07-08-2017, 08:07 PM | #71 | ||
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3 Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 14,416
|
Quote:
Quote:
Why should we care? We can only buy one car at a time at the best price we can negotiate... Looking at the numbers for retail sales is a lot easier to understand. Camaro leading in retail sales is probably why we don't see a massive advertising campaign....What for? To impress some boardroom execs at the rental agencies?... Which car the retail buying public prefers seems pretty obvious and looks simple to understand. My $.02. (Put it towards GMs profits if they need it). |
||
07-08-2017, 11:45 PM | #72 | |||
Drives: X-15 Velocipede Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 4,637
|
Quote:
All those lawsuits from "old GM" vehicles got swept away forever, (except key-gate) that got grandfathered in by the courts and public opinion. Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
07-09-2017, 06:53 AM | #73 |
|
Not entirely. Had GM been allowed to go through bankruptcy without the government contingencies, then GM would be in a much better place today. Not shedding the pensions continues to hobble GM. Then there's the UAW...another unnecessary burden on American automakers. Take away these two factors and GM would be the most profitable automaker on planet Earth year after year.
__________________
2012 - Present: 2011 CTS-V Sedan, A6, Airaid, Zmax TB and Tune by R.P.M. = 535 hp/503 lb-ft.
2009 - 2012: 2010 2SS RS IBM M6, MGW Shifter, BMR Trailing Arms/Tunnel Brace, Roto-Fab CAI, VMAX Ported TB, Kooks 6511-Complete (Headers, X-Pipe, Mufflers), dyno tuned by R.P.M. = 415 hp/412 lb-ft. "Not giving a f*^k is truly the greatest luxury, and no luxury car gives fewer f*^k's than a CTS-V." - Matt Hardigree |
07-09-2017, 09:13 AM | #74 | |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,169
|
Quote:
But $61 million (transmission example) is nothing compared to the pension liability, which is BILLIONS. But again, you can go on and on about GM and the Government and the bankruptcy. There are a lot of emotional opinions on that. My point is we have no idea how profitable the Camaro is or isn't and we have no idea what the planning volume was for the program. GM may very well be happy as clams right now with Camaro sales. They may also be very dissatisfied and wishing they had invested all the money they did on the Camaro on two more SUVs for Cadillac (one is coming soon but late to the game) GM has stated it clearly and demonstrated it by walking the talk (India). They are in business to make money, not cool cars that don't make profit. And if it loses money, or doesn't make enough return on invested capital to satisfy stock holders we may see less money spent on the Camaro.................or like the Malibu a hurried refresh followed by another hurried refresh. And the hidden issue is the other two cars on the Alpha architecture (ATS/CTS) are both selling like crap. There has not been an MCE on either of those cars and the ATS has been out for 5 years now with nothing new except the rumored 2019. GM is spending almost no money on them. Combined I don't think they are outselling the Corvette right now. The Camaro in LGR is a huge help for that plant and it's overall operations. My worry is simply based on history. There was a time when the Camaro did not sell well enough to earn it's position or future investment. GM killed the Firebird/Camaro because of poor sales. With the onslaught of self driving EVs coming (can't be stopped), will GM continue to invest in something that makes us VERY happy on Camaro5/6 but doesn't make money? This is from the announcement in September 2001: The Camaro has seen sales in the first eight months of the year fall to 22,339, down 25 percent from a year earlier, while the Firebird sales have dropped 28 percent to 16,225. But the models retain loyal customers and enthusiasts, GM conceded in its statement. "We appreciate the strong emotions that our customers have for these cars," said a statement from John G. Middlebrook, GM vice president and general manager vehicle brand marketing & corporate advertising. The company said part of the reason for the decision is the increasing popularity of light trucks, such as sports/utility vehicles, rather than car models. - Note that the combined sales of both cars was 38,000 units in 8 months, or a bit over 4,500 per month. So I have openly stated, I want the car to sell better simply to ensure it stays around.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
|
07-09-2017, 09:47 AM | #75 |
Drives: 1lt v6 Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38
|
Hi end models aside ........I think base model mustangs and challengers have been cheaper to buy since like forever ????? not sure about cheaper to own but .............it all comes down to money
|
07-09-2017, 10:10 AM | #76 | |
Drives: 2017 Camaro SS coupe Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Apple Valley, MN
Posts: 217
|
Quote:
__________________
1SS, Recaro seats, A8 w/paddle shift extensions, NPP, Magnuson 2300 supercharger, Flowmaster American Thunder exhaust and x-pipe, factory handling kit, Phastek lowering springs, Alpine sound system w/JL sub, Lexani custom 21" wheels, Michelin Super Sport 4S tires, Bigwormgraphix striping, Chevy Performance Brembo big brake kit, darkened taillights and Remin carbon fiber dash kit.
|
|
07-09-2017, 10:13 AM | #77 |
Drives: '06 Pontiac GTO M6, '19 F150 2.7TT Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 1,425
|
Fords v8 engine is more expensive to build but the mt82 tranny is cheaper than the tremec6060. And there is a $4300 atp spread that I am sure Ford is jealous of. Especially when they are selling the same number of cars.
|
07-09-2017, 10:17 AM | #78 |
Drives: '06 Pontiac GTO M6, '19 F150 2.7TT Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 1,425
|
If both the mustang and Camaro sell 60,000 cars a year that's $258,000,000 million more in revenue for GM. GMs strategy starts to make sense with those kind of $.
|
07-09-2017, 10:37 AM | #79 |
|
You realize that's less than 0.2% of GM's annual revenue right?
__________________
2012 - Present: 2011 CTS-V Sedan, A6, Airaid, Zmax TB and Tune by R.P.M. = 535 hp/503 lb-ft.
2009 - 2012: 2010 2SS RS IBM M6, MGW Shifter, BMR Trailing Arms/Tunnel Brace, Roto-Fab CAI, VMAX Ported TB, Kooks 6511-Complete (Headers, X-Pipe, Mufflers), dyno tuned by R.P.M. = 415 hp/412 lb-ft. "Not giving a f*^k is truly the greatest luxury, and no luxury car gives fewer f*^k's than a CTS-V." - Matt Hardigree |
07-09-2017, 06:39 PM | #80 | |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,169
|
Quote:
If you don't know the cost of production, and we don't, simply selling it for more is only part of the equation to determine profitability. We do know GM has higher costs than Ford that each Camaro has to cover. So it's a mix of higher costs per car for the Camaro and total volume. Your numbers are using the retail ATP and retail volumes. The higher Ford volumes overall, rental fleets or not, help keep the plant running and help spread the tooling and development numbers across that higher volume making those costs lower per unit. The big issue with selling to rental fleets isn't simply that you sell them at a lower price. The biggest problem is when the rental fleets turn around after a year and sell those cars used at an even bigger discount. This hurts residuals and keeps the OEM from having attractive lease deals. It also hurts customers who want to trade in their cars for a new one, they are now competing with super discounted cars from rental companies. This, in the long run, hurts future sales and future pricing. But in the short term, it helps spread the fixed costs over more units. And to put it in perspective, unless a plant is set up to build low volumes (Like Bowling Green KY) 60,000 units, retail or not, doesn't keep a plant open very long. 2 shifts (6.5 hours each) running 6 days per week, 50 weeks out of the year at 60 jobs per hour is 234,000 units. LGR is building around half of that across 3 models. Again we only know the highest level of accounting. The devil, as they say, is in the details. And we don't know them. This might be the most profitable car GM has ever made. We just don't know. I hope it is as that keeps it around................at least until the robots are driving. And I want it around long enough for a Gen7 that has better visibility and trunk space
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
|
07-22-2017, 09:14 AM | #81 |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,169
|
Why sales matter.
Yes, these cars all sell worse than Camaro, but Impala, CT6, Volt??? May just be posturing with the UAW, but sales matter and this is what happens when they don't. http://www.freep.com/story/money/car...eup/501292001/
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
07-22-2017, 10:55 AM | #82 |
Drives: BVM 1SS Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Columbia-Sumter- Florence, SC
Posts: 460
|
^ They're on the hook because nobody is buying cars. If gas was $4 for regular they'd be selling like gangbusters.
I'd be sad to see the LaCrosse go. I like the way they look and I want one bad. I also owned the new style Impala excellent car with 0 issues. |
07-22-2017, 11:07 AM | #83 | |
Drives: BVM 1SS Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Columbia-Sumter- Florence, SC
Posts: 460
|
Quote:
|
|
07-22-2017, 01:02 PM | #84 |
Drives: too many Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: oh va pa ma tx
Posts: 3,046
|
Oh crap lordstown takes another hit..wife worked there for yrs but got layed off...
__________________
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|