I wonder how Toyota’s ROI on the new Tundra program is looking now. Not so hot, I imagine.

I have no true brand loyalty, although I do love Mazda, which is mostly owned by Ford. Next time I buy a vehicle I’ll buy whatever fits my needs the most, which right now, none of the big 3 have as offerings.

You know nothing of my education … but I’m quite sure you have a very good idea that I am very intelligent. Far more intelligent than you, write-off.

You are so out of your league, it’s comical, loser.

“Because they don’t have any efficient cars”

Never mind that it isn’t true, but think for yourself: Leaving out the usual import humpers, how many random people have piped in with similar statements over just the last 2 weeks?

Not to worry, the illiterates like ‘NoNameDufus’ can keep their jobs mopping floors and transporting vehicles by truck … with falling real dollar wealth and a transfer of manufacturing to the U.S., monkeys like him will be doing all right in the years to come.

The fundamental problem with the domestic 3 brands is: EXECUTION OF THE PLAN.

The domestic brand would start with a concept and go through everything on the car that they felt could be made cheaper or where economies of scale could be taken advantage of. They would sacrifice design, ergonomics, build quality and brand image among other things to save money. Why? Because they have to.

Another part of executing a successful product launch is to determine demand for the vehicle, constantly manage production to keep it in line with a healthy dealer day’s supply. The domestic brands, until recently, pushed inventory on the dealers so that they could make as much money as possible, leaving their dealer’s out to dry with vehicles they couldn’t sell. At some point, the dealer’s began to turn down inventory, meaning less wholesales to dealers and less income for the manufacturer. This is one reason why the brand have been in the mindset of looking for ways to pinch pennies; it is because they had less income.

Well you would question, why not slow down production of slow-selling vehicle and increase the vehicles that are selling well? They couldn’t easily do that with UAW. The UAW effectively had precedence over how their plants were run. They couldn’t slow production or close plants without threats of lawsuits or strikes. In addition, the domestics got themselves into ridiculous labor contract overpaying workers and creating huge legacy costs. So, now, the domestic brands have very little control over production and costs.

Going back to the dealers who had too much supply of vehicle that wouldn’t sell. The domestic brands decided, “if dealers won’t buy them, we need to give a discount to someone else to take these vehicle off our hands”. Answer: Fleet sales. Up until recently, fleet accounted for 25% of Chrysler sales. The problem with fleet is that it diminished the value of vehicles already owned by retail customers, going back to the supply/demand effect of value/price. So when the vehicle was being sold traded in, the customer would owe more on the vehicle. At some point, customers stop trying to buy new cars because they were so upside down in their current vehicles that it was financially impossible to get out of it. Solution? CASH BACK and 0% FINANCING. Although it may have seemed these financing tactics were used to incite customers into new vehicles, it was really a solution to get people out of their old vehicle for a reduced cost.

I COULD GO ON ALL DAY ABOUT POOR EXECUTION. IT IS THE ONLY THING THAT KEEPS THE DOMESTIC BRANDS FROM A RETURN TO GREATNESS.

BUT THEY NEED TO HURRY QUICKLY. BEFORE TOO LONG, THE ONLY THING THESE BRANDS CAN HANG ONTO IS CUSTOMER LOYALTY, WHICH IS ERODING DAILY.

Because they don’t have any efficient cars.

Gotta love Toyota’s blunder with the Tundra, but this is why they’re the best right now: they’re fixing their mistake right away instead of rationalizing it until they’re in a deep hole.

And they still have tons of capacity at other plants, so why not shutter a few truck plants?

While it sounds logical, the question begs itself: why not GM, Ford and Chrysler shift production of efficient cars to their truck plants?
Comment by autonut, posted on June6 at 4:27 pm

Because that would make too much sense…