Conspiracy to kill the F-body? Not poor sales after all?
Registered User
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 210
From: Cincinnati, OH
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Chris 96 WS6:
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 It is hopelessly outdated and extremely expensive to operate at less than 1/2 capacity.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.
</font>
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.
</font>
Don't blame Lutz, Settlemire, et al. The f-bofy hiatus is a solid business decision.
------------------
2000 SS #1547
President,
Cadre Computer Resources, Inc.
www.ccr.com
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bearcat Steve:
The f-body hiatus is a solid business decision.
</font>
The f-body hiatus is a solid business decision.
</font>
------------------
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.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 8
From: N.Massapequa,NY,USA
damn, this is actually a really interesting theory, and it probably has a lot of merit to the reason behind the death of the F-body. Now the question - is there really a contract through 2005 which disables GM from using the Camaro/Firebird name?
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 417
From: Malden, Ma
I uess I'll put my .02 cents on this and see if what I know of might be right. From what I heard, and I'm not too sure where and what the source was although I think it to be reliable, is that GM cannot build another car with the Camaro or Firebird name in any other plant plant but St. Therese. But I think this only applied if ST. Therese was still open, so that GM couldn't just pick up and leave to make the F-body in some other plant. So it's possible, based on what was said previously in this post about GM purposely killing the F-body to close down St Therese. Now the fact that the Camaro and Firebird are no longer made (on hiatus), GM can close down St. Therese without hearing a pipe from CAW. This makes sense if you think about it. The plant was too large and could produce a hell of a lot more than what was being built, and GM wanted to get out. Hopefully the Camaro and Firebird make a return.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,801
From: Nashville, TN
I don't have any firm evidence of a contract with CAW preventing GM from producing Camaro/Firebird anwhere else, but statements about some kind of agreement to that effect have been kicked around here for a couple of years by the various people who are believed to be "in the know". That is sort of the glue that holds this theory together and if/when somebody discovers there is no such contract, then this theory gets a little less viable.
Registered User
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 210
From: Cincinnati, OH
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Chris 96 WS6:
I don't have any firm evidence of a contract with CAW preventing GM from producing Camaro/Firebird anwhere else, but statements about some kind of agreement to that effect have been kicked around here for a couple of years by the various people who are believed to be "in the know". That is sort of the glue that holds this theory together and if/when somebody discovers there is no such contract, then this theory gets a little less viable.</font>
I don't have any firm evidence of a contract with CAW preventing GM from producing Camaro/Firebird anwhere else, but statements about some kind of agreement to that effect have been kicked around here for a couple of years by the various people who are believed to be "in the know". That is sort of the glue that holds this theory together and if/when somebody discovers there is no such contract, then this theory gets a little less viable.</font>
Canadians are doing it to themselves and the f-body loyalists are collateral damage.
Then Grasshopper, examine the contract to see why F-body is on hiatus. Enlightenment is there for those who seek it.
----------------------------------
Z28Wilson, this may be the most solid business decision GM has ever made. Don't blame GM -- they are NOT the enemy in this case.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bearcat Steve:
Then Grasshopper, examine the contract to see why F-body is on hiatus. Enlightenment is there for those who seek it.
</font>
Then Grasshopper, examine the contract to see why F-body is on hiatus. Enlightenment is there for those who seek it.
</font>
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,801
From: Nashville, TN
Bearcat Steve, why not go ahead and share what you know rather than doing this cagey teacher/student thing? If you have knowledge to support this theory why keep it bottled up? Maybe you don't have any good info on this, but the 'grasshopper' stuff implies you do. No flames...just asking questions.
As for the health cars costs, its true their socialized health care system is super expensive, but is it so high as to cancel out the cheaper wages made possible by the favorable U.S./CA exchange rates? Besides, relative costs of healthcare are sort of tangential to this discussion, since the main point is that GM wanted out of St. Therese because costs were too high. Exactly why costs are so high is of lesser relevance.
------------------
Owner, Nashville Speed & Performance
1996 Trans Am WS6
As for the health cars costs, its true their socialized health care system is super expensive, but is it so high as to cancel out the cheaper wages made possible by the favorable U.S./CA exchange rates? Besides, relative costs of healthcare are sort of tangential to this discussion, since the main point is that GM wanted out of St. Therese because costs were too high. Exactly why costs are so high is of lesser relevance.
------------------
Owner, Nashville Speed & Performance
1996 Trans Am WS6
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by guionM:
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.
</font>
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.
</font>
Any of us who own a late-model F-body should be happy that the corporate guys were putting effort into a dying carline, not just giving up.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,748
From: New England
call Mulder he can find out...
The F-Files!
The Truth is out there!!!!
------------------
thanks
David Morgan
the "Over Drive Gang"
94 Z28 A4, K/N FIPK!,AIT Relocator,TB bypass,99 SS MAF Airfoil,HPP+, Shiftkit,Cutout, Flowmaster 80 series American Thunder Exhaust with 3" Chrome tips GMS Strut Tower Brace, GMS Sub Frame Connectors AND 93-96 GM Export Tail Lights! GTS Headlight Covers and Tail covers.
http://overdrive-gang.tripod.com
Check it out !! you might know some of the cars, or my friends.and a few of their rides frequent the pages of muscle car mags
Congrats Tony L. of the "ODG" Owner of The BBC 6SP 81 Malibu
Making Hot Rod Mags top 10 cars of 2001!!
The F-Files!
The Truth is out there!!!!
------------------
thanks
David Morgan
the "Over Drive Gang"
94 Z28 A4, K/N FIPK!,AIT Relocator,TB bypass,99 SS MAF Airfoil,HPP+, Shiftkit,Cutout, Flowmaster 80 series American Thunder Exhaust with 3" Chrome tips GMS Strut Tower Brace, GMS Sub Frame Connectors AND 93-96 GM Export Tail Lights! GTS Headlight Covers and Tail covers.
http://overdrive-gang.tripod.com
Check it out !! you might know some of the cars, or my friends.and a few of their rides frequent the pages of muscle car mags
Congrats Tony L. of the "ODG" Owner of The BBC 6SP 81 Malibu
Making Hot Rod Mags top 10 cars of 2001!!
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
I'm with Chris on this one, if you know something, spill it. Otherwise, you add nothing to the conversation.
Personal opinion:
GM DEFINITELY had to cut capacity. St. Therese was a likely candidate, and it got whacked. The F-body went with it.
Personal opinion:
GM DEFINITELY had to cut capacity. St. Therese was a likely candidate, and it got whacked. The F-body went with it.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,801
From: Nashville, TN
I was just digging around on the CAW's website. I didn't find anything about a specific F-body contract, but I did find a couple of moderately interesting things:
http://www.caw.ca/news/videonews/archives/980130_1e.asp
This is the text of a speech in May ’02 by CAW president Buzz Hargrove. If you can cut through all the socialist dogma there are a couple of tidbits in there (bold emphasis added by me)
http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/bargainin...2speech.asp#gm
What are the problems facing the industry? We have record sales so the problem is not the market. No one can argue it is the market. Yet it is interesting to see how analysts can distort reality. I had an interview today with reporter from a Detroit publication, Wards Automotive Reports. The reporter maintained that the analysts are saying that because the UAW collective agreement does not expire until 2003 and the CAW's contract expires this year, the automakers are closing Canadian plants this year because the UAW contract doesn't allow plant closures until 2003. I invited the reporter to look more closely at our plants.
General Motors is closing a plant in Quebec which is the only plant that builds the Camaro and Firebird. It would not matter if it was a UAW plant or CAW plant or when the contract expired. If the company is not selling the cars the plant will close. You cannot convince me that because our agreement expires this year that is the reason General Motors is closing the Ste-Thérèse assembly plant.
---
Now its clear Hargrove belives St. Therese closing is due to sales only. Funny that a Union leader is so willing to tow the corporate line in a situation in which one of Canada's largest provinces is losing its only remaining major automotive facility. That seems counter intuitive to me.
But, the more interesting thing is that the CAW apparently holds one big contract with GM, which expires next year. Theory still makes sense from a standpoint of GM wanting out of St. Therese, but if there is no f-body specific contract then it makes no sense that GM would delay a new f-body and go so long with no plans for one. Perhaps we will hear some news about the 5th gen after the '03 CAW contract expiration?
------------------
Owner, Nashville Speed & Performance
1996 Trans Am WS6
http://www.caw.ca/news/videonews/archives/980130_1e.asp
This is the text of a speech in May ’02 by CAW president Buzz Hargrove. If you can cut through all the socialist dogma there are a couple of tidbits in there (bold emphasis added by me)
http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/bargainin...2speech.asp#gm
What are the problems facing the industry? We have record sales so the problem is not the market. No one can argue it is the market. Yet it is interesting to see how analysts can distort reality. I had an interview today with reporter from a Detroit publication, Wards Automotive Reports. The reporter maintained that the analysts are saying that because the UAW collective agreement does not expire until 2003 and the CAW's contract expires this year, the automakers are closing Canadian plants this year because the UAW contract doesn't allow plant closures until 2003. I invited the reporter to look more closely at our plants.
General Motors is closing a plant in Quebec which is the only plant that builds the Camaro and Firebird. It would not matter if it was a UAW plant or CAW plant or when the contract expired. If the company is not selling the cars the plant will close. You cannot convince me that because our agreement expires this year that is the reason General Motors is closing the Ste-Thérèse assembly plant.
---
Now its clear Hargrove belives St. Therese closing is due to sales only. Funny that a Union leader is so willing to tow the corporate line in a situation in which one of Canada's largest provinces is losing its only remaining major automotive facility. That seems counter intuitive to me.
But, the more interesting thing is that the CAW apparently holds one big contract with GM, which expires next year. Theory still makes sense from a standpoint of GM wanting out of St. Therese, but if there is no f-body specific contract then it makes no sense that GM would delay a new f-body and go so long with no plans for one. Perhaps we will hear some news about the 5th gen after the '03 CAW contract expiration?
------------------
Owner, Nashville Speed & Performance
1996 Trans Am WS6
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 74
From: Ball Ground, GA, USA
The agreement mentioned earlier with the Camaro/Firebird name not being able to be used until 2005 without going to the Ste. Therese plant - Would that coincide with GM saying that they would leave Ste. Therese standing for the next 16 months?
http://www.canada.com/montreal/montr...0-5C7B3AA655A6
http://www.canada.com/montreal/montr...0-5C7B3AA655A6
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Z28Wilson:
The F-body leaves GM without a single affordable performance car, at a time when other manuafacturers are about to bombard us with their new products. I don't think I have to run through the list again. The new Mustang will be out shortly. IF F-body returns it will have a lot of ground to make up to win back lost customers. How solid does that business decision look now?
</font>
The F-body leaves GM without a single affordable performance car, at a time when other manuafacturers are about to bombard us with their new products. I don't think I have to run through the list again. The new Mustang will be out shortly. IF F-body returns it will have a lot of ground to make up to win back lost customers. How solid does that business decision look now?
</font>
Who cares that GM doesn't have an affordable performance car? Most people simply don't care. If performance was the leading quoteint in buying a car the top sellers wouln't be bland FWD sedans like Accord, Camry, and Impala. If HP was a leading quotient in what people want, the Mustang GT wouldn't have lost to a freaking Stratus R/T in a comparo in Car and Driver this month. The Mustang is a enigma in the sports coupe market because it sells so well. Other cars that are in the market like Celica, Monte Carlo, and Eclipse don't sell near the 100,000's a year. If you look at the overall sports coupe market it is very small volume wise and in it's impact of GM's bottom line. GM probaly makes more money selling 1,000 suburbans than they do selling 100,000 f-bodies.
The f-body had become a characiture of it's self. A car that had lost it's character in a time when character is everything. Whiel teh car was able to keep owners who had been with it a long time and felt passionate about it, the current car did not have enough charcter to attract new buyers.
I think this lay off it two fold...first the plant issues which Chris mentioned are very much a part of it. I think the Canadian governments overbearingness is a much larger factor than people think...But also the car needs some time off. Right now people simply don't care about the F-body...and if they do it's only to make a joke.
Wait a few years and bring the car back with a fresh start I say..Look what it has done for the image of the Thunderbird.
We need to start a serious "Bring the Camaro Back" site.
------------------
Branden-Founder- GMInsidenews and NewAgeGTO
1995 Firebird White with Red Leather!- 2002 TA exhuast, JVC Head unit, 350 watt amp pushing two 10" subs..
Slow can be sexy
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by formula79:
Okay i guess I get to play the role of ******* here....
Who cares that GM doesn't have an affordable performance car? Most people simply don't care. If performance was the leading quoteint in buying a car the top sellers wouln't be bland FWD sedans like Accord, Camry, and Impala. If HP was a leading quotient in what people want, the Mustang GT wouldn't have lost to a freaking Stratus R/T in a comparo in Car and Driver this month. The Mustang is a enigma in the sports coupe market because it sells so well. Other cars that are in the market like Celica, Monte Carlo, and Eclipse don't sell near the 100,000's a year. If you look at the overall sports coupe market it is very small volume wise and in it's impact of GM's bottom line. GM probaly makes more money selling 1,000 suburbans than they do selling 100,000 f-bodies.
The f-body had become a characiture of it's self. A car that had lost it's character in a time when character is everything. Whiel teh car was able to keep owners who had been with it a long time and felt passionate about it, the current car did not have enough charcter to attract new buyers.
I think this lay off it two fold...first the plant issues which Chris mentioned are very much a part of it. I think the Canadian governments overbearingness is a much larger factor than people think...But also the car needs some time off. Right now people simply don't care about the F-body...and if they do it's only to make a joke.
Wait a few years and bring the car back with a fresh start I say..Look what it has done for the image of the Thunderbird.
We need to start a serious "Bring the Camaro Back" site.
</font>
Okay i guess I get to play the role of ******* here....
Who cares that GM doesn't have an affordable performance car? Most people simply don't care. If performance was the leading quoteint in buying a car the top sellers wouln't be bland FWD sedans like Accord, Camry, and Impala. If HP was a leading quotient in what people want, the Mustang GT wouldn't have lost to a freaking Stratus R/T in a comparo in Car and Driver this month. The Mustang is a enigma in the sports coupe market because it sells so well. Other cars that are in the market like Celica, Monte Carlo, and Eclipse don't sell near the 100,000's a year. If you look at the overall sports coupe market it is very small volume wise and in it's impact of GM's bottom line. GM probaly makes more money selling 1,000 suburbans than they do selling 100,000 f-bodies.
The f-body had become a characiture of it's self. A car that had lost it's character in a time when character is everything. Whiel teh car was able to keep owners who had been with it a long time and felt passionate about it, the current car did not have enough charcter to attract new buyers.
I think this lay off it two fold...first the plant issues which Chris mentioned are very much a part of it. I think the Canadian governments overbearingness is a much larger factor than people think...But also the car needs some time off. Right now people simply don't care about the F-body...and if they do it's only to make a joke.
Wait a few years and bring the car back with a fresh start I say..Look what it has done for the image of the Thunderbird.
We need to start a serious "Bring the Camaro Back" site.
</font>
If that is the case... and no one cares... then why are so many companies readying new affordable performance?
It's particularly embarrassing for GM when you consider that they are the largest automaker in the world... and companies like Nissan , et al are bringing out cars that GM appartantly can't.
The whole notion of Camaro & Firebird needing time off is silliness. Put out a good car, and people will buy it.