[Michigan1LTRS]

The buying public prefers Camaro, AGAIN!! WOOHOO!!

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Is this part of the new math where less is more or is it a participation trophy where 3rd place makes you a winner. Either way I see a whole lot more wins coming up for this new Gen Camaro as with the into of the updated Mustang I am sure it will make a big jump into 1st place or I should say last place with the highest volume sold.

Business 101. The goal of an automotive manufacturer is not to sell more cars, the goal is to make more money.

Originally Posted by ssrs2lt

I can't imagine 4000-5000 sales a month is / was the goal. The fleet - rental sales is obviously in the GM business plan..it will be interesting to see if GM shifts away from this as the car sales continue to tank. There's still a large import car sold number they have not tapped into. No matter the spin being last blows

The car market continues to contract as customers lean toward CUV's and holding on to cars for longer. There is no "spin", only money in the bank. As stated above, the goal of a business is not to sell the most product, it's to make the most money.

Originally Posted by germanicus

So, you are a customer of the rental car industry, and once you sat next to someone who manages cars for an unrelated industry at a dinner, and are therefore qualified to know and represent the buying metrics for said rental car industry. Did you also once stay at a Holiday Inn Express?

As an investor I follow markets, including automotive, with great scrutiny. Price is king for fleet. Always has been. You think Avis cares what customers prefer to drive? But don't take my word for it. Post hard statistical evidence of factors influencing fleet purchasing decisions so we can discuss further.

Originally Posted by germanicus

Sorry if this sounds snarky, but you are really stretching. The notion that any of the major rental car companies (Enterprise, Avis, Hertz, Budget) pay no attention to customer preferences or market pressure is just silly.

Let me know when you've rented 900+ cars and we'll talk. All except National stick you in whatever car they please. I request a segment and then they bugger it up and give me what they have. At least with National I get to choose from available cars on the lot. Sometimes that means choosing between 7 Dodge Caravans and a Nissan Rogue.

Originally Posted by germanicus

No business on earth functions this way. This is bourne out by the fact that their fleets are clearly made up of different segments. SUV/Crossovers/Sub Compacts/Full Size Sedans etc. If what you said is true, and the consumer nor the renter care anything about specific models, they would simply have fleets made up of the cheapest vehicles (sub-compacts). I'm assuming you see the folly in this, as its clearly not the case.

I gather you don't rent much. I choose the segment (compact, intermediate, full size, SUV, truck, luxury, sport) and they stick me with whatever they darn well please in that segment. It changes day to day, week to week. Sometimes I get nothing in my segment and they give me a Suburban when I ordered a compact.

Originally Posted by germanicus

We have already had anecdotal evidence of someone claiming that rental Camaro's have been returned by customers due to visibility issues in this very thread. Does that claim sound far fetched? Someone renting a 6th gen and complaining about visibility

As far fetched as me telling you I refuse to drive a Mustang because of poor reliability. Who wants to spend time out of their day broke down on the side of the road in a Ford rental?

Originally Posted by germanicus

Tell me, if you were in charge of procurement for a rental company, wouldn't you be much less inclined to repurchase a vehicle that has had complaints, and has a history of returns by your customer base? This would in the very least, factor into your decision to purchase further units of that particular model. If the answer is yes, you just admitted that your previous claim is false:

If I were in charge, I would buy the cheapest vehicles I could find to maximize profit. Renters returning Camaro's for poor visibility is as unlikely as renters returning Mustangs for poor reliability.

Originally Posted by germanicus

Of course cost is a huge component, but its meaningless if that particular widget doesn't meet its core functional requirements or it does so poorly and you therefore must bear additional costs. If customers return to the lot and demand a replacement, you have not only just wasted the time of your staff, but you then need to calculate that you purchased two vehicles to satisfy that one customer in that particular transaction.

There is little practical difference between cars in a segment on a rental lot. How many customers return to the lot and demand a replacement? I've never done it in 900+ rentals. I've not taken certain vehicles out of preference (e.g. I'll pick the Grand Cherokee over an Impala because of 4WD when it's snowing) but never returned a car because there was something I didn't like about it.

Originally Posted by germanicus

If you need me to explain that sitting on unsold inventory at rates over double the industry standard is a 'bad' thing, I don't know what to tell you.

And? What harm is it doing?

Originally Posted by germanicus

You seem to conveniently bounce in and out of a macro/micro viewpoint in these discussions. Sometimes focusing on just Camaro metrics, then GM as a whole. Camaro is such a tiny percentile of GM, quoting stock values may as well be essentially irrelevant. Do you believe that GM only looks upon the performance of sales in total? No analysis or decisions regarding the performance of specific models?

Because we don't know the in-between. Only what GM discloses from sales and financial filings. The fleet story isn't limited to Camaro. It's in effect across the GM portfolio. What we've seen across the portfolio is the best financial results in decades while FoMoCo and FCA continue to flop.

[camaro5]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Business 101. The goal of an automotive manufacturer is not to sell more cars, the goal is to make more money.



The car market continues to contract as customers lean toward CUV's and holding on to cars for longer. There is no "spin", only money in the bank. As stated above, the goal of a business is not to sell the most product, it's to make the most money.



As an investor I follow markets, including automotive, with great scrutiny. Price is king for fleet. Always has been. You think Avis cares what customers prefer to drive? But don't take my word for it. Post hard statistical evidence of factors influencing fleet purchasing decisions so we can discuss further.



Let me know when you've rented 900+ cars and we'll talk. All except National stick you in whatever car they please. I request a segment and then they bugger it up and give me what they have. At least with National I get to choose from available cars on the lot. Sometimes that means choosing between 7 Dodge Caravans and a Nissan Rogue.




I gather you don't rent much. I choose the segment (compact, intermediate, full size, SUV, truck, luxury, sport) and they stick me with whatever they darn well please in that segment. It changes day to day, week to week. Sometimes I get nothing in my segment and they give me a Suburban when I ordered a compact.



As far fetched as me telling you I refuse to drive a Mustang because of poor reliability. Who wants to spend time out of their day broke down on the side of the road in a Ford rental?




If I were in charge, I would buy the cheapest vehicles I could find to maximize profit. Renters returning Camaro's for poor visibility is as unlikely as renters returning Mustangs for poor reliability.




There is little practical difference between cars in a segment on a rental lot. How many customers return to the lot and demand a replacement? I've never done it in 900+ rentals. I've not taken certain vehicles out of preference (e.g. I'll pick the Grand Cherokee over an Impala because of 4WD when it's snowing) but never returned a car because there was something I didn't like about it.




And? What harm is it doing?



Because we don't know the in-between. Only what GM discloses from sales and financial filings. The fleet story isn't limited to Camaro. It's in effect across the GM portfolio. What we've seen across the portfolio is the best financial results in decades while FoMoCo and FCA continue to flop.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




Yeah, Ford's a great company - for me to poop on!

Harry Bennett, head of Ford security, drove up in a car, opened a window, and fired a pistol into the crowd.

Immediately, the car was pelted with rocks, and Bennett was injured. He then got out of the car, and continued firing at the retreating marchers.

Bennett was Henry Ford's personal thug. Thug Motor Company - 4 men killed.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Is it? Would you rather sell 5 widgets at $1 profit/widget or 4 widgets at $3 profit/widget?



If GM wants to maintain more inventory, let them. Doesn't change the fact that GM is selling more Camaro's to retail customers at higher prices than Mustang or Challenger.



.

This is really the only part I disagree with you on here. Yes you would rather sell 1 widget at a higher price, but you also have to do what is necessary to keep inventory levels down, as well as the factory moving. It is all about finding the right balance. With ATS and CTS sales tanking, I would believe they need Camaro volume to pick up the slack.

but like you mentioned GM is doing just fine financially and way better than their rivals so I guess its working just fine for them lol.

[germanicus]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Business 101. The goal of an automotive manufacturer is not to sell more cars, the goal is to make more money.

As an investor I follow markets, including automotive, with great scrutiny. Price is king for fleet. Always has been. You think Avis cares what customers prefer to drive? But don't take my word for it. Post hard statistical evidence of factors influencing fleet purchasing decisions so we can discuss further.

If your word is that these businesses pay no attention to customer feedback, return business rates/retention, or early returned rentals, I won't. Your appeal to authority fails to pass muster. You are basically positing that they have no performance metrics. I find it difficult to believe you could make that argument with a straight face.

Additionally, what pray tell would constitute 'hard statistical evidence' of a businesses internal policies? Are you asking for me to publish their internal policies and practices verbatim?

As far fetched as me telling you I refuse to drive a Mustang because of poor reliability. Who wants to spend time out of their day broke down on the side of the road in a Ford rental?

Nice dodge (pun intended).

If I were in charge, I would buy the cheapest vehicles I could find to maximize profit.

And herein lies the fallacy. Profit is not determined simply by the procurement cost of the fleet. It would be nice to ignore things like customer satisfaction/retention/downtime costs/customer service handling time etc. but we cannot. If you buy the cheapest vehicles without consideration of the aforementioned, your profits will be considerably lower.

As you aptly stated in response to another poster, its Business 101.

There is little practical difference between cars in a segment on a rental lot. How many customers return to the lot and demand a replacement? I've never done it in 900+ rentals.

And yet in this thread we have anecdotal evidence of that very thing occurring.

And? What harm is it doing?

See your own "Business 101" comment. What a joke.

[ssrs2lt]

Business 101 is maximizing profits not selling less with a higher profit margins..selling a 1000 less or more camaros a month from previous years can't be what GM had in mind and I believe begins to put the camaro in the fringe discontinued car line. The profits are a drop in the over all GM budget and could actually be almost irrelevant..its still in third selling poorly according to me!

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by shaffe

This is really the only part I disagree with you on here. Yes you would rather sell 1 widget at a higher price, but you also have to do what is necessary to keep inventory levels down, as well as the factory moving. It is all about finding the right balance. With ATS and CTS sales tanking, I would believe they need Camaro volume to pick up the slack.

but like you mentioned GM is doing just fine financially and way better than their rivals so I guess its working just fine for them lol.

Nothing exists in a vacuum. Inventory is one issue, fleet dumping is another. If Ford chooses to fleet dump product to keep inventory in check, that's their prerogative. Financially it's foolish to give your product away, not to mention what it does to residuals on the 70% of automobiles it manages to sell retail.

Why would Camaro need to "pick up sales slack"? GM has dozens of automobiles across the portfolio. ATS and CTS aren't immune to the shrinking luxury sedan market. They will be folded back into one sedan as existed prior to 2013. Alpha platform was also developed with a CUV in mind so who knows if/when that will happen. That's clearly where the market is going.

Originally Posted by germanicus

If your word is that these businesses pay no attention to customer feedback, return business rates/retention, or early returned rentals, I won't. Your appeal to authority fails to pass muster. You are basically positing that they have no performance metrics. I find it difficult to believe you could make that argument with a straight face.

Their performance metrics are to make money. Just like every other business. When they ask for feedback its around timing of rental pickup process, availability of cars upon arrival, return service efficiency, cleanliness of vehicles, customer service feedback when problems arise. NOTHING about specific car models vs others. In 22 years of frequent rentals I've never once been surveyed about a specific brand or model of car.

Originally Posted by germanicus

Additionally, what pray tell would constitute 'hard statistical evidence' of a businesses internal policies? Are you asking for me to publish their internal policies and practices verbatim?

Anything that would lend credibility to your position. You dislike my experience, that's just fine. Give us something concrete we can discuss further.

Originally Posted by germanicus

And herein lies the fallacy. Profit is not determined simply by the procurement cost of the fleet. It would be nice to ignore things like customer satisfaction/retention/downtime costs/customer service handling time etc. but we cannot. If you buy the cheapest vehicles without consideration of the aforementioned, your profits will be considerably lower.

None of which changes the fact that Mustang is a fleet queen dumped at rock bottom prices. You think the cost to operate a Mustang, Challenger, Camaro over the first 10 - 20k miles differs all that much? You think customer satisfaction factors into what cars they buy!? Too funny. No one is 22 years of frequent rentals has every asked me what model I prefer. Anecdotal? Sure. When you have as much rental experience as I do we can talk.

Originally Posted by ssrs2lt

Business 101 is maximizing profits not selling less with a higher profit margins..selling a 1000 less or more camaros a month from previous years can't be what GM had in mind and I believe begins to put the camaro in the fringe discontinued car line. The profits are a drop in the over all GM budget and could actually be almost irrelevant..its still in third selling poorly according to me!

Can you share with us GM's business plan and forecast for the 6th gen Camaro? Somehow it's on the "fringe discontinued car line" despite it generating more revenue than the Mustang and Challenger!? Please elaborate. Again, sales are not the goal, revenue is and no one is generating more revenue on pony car sales than General Motors.

[Arugon]

Oh my god the walls of text in this thread 0.o

[SpeedIsLife]

Originally Posted by rburke76

I don't think its price totally

Originally Posted by rburke76

they should start selling a "base V8" for 29,999$...you know, a auto or manual V8 stripped down for about 29,999$

So does the price play a role or not? You can't say "it's not the price totally" and then immediately offer a lower priced version as a solution.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Nothing exists in a vacuum. Inventory is one issue, fleet dumping is another. If Ford chooses to fleet dump product to keep inventory in check, that's their prerogative. Financially it's foolish to give your product away, not to mention what it does to residuals on the 70% of automobiles it manages to sell retail.

Why would Camaro need to "pick up sales slack"? GM has dozens of automobiles across it's portfolio. ATS and CTS aren't immune to the shrinking luxury sedan market. They will be folded back into one sedan as existed prior to 2013. Alpha platform was also developed with a CUV in mind so who knows if/when that will happen. That's clearly where the market is going.



.

It might be their choice, but sitting on unsold inventory can kill your profits, real quick. It's better to sell it at some profit than sit on it with no profit.

Why would Camaro need to pick up the slack of ATS/CTS? To keep the plant moving. Idle plant = lost money. Yes ATS/CTS aren't immune to the growing demand for CUV's, IMO that puts pressure on Camaro to pick up some Alpha volume.

BUT Like I agreed with you, GM is in better shape than FoMoCo or Fiat Chrysler so whatever they are doing is working.

[ChefBorOzzy]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

So with all the talk of Mustang price being the main selling point to rental, I suppose the 2018's will see that come to an end. Seeing as the pricing parity has been closed. Of course that's assuming there is no price increase for the upcoming MCE 2019 Camaro.

2018 will be an interesting year to watch.

Takes two to complete a transaction. If GM doesn't want to offload a larger percentage to fleet, then the price of Mustang going up is irrelevant.

[camaro5]

Originally Posted by germanicus

occurring.


See your own "Business 101" comment. What a joke.

What kind of troll keeps coming back here to make trouble and talk sh!t, month after month.

Mustang trolls suck. Mustangs suck. We don't give a damn what you think.

GTFOH - or we can visit regularly. Go to a Mustink site troll!

Your posts are the joke here. Not a funny joke, either. ESAD

[Zodiac]

Originally Posted by camaro5

What kind of troll keeps coming back here to make trouble and talk sh!t, month after month.

Mustang trolls suck. Mustangs suck. We don't give a damn what you think.

GTFOH - or we can visit regularly. Go to a Mustink site troll!

Your posts are the joke here. Not a funny joke, either. ESAD

Did you come up with that all by yourself?

You sound like a child, holy shit. If anything your post is the joke.

I can enjoy the banter back and forth with sensible posts and a good argument, your post does none of that.

These threads on both sides of the forums bring out the worst. I'm not sure why people bicker back and forth over this subject. The only ones that can translate the numbers to whether or not they are viable for their business is the manufacturers. Everything else is just speculation.

[Michigan1LTRS]

Camaro!!!!!! Number 1 in retail sales again!! Woohoo!!! Not surprising. I mean look at it!!