http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060818/ford_...3D21&quicken=2

Could the light bulb finally be going off in Detroit. At least they are admitting that their line-up is not inline with what the public is looking for.

 

I wonder why Ford and GM can't figure out that "high-profit" SUVs don't reap so much profit when they sit on the showroom floor so long that they have to be liquidated at $10k off.

 

If production's going to be down 21%, can we expect Bill Ford to cut his salary by 21%? It would only be fair, after all.

I like the claim that it's these gas prices that suddenly turned away consumer interest. Haven't we been reading for years that an SUV-backlash was coming, even before this spike in gas prices? Still, I guess it's better to blame the gas prices than admit that you got caught with your pants down.

 

It's unlikely that he makes much money as CEO, as it's a family position more than a business one. He probably makes about a $100 a year or whatever the minimum for tax purposes is.

 

I agree with Blinkard that the SUV backlash was years in coming. Most people I know loathed those vehicles even when gasoline was still $1.29/gallon.

Culturally, styles DO change. Think about how in the 1950s the huge, long cars with gigantic fins just disappeared overnight.

I think the CUV and "box wagon" (aka Scion and Element) are in ascendency because they are still big enough for hauling people and things, but small enough to park easily (and get twice the FE of a land-hulk). I think cars like the Honda Fit are sheer genius because it has *some* SUV capability but gets almost the same FE as a hybrid -- for $16k.

 

Guys, seriously. Can we continue to make this a hybrid newsgroup and not an SUV / domestic automaker bashing newsgroup? Hybrid vehicles are an exciting tecnological innovation. Crapping on other vehicles does not make them any better.

As many giggles and grins as some of you get over "the death of SUVs", keep in mind that most of the downturn in SUV sales is in mid-sized SUVs, and not so much the larger ones that you know and love. That's because mid-size SUVs that typically seat 4 or 5 people are more easily replaced by sedans that seat 4 or 5 people. The 7 - 9 passenger SUVs have only shown moderate drop-offs in sales. The alternative vehicles are large vans or other large SUVs. Some (Ford Expedition) are more impacted than others (Chevy Suburban / GMC Yukon XL) because people are trending towards the newer designs with better fuel economy.

Let's continue to delight in the continual expansion of hybrid offerings and lighten up on the "other vehicles suck" drumbeat, m'kay?

Peace,

Martin

 

I hope that I didn't sound too negative. I was just stating that I find the CUV trend fascenating -- mostly because some of the vehicles (like Matrix and Scion) are just so unique and quirky looking.

 

Curiously, I was reading something last night that also deals with an economic problem leading to unsold inventory:

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/co...x+page_insight

"AUGUST 18, 2006

Insight
By Ed Wallace

Detroit Needs to Give Credit Where It's Due
Here's a good way to rescue Detroit: Make it easier and cheaper for the millions of Americans with poor credit ratings to buy new cars
. . .
It should also be noted that, by scrimping a little and saving a lot, even people working in minimum-wage jobs often bought new cars. Just last week, General Motors (GM) Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner talked about his own first car, a 1973 Camaro for which he paid $3,500—money he had saved from mowing yards at $2 a pop.

A quick calculation shows how much things have changed: In 1969 a teenager working a full-time job, earning $1.30 an hour, earned enough in one year to purchase a new Ford Mustang—albeit one without many optional features. Even as late as 1976, that same minimum-wage job (now paying $2.30 an hour) would let you purchase a new Olds Omega with change left over. While it's too soon to tell how GM is going to price its retro Camaro, rest assured that it will cost far more than the $10,712 today's minimum-wage worker earns per year. . . . '

I don't know if I agree with this but he goes on to report low-cost Asian cars still moving. Implicit in this article is a rapidly shrinking middle class, the buyers of the mid-sized vehicles.

Bob Wilson

 

Believe me, my post was not intended to slam SUV. I think there are a number of people on this board who will more than quickly tell you that I am not anti-SUV. That being said. The line ups coming out Detroit need to be altered if they are going to get back on track. It looks like Ford might just be beginning to understand that to gain market share means you have to offer vehicles that the public wants, not give away vehicles that they don't want.

 

AshenGrey and Chilly,

I was not specifically calling you guys out. We've all posted and counter-posted enough that I think we all know our own relative positions. Just the general tone of this thread seemed to be headed towards some hefty Ford and SUV bashing. I just can't help but think that that sort of sport does nothing to elevate the cause of hybrid technologies. You don't fertilize your lawn by pooping on your neighbor's lawn. Maybe I'm finally getting a little too sensitive.

Oh, and Ashen, I agree with you about the CUV trend. It is fascinating. What we're seeing, though, in buyer behavior as we look at disposal statistics (what are customers trading in or selling when they buy a certain type of vehicle) is that people buying CUVs are moving up from small and mid-sized cars. There are also some moving down from mid-size SUVs, just not as many. That trend will probably swing to more coming from mid-size SUVs or at least moving from body-on-frame (truck based, like Explorer and Trailblazer)) mid-sized SUVs to body frame integral (car based, like Freestyle and MDX) mid-sized SUVs.

Peace,

Martin