the point comes that they are no longer profitable (sometimes due to legislation, such as with the Camaro).

2) As a rule, for companies that can ACTUALLY BUILD A TRUCK, trucks are the most profitable thing going.

3) Nissan is obviously not making enough money of the Titan to justify it's existence, meanwhile - GM and Ford sell somewhere north of a million trucks a year EACH.

The ACCURATE statment is that Nissan's "truck" can't make enough profit to justify it's existence. If they could, they wouldn't be begging Chrysler to give them a truck they can slap a badge on... apparently Nissan believes that a RE-BADGED DODGE CAN MAKE ENOUGH PROFIT TO JUSTIFY IT'S EXISTENCE - which is very, very telling.

Meanwhile, GM and Ford build north of a million trucks a year.

Again, since you just can't seem to catch on:

1) There is nothing more profitable in the industry than a truck.

2) If you can't make good enough profit for a truck program to justify it's own existence - you're either incompetant... or your truck sucks... or both.

Which leads us to the questions (and I'll make sure not to be drinking my coffee when you answer, because it's probably going to end up on my keyboard...):

What exactly does Mr. Ghosn think is a more profitable market to be in rather than pickups? Small cars? Oddly enough, Mr. Ghosn's competition seems to make more than enough money off of their trucks to justify their existence... Golly gee, why can't Nissan?

Could it be... possibly... that the Nissan "truck" just up and got it's ass kicked to the curb by universally superior products from the Big 2.5 to the point that Nissan is going to now replace it with a SMALL or MIDSIZE CAR on the idea that they can make more money off of that than a pickup truck unless CHRYSLER engineers and produces it for them? Hmmmmm???
Let’s remember that the story posted is someone’s opinion about what Ghosn meant – Ghosn says about the same thing about every vehicle Nissan/Infiniti makes; there are no sacred cows; any vehicle that doesn’t turn enough profit is expendable.

You are also flat wrong when you say GM or any other manufacturer doesn’t kill a vehicle that is profitable and only does so when it’s unprofitable…no company can look at any one vehicle and make the save or kill decision on whether that particular vehicle is profitable or not; they have to look at what is overall the most profitable for the company and where those resources can be best utilized. It was likely different in Detroit’s heydays when they hardly had enough things to spend money on, it isn’t that way any longer.

Using your reasoning about truck profitability, GM and Ford and Chrysler should be not just making a profit overall but literally be awash in profits and flush with cash…hummmmm….that doesn't seem to be the case.


No one anywhere in this thread said that the truck market isn’t profitable as a whole or is “less profitable” than small or midsize vehicles (I don’t know where you got that statement) - the truck market is profitable; that profitability is the overriding reason GM and Ford and Chrysler even made a profit in the last 10-15 years which is why even a small downturn in truck sales has all but put them down for the count.

I see the pickup market going back to the size it was in the 80's in the next 5-7 years.
Only you, could take those two separate statements and interoperate them to say the truck market is going away; do I believe it is going to stagnate for a while and likely decrease significantly compared to the pre-2004 levels, yes I do. You, of course, are free to believe whatever you want to believe. Let’s hope those at GM and Ford are smart enough to not follow your lead or we’ll soon be talking about them only in the past tense.

If you want to take a possible move by Nissan to ax the Titan as some triumph of the illustrious big 2 then go ahead; but getting back to Business 101, whos concepts you claim you understand so well, I’m surprised someone of your vast intelligence and automotive industry wisdom can’t see the potential advantage to Nissan taking a product of Chrysler (a product they [Nissan] hasn't had to invest a single $ in to manufacturer) and selling it as a Nissan – any money they make will essentially be pure profit.

Time, and not very much time, will tell if this article is correct at all or just blowing smoke.

I wouldn't discount Chrysler though, due to Cerberus' mentality. Buy. Invest. Dump. Chrysler has turned into the bastard child of the Big 3. Whoever is willing to take them.....please sign up.

Sounds like we have the armchair quarterback's analysis of Chrysler, eh??? :rolleyes:

1) If the real goal of Cerberus was to strip and flip, I don't think they would have lured talent such as Jim Press away from Toyota to find himself without a company to work for in 5 years, especially when he isn't that old...

2) If anything, at the dealer seminars in Vegas I attended, dealers were more upbeat than they had been since well before the DCX merger. When a podunk dealer from anywhere in the country can interrogate the CEO of the company, in front of other dealers from all over the nation, and get a STRAIGHT ANSWER, not BS, that really says something. The new ownership structure knows EXACTLY what the problems are at Chrysler.

3) Even GM has never moved at the speed Chrysler is right now. The lifetime powertrain warranty, cutting of 4 slow models, developing a new division to focus solely on interior quality, the most obvious shortcoming in every new Chrysler launch. All of this has happened since, what, August?

Personally, private equity normally scares the sh!t out of me. But they scare me far less than the Germans. These guys will make money with Chrysler, and for some time to come. I am completely doubtful they will shut this thing down...they're spending way too much money on fixing what's wrong.

I'd love it if Josh could come up with a concrete response, but I know he won't. As someone who has come to appreciate Chrysler for what it is, and what it wants to be, I give their top management a lot of credit. Sure, they COULD strip and flip tomorrow...but they'd already be doing that by now if that was the idea...

As for the truck responses, all I can say is people are fairly accurate when they assess that those who NEED trucks (aka work trucks and heavy dutys) will always NEED trucks. What we've seen is a significant decrease in the personal use segment for new trucks (used remains strong). However, with respect to a Chrysler dealer, consider that a) we sold a ton of trucks under EP pricing, and that was barely over 2 years ago...how many more new trucks do people need right now? and b) my opinion after seeing the new Ram is that Dodge will at least see a blip in Ram sales for a year or two, as the personal use guys trade their '02-'04s in...they're gorgeous :)

Anyone who b!tches about the new Ram interior is insane...think Ford Super Duty in terms of style, and current F150 in detailing...its very nice...

Ford and GM sold over 1,000,000 trucks a year each even back in the 1980s, before there many people bought them for the image. And the economy is much bigger today.

I'm not even sure why this is an argument, even PacerX conceded that the truck market might shrink 20-30%, which is quite a bit even thought the volumes are still huge.

Using your reasoning about truck profitability, GM and Ford and Chrysler should be not just making a profit overall but literally be awash in profits and flush with cash…hummmmm….that doesn't seem to be the case.

If things got really really bad for one of the Big Three, its certainly possible they could drop almost everything except trucks. Look at Chrysler -- not very many cars left in their showrooms.

Ford and GM sold over 1,000,000 trucks a year each even back in the 1980s, before there many people bought them for the image. And the economy is much bigger today.

I'm not even sure why this is an argument, even PacerX conceded that the truck market might shrink 20-30%, which is quite a bit even thought the volumes are still huge.

If things got really really bad for one of the Big Three, its certainly possible they could drop almost everything except trucks. Look at Chrysler -- not very many cars left in their showrooms.
An all truck line-up might work...probably risky but it might work.

I'd like to see your figures for the 1M trucks a year in the 80's...not saying it's wrong but I don't remember the truck segment being that big and at the moment, I don't have anyting to check...keep in mind that the truck segment includes SUVs which were barely a blip on the radar (in terms of units) in the early 80's (the term didn't even exist then).

The economy has done well and continues to grow (long term, anway) but one of Detroit's problems is that the automotive market (the U.S. market) hasn't been growing and the big 2 have seen their share of the market decrease year on year.

Oh well, time will tell...if we are all still here in 10 years we'll know who was right. :)

I don't know if a rebadged Ram is the solution cause in that case...why don't i just buy a Ram??

Well because American made cars suck, if it says Nissan obviously it's not American and must be better.

Right? :)

I'd like to see your figures for the 1M trucks a year in the 80's...
Sorry, fuzzy memories from the days I lived near a F-150 plant. I could easily be wrong.

Also, to some degree the raw numbers don't tell the real story. The big thing that's happened in the last couple decades is the growth of the luxury and near-luxury truck market. When you have a $40,000 version of a $17,000 product, there has to be tons of profit in there. The same basic design works for everything from the cheap fleet business to the top-of-the-line Cadillac products.

Also, to some degree the raw numbers don't tell the real story. The big thing that's happened in the last couple decades is the growth of the luxury and near-luxury truck market. When you have a $40,000 version of a $17,000 product, there has to be tons of profit in there. The same basic design works for everything from the cheap fleet business to the top-of-the-line Cadillac products.
Exactly the line of thought I had earlier today but hadn't had a chance to post. :)

I don't rememver exact difference from the late 70's on but I do remember that the price differential between a pick-up and a car was not that significant and I suspect if we looked into it, the difference that did exist was not becasue of high dollar/high profit items.

I was looking at a Blazer in about 1979-80 (a real one, not the play-toy size that existed later) because I wanted something to go along with my
'79 TransAM and living in Seattle; something that worked in snow!). It was not cheap but it wasn't a luxury vehicle either...it wasn't until about the mid to late 80's that trucks and SUV's began to really get pricy and contain a lot of margin in them.

So the point being, keeping the same level of units is one thing; keeping the same high-end/high profit units is another issue.

Actually I was being serious. I've never had an issue with the Tacoma, period.

It was funnier than hell though. :D

Tacoma is the only Toyota Id consider owning. I dont know if Id buy a Colorodo. In full size my preference is the Silverado. Only thing that comes close for my taste is the F150... and not really. I agree with you.

The problem with the Titan is that is its pretty narrow on options. Nissan should start selling a stripped down Titan and throw in the 3.5 or 3.7 V6 with around 300hp as the standard engine. This should open up some more market for the Titan, if they can get the price down with other base full-size trucks in the market.

[QUOTE=Gold_Rush;5055293]I actually like the Titan unlike the Tundra.

Me too. Just a nicer package. the tundra is too piece-meal me-to. The Titan was a decent package. I drove a titan for work. Really not too bad.

[QUOTE=Gold_Rush;5055293]I actually like the Titan unlike the Tundra.

Me too. Just a nicer package. the tundra is too piece-meal me-to. The Titan was a decent package. I drove a titan for work. Really not too bad.
I had a ’05 Titan for two years and I’ve owned one F150 and driven a lot of other pick-ups over the years…there was and is nothing wrong with the Titan or its capabilities. Of course, those who hate anything not made by GM or Ford or those who’s most intelligent rebuttal to Titan is they think it’s ugly won’t agree.

I would hate to see the Titan go away as I plan on another one in the not too distant future. Then again, I’m also concerned about the entire light truck/full-sized SUV segment and what is going to be available in the not too distant future.

The Titan is a good pick-up and it can be made even better; it can be made equal or better than anything offered by Detroit…the question is, even if it is, can it make a significant enough dent in the sales of Detroit’s offerings?

That more than anything else is what Nissan will have to decide.

Assuming they get rid of it, just buy a Detroit offering...will it kill you?

Assuming they get rid of it, just buy a Detroit offering...will it kill you?
Probably not but why take that chance??? ;)