Conspiracy to kill the F-body? Not poor sales after all?
08-30-2002, 09:38 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,801
Conspiracy to kill the F-body? Not poor sales after all?
Disclaimer, this is 100% conjecture based on bits and pieces I've picked up here over the last couple of years. Feel free to fact check me here.
I believe that poors sales were not the cause of the end of the F-body, but the cover given to justify its end and conceal the real reason.
The real reason is the St. Therese plant and the contract with CAW.
Why? Primarily because the St. Therese plant first started production of automobiles in 1965. It is hopelessly outdated and extremely expensive to operate at less than 1/2 capacity. Also (somebody correct my numbers if they are off), but CAW has a contract with GM to produce anything with the names Camaro and Firebird at St. Therese until 2005.
Also, look at sales numbers. The 2 f-bodies combined have been averaging 60-70,000 units per year over the last 3 years. This is very close or in excess of Monte Carlo sales over the same time period. Now, the Monte is a W-body, so its not an exclusive platform, but it is at the same time not a carbon copy of other W cars. The Monte's development costs are much more recent than the 4th gen F-body's, and very likely much much more in terms of pure dollars.
The 4th gen F-body's development costs were paid for several years ago. Its safe to say the Monte is less profitable than the F-body then, but you don't see GM pulling the plug on it for poor sales, do you?
I think GM wanted to get out of St. Therese really bad, and the only way to do it was to end F-body. If they had created a 5th gen car to start production in 2003 it would have had to be made in St. Therese due to the contract.
So GM pulls advertising in 1998 when the cars had been selling reasonably well until then. GM also lets the rumors start swirling that there is no new model in the planning stages, and that sales are sagging. The lack of advertising does hurt sales, making GM look justified in the decision when it is finally announced in 2001.
There are some caveats to this. No way the current model F-body could have continued on more than another year, its just too old. That was definitely hurting sales, but they were no worse than 3rd gen sales were in 1991, the last full model year before change over to the 4th gen. (1992 was a shortened model year and sales were correspondingly small)
The last Camaro ad I remember seeing was in 1998. A red LS1 Z comes up behind a gagle of bikers and splits them down the middle, all the bikers gawking at the car. Trans Am commercials survived another couple of years, and we saw Firebird sales outpace camaro sales for a short time where they had always historically been only about 50% that of Camaro through most of the 4th generation.
To sum, I don't think we'll hear anything official about a new Camaro until after the CAW contract expires in 2005. Let me be clear, I'm not suggesting that guys like Settlemeyer have been lying to us. I think the decisions and strategy of this decision were made at a much higher level than Scott. He was simply told the same thing we've heard all along: Poor sales do not justify continuance of the names.
OK, the black helicopters are swirling. Feel free to poke holes in my theory. Its only by eliminating the incorrect that we arrive at fact.
------------------
Owner, Nashville Speed & Performance
1996 Trans Am WS6
I believe that poors sales were not the cause of the end of the F-body, but the cover given to justify its end and conceal the real reason.
The real reason is the St. Therese plant and the contract with CAW.
Why? Primarily because the St. Therese plant first started production of automobiles in 1965. It is hopelessly outdated and extremely expensive to operate at less than 1/2 capacity. Also (somebody correct my numbers if they are off), but CAW has a contract with GM to produce anything with the names Camaro and Firebird at St. Therese until 2005.
Also, look at sales numbers. The 2 f-bodies combined have been averaging 60-70,000 units per year over the last 3 years. This is very close or in excess of Monte Carlo sales over the same time period. Now, the Monte is a W-body, so its not an exclusive platform, but it is at the same time not a carbon copy of other W cars. The Monte's development costs are much more recent than the 4th gen F-body's, and very likely much much more in terms of pure dollars.
The 4th gen F-body's development costs were paid for several years ago. Its safe to say the Monte is less profitable than the F-body then, but you don't see GM pulling the plug on it for poor sales, do you?
I think GM wanted to get out of St. Therese really bad, and the only way to do it was to end F-body. If they had created a 5th gen car to start production in 2003 it would have had to be made in St. Therese due to the contract.
So GM pulls advertising in 1998 when the cars had been selling reasonably well until then. GM also lets the rumors start swirling that there is no new model in the planning stages, and that sales are sagging. The lack of advertising does hurt sales, making GM look justified in the decision when it is finally announced in 2001.
There are some caveats to this. No way the current model F-body could have continued on more than another year, its just too old. That was definitely hurting sales, but they were no worse than 3rd gen sales were in 1991, the last full model year before change over to the 4th gen. (1992 was a shortened model year and sales were correspondingly small)
The last Camaro ad I remember seeing was in 1998. A red LS1 Z comes up behind a gagle of bikers and splits them down the middle, all the bikers gawking at the car. Trans Am commercials survived another couple of years, and we saw Firebird sales outpace camaro sales for a short time where they had always historically been only about 50% that of Camaro through most of the 4th generation.
To sum, I don't think we'll hear anything official about a new Camaro until after the CAW contract expires in 2005. Let me be clear, I'm not suggesting that guys like Settlemeyer have been lying to us. I think the decisions and strategy of this decision were made at a much higher level than Scott. He was simply told the same thing we've heard all along: Poor sales do not justify continuance of the names.
OK, the black helicopters are swirling. Feel free to poke holes in my theory. Its only by eliminating the incorrect that we arrive at fact.
------------------
Owner, Nashville Speed & Performance
1996 Trans Am WS6
08-30-2002, 10:03 AM
#2
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,801
OK, I started fact checking a bit, starting with production numbers.
Since '98, here's F-body production:
Year/camaro/firebird/total
1998/47,200/33,100/80,300
1999/44,600/36,600/81,100
2000/43,200/31,600/74,700
2001/27,500/21,100/48,600 (shortened MY to accomodate early 2002 production start)
2002 (thru march)/27,448/20,137/47,585
OK, so my thoughts on Firebird production outpacing Camaro were wrong. But look at total production, remaining reasonably steady at 75,000 units or better until the shortened 01 MY. One could reasonably argue that it would have also hit 75K had the production run been allowed to run a full year.
And by using the thru March numbers for 2002, we can guesstimate that total production through August 27 will total approximately 71,350 units. So the f-body platform basically maintaned production in excess of 70K units/year WITHOUTH any significant advertising or promotion.
In my opinion, 75,000 units a year is viable for a new vehicle. GM has plenty of cars out there which sell far less than 75,000 units per year and that ate up far more in development costs than a 5th gen would. Most notably the Aztek. The Monte doesn't sell that many units either.
So I just can't buy that lagging sales was the reason the decision was made not to plan a 5th gen, conceeding a market entirely to the competition and leaving two of the company's most recognizable names without cars to attach them to. Sorry, I just can't accept that when sales were actually pretty stable over the last 5 years even though they were only half of '94 and '95 numbers.
[This message has been edited by Chris 96 WS6 (edited August 30, 2002).]
Since '98, here's F-body production:
Year/camaro/firebird/total
1998/47,200/33,100/80,300
1999/44,600/36,600/81,100
2000/43,200/31,600/74,700
2001/27,500/21,100/48,600 (shortened MY to accomodate early 2002 production start)
2002 (thru march)/27,448/20,137/47,585
OK, so my thoughts on Firebird production outpacing Camaro were wrong. But look at total production, remaining reasonably steady at 75,000 units or better until the shortened 01 MY. One could reasonably argue that it would have also hit 75K had the production run been allowed to run a full year.
And by using the thru March numbers for 2002, we can guesstimate that total production through August 27 will total approximately 71,350 units. So the f-body platform basically maintaned production in excess of 70K units/year WITHOUTH any significant advertising or promotion.
In my opinion, 75,000 units a year is viable for a new vehicle. GM has plenty of cars out there which sell far less than 75,000 units per year and that ate up far more in development costs than a 5th gen would. Most notably the Aztek. The Monte doesn't sell that many units either.
So I just can't buy that lagging sales was the reason the decision was made not to plan a 5th gen, conceeding a market entirely to the competition and leaving two of the company's most recognizable names without cars to attach them to. Sorry, I just can't accept that when sales were actually pretty stable over the last 5 years even though they were only half of '94 and '95 numbers.
[This message has been edited by Chris 96 WS6 (edited August 30, 2002).]
08-30-2002, 10:32 AM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
It's been stated many times over the past year or 2 that it wasn't poor sales. Despite what some say when they visit here, there was a distinct effort to kill Camaro off. Even in GMHP, a GM representitive said that even with reduced sales Camaro was still making money.
So whatever the reason or purpose, Camaro died either because of mismanagement & incompetence of Team Camaro or their bosses, or a purposeful decision to kill it off.
With Mustang sales nearing 200,000 cars, and seemingly everyone & their brother getting into the RWD affordable performance car market, claims that there isn't a market for Camaro is downright dishonest.
So whatever the reason or purpose, Camaro died either because of mismanagement & incompetence of Team Camaro or their bosses, or a purposeful decision to kill it off.
With Mustang sales nearing 200,000 cars, and seemingly everyone & their brother getting into the RWD affordable performance car market, claims that there isn't a market for Camaro is downright dishonest.
08-30-2002, 10:39 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Rogers, AR, USA
Posts: 52
Chris 96 WS6,
Thanks for this new theory that is very interesting and quite possibly true. I didn't realize that the GM contract with St. Therese was running out in '05.
Hmmm...If you're correct then maybe GM does have some "unspoken" plans for the F5. Either way it sounds like the F5 cars will be built in a newer, more technologically advanced assembly plant. Maybe the cars themselves will be more advanced also. I just can't help dreaming about a totally awesome looking and performing 5th gen that we can all be proud of. One that won't draw criticism because people think it's not advanced enough. I like technology, but then again, simple, tried and true works pretty well for me also.
bburn
------------------
'94 Z28 - stock med. patriot red A4 T-top. Looking for an M6 F-body!!!
Thanks for this new theory that is very interesting and quite possibly true. I didn't realize that the GM contract with St. Therese was running out in '05.
Hmmm...If you're correct then maybe GM does have some "unspoken" plans for the F5. Either way it sounds like the F5 cars will be built in a newer, more technologically advanced assembly plant. Maybe the cars themselves will be more advanced also. I just can't help dreaming about a totally awesome looking and performing 5th gen that we can all be proud of. One that won't draw criticism because people think it's not advanced enough. I like technology, but then again, simple, tried and true works pretty well for me also.
bburn
------------------
'94 Z28 - stock med. patriot red A4 T-top. Looking for an M6 F-body!!!
08-30-2002, 11:08 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 385
Perhaps the fact that government in Canada is becoming increasingly left leaning, and hence increasingly expensive to big business also led to GM taking advantage of an opportunity to close a plant?
08-30-2002, 01:02 PM
#6
Disciple
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,479
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by ckt101:
Perhaps the fact that government in Canada is becoming increasingly left leaning, and hence increasingly expensive to big business also led to GM taking advantage of an opportunity to close a plant?</font>
Perhaps the fact that government in Canada is becoming increasingly left leaning, and hence increasingly expensive to big business also led to GM taking advantage of an opportunity to close a plant?</font>
I think the age, size and location of the plant would be a more significant factor.
08-30-2002, 03:08 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
I thought that whole rumor about the CAW holding any kind of rights to the Camaro and Firebird nameplates was untrue. I can't fathom that GM would sign some kind of legal document stating that they cannot use their own cars' nameplates as they see fit until 2005 or whenever. That just doesn't make sense.
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.
08-30-2002, 03:28 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,504
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Z28Wilson:
I thought that whole rumor about the CAW holding any kind of rights to the Camaro and Firebird nameplates was untrue. I can't fathom that GM would sign some kind of legal document stating that they cannot use their own cars' nameplates as they see fit until 2005 or whenever. That just doesn't make sense.
</font>
I thought that whole rumor about the CAW holding any kind of rights to the Camaro and Firebird nameplates was untrue. I can't fathom that GM would sign some kind of legal document stating that they cannot use their own cars' nameplates as they see fit until 2005 or whenever. That just doesn't make sense.
</font>
Smells like BS to me
08-30-2002, 03:31 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Orlando, Florida USA
Posts: 66
Chris, it makes perfect sense to me an I agree totally. I always wondered why GM decided to move the assembly of f-bodies to St. Therese in the early 90's and they spent over a hundred million on an expansion to the old Norwood plant in the early 80's to build the 3rd genners. I worked on that expansion and there were labor problems back then with the UAW. There was a wild-cat strike by them and the union construction workers wouldn't cross their picket lines. So that shut our construction down until thier strike was settled. Not long after that, someone torched our construction trailers, and my office was destroyed. So what I'm getting at is the fact that labor problems have always existed and I think that GM, and probably others, shut the plant down and move elsewhere. Your theory is right on IMHO.
08-30-2002, 10:57 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,381
For years i heard the contract wore out in 2003. or um.. 3 4 days ago 
------------------
"Let the second era of muscle car wars begin!"
www.gerbilz28.cjb.net
1995.5 3.8L V6 red Camaro with a nice *** sound system.
www.mustangvscamaro.com Check it out! Its another cool site.
------------------
"Let the second era of muscle car wars begin!"
www.gerbilz28.cjb.net
1995.5 3.8L V6 red Camaro with a nice *** sound system.
www.mustangvscamaro.com Check it out! Its another cool site.
08-31-2002, 08:58 AM
#14
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,801
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by MissedShift:
I posted this a month ago. So there.
</font>
I posted this a month ago. So there.
</font>
