How do you know that Toyota is not heading down the same path as GM, but just a few years behind?

They try to jump into the truck market only to see demand crushed by $4.00 gas.

They try to open a new plant in MS for the new prius only to see demand sink due to $1.50 gas and economic woes.

Toyota's "no layoff" policy is their version of GM's job bank.

Toyota is without a doubt in a better position being that this is their 1st loss in 70 years, but they better learn from GM or they'll wind up just like them.

B

 

Frankly, we don't know for sure. There are a variety of threats to Toyota; a resurgent GM would certainly be one, and if the Chinese unlock the mystery to building a good car, then we're all screwed.

But as GM shows, giants take time to be slayed, and so I feel pretty confident saying that Toyota can ride out this current storm despite its gloomy prediction for next year and its recent missteps (I'm thinking that the Tundra effort cost them a few billion dollars). If the company's collective ego gets in the way of good decision making, then it won't learn valuable lessons from the inevitable failures. Toyota also needs to prove that it can survive and adapt instead of just growing at some steady (and largely unreasonable) pace by largely emulating those who have gone before it. The Prius is an example that's obvious by its solitude.

At some point, though, the auto industry has to change from its current zero-margin (or less!) hyper-competitive and over-capacitized nature to something where supply is appropriate for demand and profit margins are attractive enough to justify the capital investment required to run the industry. The days of having several dozen car companies around the world - with many of those aspiring to be "full-line" manufacturers - will soon come to an end. That basically means a game of "last man standing", and Toyota has a very good chance of surviving long enough to reap the benefits.

Please don't take this as nuthugging - this is just my brutally honest assessment of the situation.

 

Negative perception equals fewer sales. Fewer sales equals declining market share. Declining market share means less operating capital.

The Chevy Malibu is as good, if not better than, the Accord and Camry. But the Accord and Camry outsell the Malibu by a good margin. Why? Because of the lingering negative perception of American cars by the uninformed mass car-buying public.

 

If the perception is correct; then shouldn't all those things have happened?

If you look at a specific model here and there, I think GM is on par with or even better thsn its competition but I'm not sure you can say the same for all of GM's products compared to all of some other manufacturer's products.

Whether the current perception of GM's products is correct or not, I don't think perception is the problem; I think it's the underlying issues that caused the negative perception that is the problem; at least that's how I see it.

 

why is eric bryant at the head of 90% of the debate around this place?


everyone needs to stop trying to pound their opinions into the heads of people that disagree with them.

 

The Malibu/Accord/Camry comparison was just an example of the fact it doesn't matter if GM has a single model, or if all its models, is/are better than the competition, they will sell less than the comp. because people are stuck on the "domestics are junk" BS.

If you were to do a "man-on-the-street" poll with passers-by, using the Malibu/Accord/Camry comparison, asking:
1. Which car did the best on the J.D. Power & Associates Initial Quality Score?
2. Which car would you buy based strictly on how well it was built (quality)?
I guarantee you most, if not all, will pick the Accord or Camry to answer both of the above questions.

You can look all over the 'Net and see examples of ignorant quotes. One example:
"If most American cars weren't crap, I might consider buying one. As most of them are, I will stick with Honda."

 

I suspect that's because for decades, their perception was true.

I also would think that few people outside of gearheads or people in the industry; few know or care about JD Power ratings.

 

not in this day of interwebz..

I dont know if anyone caught this. It was on TV on CNN I think (been flipping through the channels about this) Very spot on guy on his talking about the problems with the big 3 the auto industry and our goverments reaction.
he also mentioned that he had a test that two cars went down a line (not sure if it was an actual test) But one was a GM one was a Toyota. same process of building it. same paint same materials same everything. Then when it came time for the public to give it a rating they chose the asain car over the american car. Even thought they knew it was from the same line. They said it was built better and had better quality.

How can it be built better or more quality if they are built and made with the same stuff?
He was just pointing out the facts of perception of quality is still a huge lingering problem with GM Ford and Chrysler. GM is and Ford has turned the corner. But this market hit and just threw everything out of whack. The other thing is when issues pop up with Toyta they do a great job of covering it up.
You know how many people who quote me the ToTY crap about the Tundra and how its the best truck on the market yadda yadda yadda cus its a Toyota. Funny when I email them links to what the Tundra really can do and its not good stuff. They really do STFU and or say sorry.

 

Perception: When Toyota has a recall or a service bulletin, most people have never even heard of it- When there is the least hint of a problem with the Big 3, it is front page news for weeks- Remember the Ford 'Exploder' debacle, or 60 Minutes faking a report about Chevy trucks burning? Many people remember the 'news' about that, but almost nobody heard the retractions and clarifications-

It is not untrue to say that liberals in general hate cars- they blame them for development, and urban sprawl. The criticize them for pollution and blame them for our dependence on foreign oil- never acknowledging our government's lack of leadership or planning. And, the press is very liberal- If you doubt that, just remember the last election cycle, where one man was dubbed the Messiah, while every time his opponent sneezed of coughed, 'serious issues' were raised about his age or ability-

If you doubt perception, why do foreign cars sell at list, or even with markups 'market adjustments' while GM and other American manufacturers have to resort to employee pricing and red tag sales? Most of the 'sheeple' just blindly believe what the media touts, without bothering to do 5 minutes of unbiased research- This is not a knock against the Japanese- they build decent cars- just a restatement that our native industries have brought their own products up to comparable levels, but that news is mysteriously not getting out-

 

No Schadenfreude for you? That's a pretty typical human response I think.

 

Fixed

 

One resource I find very informative is the Fed's site nhtsa.com - they list every service bulletin and recall on any year, make or model.
Anyone who ever buys a vehicle may or may not have a certain problem or problems with it. It's completely random but probably doesn't happen to every single copy of that model that was made. However, when a recall is issued, that is a proven problem/defective that covers all copies of that model. One could argue (or not) that this is the true indicator of a vehicle's "quality". One poster stated on this site that he was still waiting for someone to say with a straight face that a 1998 Lumina was a better car than a 1998 Camry or Accord. I found on nhtsa.com that, since the last ten years, the Lumina and Camry are tied at 2 recalls each, while the Accord has had sixteen.

Of course, since alot of a cars' parts are made by a supplier, if a car has alot of problems, isn't the fault of the supplier and not the car manufacturer?

 

Blasphemer! This post will be ignored.

 

The US auto market has been pretty stagnant for at least the past few years, & that's not going to change because pretty much everyone who wants a new car and has means to pay for it has a new car.

That means a business model and profit scheme based on increasing market share is doomed to failue unless you are a new entry into the US auto market, which means you'll be peeling away sales from other companies. That's why all attempts by GM to increase market share and their setup of building profits on dominant market share has both failed so dismally.

Chevrolet is still a powerhouse on sales volume. Pontiac (as GM's 2nd biggest selling car division) is very strong on volume as well. An ad for a Impala and a Lecrosse costs the same, yet the Impala sells at least 5 times as many. Ditto design and sheetmetal and interior tooling, and in the Lecrosse's case, there is far less cars to share the costs.

Point is, Toyota has their name brand and Lexus (and to a lesser extent, Scion). Chevrolet should also become a super-division, since it's already mostly there. Taking in the Lucerne (Caprice?) and returning to a full range of each model (in the 70s and 80s you could get a Malibu that rivaled a Buick) while Cadillac continues doing what they've been doing.. becoming a global luxury brand.

 

QFT! Yup, been sayin' it for years. I've also been blasted for sayin' it... Costs...yeah that's a problem too, but IMO this is a bigger one!