Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

Nissan does worse than GM, Toyota/Honda worse than Ford

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 2, 2008 | 08:00 PM
  #16  
blackrat's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 587
From: Bay Area, CA
Originally Posted by UnknownWarrior
yet again who wanted the large trucks and SUVs tho? we the AMERICAN PEOPLE did... GM was trying to do small cars but when they saw people bought their large trucks and suvs before small cars their priorities changed
And? Many companies go out of business for that same reason every year. Why are any of the big 3 any different? Part of running a business and making that big money is to keep an eye on trends and try to be ahead of the game, right?


They failed, again.
Old Dec 2, 2008 | 08:02 PM
  #17  
TMDZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,450
From: LA, So Cal
Originally Posted by UnknownWarrior
the big 3 saw it more profitable to sell trucks and suvs over small cars period that is business if you had a store and 2 items and sold out of one item but never the other which do you think you should supply more for your customers?
This is true, but a good business owner knows that any product, it does not matter how profitable, eventually will be replaced.

A little thing called forecasting. The big 3 should learn it.
Old Dec 2, 2008 | 08:18 PM
  #18  
anasazi's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,604
From: Milton, FL
Originally Posted by UnknownWarrior
the big 3 saw it more profitable to sell trucks and suvs over small cars period that is business if you had a store andonly had 2 items for sell and sold out of ITEM A but never ITEM B which do you think you should supply more for your customers?
you left out the part on how the guy across the street was selling the hell out of ITEM B and making good profits doing it but yet they ignored that fact and branded it unprofitable.
Old Dec 2, 2008 | 08:19 PM
  #19  
guionM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Originally Posted by UnknownWarrior
yet again who wanted the large trucks and SUVs tho? we the AMERICAN PEOPLE did... GM was trying to do small cars but when they saw people bought their large trucks and suvs before small cars their priorities changed
In the past the big 3 had something in all parts of the market. This time they put everything into the most profitable part. The market and fuel priced did what they occasionally do. As was mentioned, they were caught with their collective pants down without anything strong in the market segments where they need to be.

Originally Posted by UnknownWarrior
the big 3 saw it more profitable to sell trucks and suvs over small cars period that is business if you had a store andonly had 2 items for sell and sold out of ITEM A but never ITEM B which do you think you should supply more for your customers?
Economic downturns aren't anything new. Neither are fuel price spikes. Did they honestly think that these possibilities were extinct?

Even in the 70s, the big 3 had small cars and even the Camaro grew in sales because it was small & economical (by standards of the day). This time around, even Chrysler... a company that has ALWAYS had small economical cars in their lineup... hasn't a single vehicle smaller than a midsize. A less than great midsize.

(
Old Dec 2, 2008 | 08:30 PM
  #20  
93Phoenix's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 392
From: Roch, NY
What's this bull****? GM wasn't the only one making SUV in the 90s. Off the top of my head: what about Toyota with the 4Runner and Passport, Honda with the Passport, Nissan with the Pathfinder?
Old Dec 2, 2008 | 09:13 PM
  #21  
blackrat's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 587
From: Bay Area, CA
Originally Posted by 93Phoenix
What's this bull****? GM wasn't the only one making SUV in the 90s. Off the top of my head: what about Toyota with the 4Runner and Passport, Honda with the Passport, Nissan with the Pathfinder?
A niche segment for them. The bulk of their attention was in their cars.
Old Dec 2, 2008 | 11:24 PM
  #22  
Robert_Nashville's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Originally Posted by Z28x
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/02/b...are-a-dime-ed/

I wish the news would talk about how bad Nissan and the rest of Japan are doing and stop focusing only on the Big 3

BMW Group -26.8%
Chrysler LLC -47%
FoMoCo -30.6%
General Motors -41.3%
Honda America -31.6%
Nissan NA -42.2%
Toyota Mo Co -33.9%
Be careful what you wish for...and you need to be careful with stats; they don't always say what you think they say. One might also suggest that you spend at least as much time looking at the YTD numbers as you do looking at sales year on year if you really want to have an idea of how the various manufacturers are doing

In case you missed it...

BMW: -6.8%
CHRYSLER: -27.7%
FORD: -20.6%
GM: -21.9%
Honda: -5.4%
NISSAN: -9.1%
TOYOTA: -13.4%

Makes the picture a little more clear doesn't it?

Put another way, companies like BMW, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, etc. are likely looking at a lackluster year and significantly reduced Net Incomes (but still with a Net Income) while Chrysler, Ford and GM are looking at continuing, large Net Losses.

Per: http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...812029986/1078

Last edited by Robert_Nashville; Dec 2, 2008 at 11:54 PM.
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 01:39 AM
  #23  
94LightningGal's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,178
From: Payson, AZ USA
In the same vein that you can talk about the Detroit 3 chasing the easy money of the truck/SUV sales............... you can also talk about the banks chasing the easy money of the mortgage and home sales bubble.

It is the same. The difference is, the banks and investors get a huge, next to no strings attached bailout. The Detroit 3 look for $25 billion in a bridge loan, and get thrown to the wolves.

They all made mistakes.

According to some, we should just take the automakers out back and shoot them all. The banks................. well................. I guess we will throw more money at them when they come whining again.
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 04:31 AM
  #24  
SCNGENNFTHGEN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,579
From: The Land of Pleasant Living
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by UnknownWarrior
yet again who wanted the large trucks and SUVs tho? we the AMERICAN PEOPLE did... GM was trying to do small cars but when they saw people bought their large trucks and suvs before small cars their priorities changed
And there are plenty of people NOT bitching, driving said suv's lovin' em'. It is exactly what the people wanted. This notion that they don't build what the people want is complete BS. People will still buy big suv's! They don't build what the ******** want to force everyone to buy is more like it! People like to spend time in their cars, some people like space inside their vehicles. And sometimes people like to bring other people too, maybe even some equipment based around whatever their hobbies might be. For this they NEED a big vehicle, and they are with V8's and everything, but people in this country want V8 power, and for what they are, the MPG is pretty dam good these days. What people don't want, is to be mandated into tiny little electric ****boxes! The gov't has mandated the big 3 to death over the years, but this could be the straw.
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 06:48 AM
  #25  
My Red 93Z-28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,503
From: BFE, Ohio
Originally Posted by Robert_Nashville
Be careful what you wish for...and you need to be careful with stats; they don't always say what you think they say. One might also suggest that you spend at least as much time looking at the YTD numbers as you do looking at sales year on year if you really want to have an idea of how the various manufacturers are doing

In case you missed it...

BMW: -6.8%
CHRYSLER: -27.7%
FORD: -20.6%
GM: -21.9%
Honda: -5.4%
NISSAN: -9.1%
TOYOTA: -13.4%

Makes the picture a little more clear doesn't it?

Put another way, companies like BMW, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, etc. are likely looking at a lackluster year and significantly reduced Net Incomes (but still with a Net Income) while Chrysler, Ford and GM are looking at continuing, large Net Losses.

Per: http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...812029986/1078

The lower numbers for the quarter also come at a time when Toyota had 0% financing as well and now Nissan has it. Nobody is selling cars right now, no matter what you make or what kind of deals you have.
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 07:12 AM
  #26  
Jason E's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
The interesting thing about Chrysler's numbers is that 16% of that 47% number was a pre-planned reduction in fleet sales. Retail was down 31%...the same as Toyota. Their fleet sales were down a whopping 63%.

Interestingly, Chrysler's RETAIL market share has gone up from a low of 7.6% in July or August to 9.9% in November...proof trucks and SUVs are coming back a little bit.
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 08:52 AM
  #27  
Adam4356's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 176
From: Cleveland, OH
very misleading thread title.

Sales for the quarter, thats all that is. If you want to counter argue the health of the companies then bring in the balance sheets, etc.
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 09:21 AM
  #28  
Robert_Nashville's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Originally Posted by My Red 93Z-28
The lower numbers for the quarter also come at a time when Toyota had 0% financing as well and now Nissan has it. Nobody is selling cars right now, no matter what you make or what kind of deals you have.
No offense to you personally but I'm really getting tired of the "nobody is selling cars right now" mantra...it's old...and it's simply not true.

10-11 million units per year is hardly "nothing".

Yes, the market is very weak compared to prior years (why did everyone assume it would stay at historically high levels forever?).

Yes, credit is difficult to come by for poor credit risks (as it should be).

Yes, we are in a recession (as if they never happen).

Yes, the stock market is in the toilet right now (as if THAT has never happened before)!.

People need to get a grip...most people are at least as well off or even better off TODAY as they were at this time LAST YEAR...meaning that unless YOU are or are about to become unemployed (or facing some other challenge that has nothing to do with the economy); you have no reason to participate in this now declared recession.

Be cautions/spend your money wisely? Sure.

Make some investment adjustments? Maybe (but only after taking a long, long candid look at you investment portfolio (if you have a sound investment strategy you probably don't need to "adjust"; you just need to buy because things are on sale right now).

Reduce/get out of debt? Absolutely (unless you like having a weight around your neck).

But there is no reason to succumb to the Chicken Little Sky is Falling mentality going around right now!
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 11:54 AM
  #29  
latinspice-94T/A's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 197
From: Bayamon, PR
Originally Posted by UnknownWarrior
the big 3 saw it more profitable to sell trucks and suvs over small cars period that is business if you had a store andonly had 2 items for sell and sold out of ITEM A but never ITEM B which do you think you should supply more for your customers?
Always, always have a plan B down your product pipeline.

Good companies don't respond to trends, they set them. Toyota makes a great maytag and managed to strengthen its brand selling bland, unremarkable grocery getters. Surprise, that's the largest chunk of the market.
Old Dec 3, 2008 | 12:08 PM
  #30  
Adam4356's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 176
From: Cleveland, OH
Originally Posted by latinspice-94T/A

Good companies don't respond to trends, they set them.

and anticipate them.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:46 AM.