Fleet Numbers - first half of 07

[enzl]

Well, if you're a Big 3 fan and have a strong stomach, a full breakdown of the numbers.

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/fleet-sales-first-half-2007/

[91z4me]

Hmm...Mazda 5 at 43%. I wondered why I never saw them.

Avenger at 79%!

All the LX cars are near or above 50%!

Volvo S40 at 37%.

Some surprises there.

[Satty]

Scion xB at 2.7% ITS TEH FL33T QUEEN!!!

Crown Vic is only 91.3%?

The Audi A6 and TT are higher than I would have thought.

[Flybrian]

Optima still makes me laugh. What a great car.

[gm4life]

Interesting. Alot of LX cars are 2.7L/3.5L V6 version with bolt on wheels are fleeted. Most buyers opt for AWD or the Hemi maybe both.

[thegriffon]

Optima still makes me laugh. What a great car.

It's not a bad car, but the wrong size for the US market, as is the Mazda6, which you'll note is also more popular with rental fleets.

[CARBIZ]

I guess fleet buyers know a good deal when they see one. Look, we've beaten this to death before. Fleet is a sale. In Canada, they still go through the dealer, the dealer still gets paid. Usually, the deal is a couple hundred over invoice, then there is some kind of fleet "rebate" of $1,000 to the dealer. Big deal. GM employees get a better deal than that. There are some 30 year veterans in Fleet departments at dealers than I know of. They've got relationships with government agencies, big companies, etc. that goe back to Studebaker days!

Toyotas and Hondas COST more to buy, COST more to maintain and they have to break into established Fleet Departments at Big Three dealers. I don't know where the impression is made that somehow Detroit is losing their shirts on selling these vehicles. Since they don't offer 0% and a lot of other things on Fleet deals, I suspect they may make MORE on some of the deals.

Do you think Sony cares if Future Shop dumps 1,000 TVs at their cost? No. They laugh all the way to the bank.

Notwithstanding the figures listed here (I am assuming they are American numbers, no?) Malibus and Impalas are quite scarce at the auctions up here these days. GM warned us about 6 months ago that they would be cutting back, and it looks like they have.

Still, if a rental car company comes to my boss and wants to place an order for 200 Malibus, is he going to say no?

[FloydHendershot]

There's nothing wrong with fleet sales. Someone's going to fill the void. You think if there were no domestic OEMs fleet sales would disappear? What would Europe do? Rent a benz? Do they even rent them?

A sale is a sale.

[ZL-1]

Crown Vic is only 91.3%?

I'm surprised that there are retail costumers for that and the Grand Marquis (which has a fleet/retail mix of 50%/50%)

[enzl]

I guess fleet buyers know a good deal when they see one. Look, we've beaten this to death before. Fleet is a sale. In Canada, they still go through the dealer, the dealer still gets paid. Usually, the deal is a couple hundred over invoice, then there is some kind of fleet "rebate" of $1,000 to the dealer. Big deal. GM employees get a better deal than that. There are some 30 year veterans in Fleet departments at dealers than I know of. They've got relationships with government agencies, big companies, etc. that goe back to Studebaker days!

Toyotas and Hondas COST more to buy, COST more to maintain and they have to break into established Fleet Departments at Big Three dealers. I don't know where the impression is made that somehow Detroit is losing their shirts on selling these vehicles. Since they don't offer 0% and a lot of other things on Fleet deals, I suspect they may make MORE on some of the deals.

Do you think Sony cares if Future Shop dumps 1,000 TVs at their cost? No. They laugh all the way to the bank.

Notwithstanding the figures listed here (I am assuming they are American numbers, no?) Malibus and Impalas are quite scarce at the auctions up here these days. GM warned us about 6 months ago that they would be cutting back, and it looks like they have.

Still, if a rental car company comes to my boss and wants to place an order for 200 Malibus, is he going to say no?

The sales portion of your argument is solid: a sale is a sale, and, hopefully, there's money in it for the dealer and manufacturer.

Here's the problem--the resale for the 'retail' purchase. Why should Joe 6-pack have to take it in the shorts because GM (Or Kia, to be fair) set production too high or marketing $ to low?

As many here have observed while renting, seeing a sea of Optimas (or Corollas, et al) isn't confidence inspiring when standing at the Hertz counter. We buy rental units at auction occasionally and they require a disclosure at sale that damages resale pricing as well.

Biz, in my experience, its a Catch-22 for the manufacturers...but seeing figures as high as 80% is scary. If I just bought an Avenger, I'd be sick to my stomach.

[Flybrian]

Coming from someone who honestly cares not about resale value (I buy to keep), even I would be bothered to see my car have such a high rental proportion. An Impala or Taurus, well, is expected - affordable fullsize cars have been rental and government staples forever, but some of the others are frightening.

[4gm]

Cobalt is 39.7% fleet. Ouch. Sometimes I think GM should have kept the Cavalier name. At least people knew it.

[CARBIZ]

But we are all in the business or at least pay attention to the business so WE notice how many of what models are at the rental agencies. I have been a car jockey before - trust me: most people (especially women) can't even remember what THEY are driving. I doubt very much they would notice, or care, what pollutes the rental lots.

Because I am bored right now, I did a mathematical exercise to allay the concerns about depreciation. These are actual numbers, albeit Canadian.

A 2007 Impala LS would sell for about $26k, including freight. That is before visa points, stackable credits (a $1,000 one just started yesterday, BTW), etc. That is not MSRP - I am allowing the dealer to make some money! Most people on this board pay CASH, I suspect, so they do not factor in the cost of money, but let me do that.

$26 + taxes = $29,640 (this is Canada, after all) The new Impala is 0%, 60 months, so your payment is $494.

Currently, a 2006 Impala with about 25k km, sells for about $19k on our used car lot. $19 + tax = $21,660. Ah, you say, the used one depreciated $8,000 if you include the tax. True, but that is for the CASH customer. What happens if you throw in the 8.75% interesest (two of our banks just raised their rates this week). Your payment becomes $448 for 60 months.

Do the math 494-448 = $46 a month cheaper for a 1 yr old car with nearly half the comprehensive gone. 46X60= $2,760 in REAL savings? Is that much depreciation for the AVERAGE consumer? I'd say not.

Do your own math, even if you had a line of credit secured against a home and got the used car loan at 5%, the payment would be $409 a month, for a total savings of $5,100.

But you can use up to $2k in visa points and there is the stackable credit.

This is why I chirp about the cost of ownership and the true selling price of vehicles, not some fictional MSRP that blue book and all these other revered sources use.

[enzl]

But we are all in the business or at least pay attention to the business so WE notice how many of what models are at the rental agencies. I have been a car jockey before - trust me: most people (especially women) can't even remember what THEY are driving. I doubt very much they would notice, or care, what pollutes the rental lots.

Because I am bored right now, I did a mathematical exercise to allay the concerns about depreciation. These are actual numbers, albeit Canadian.

A 2007 Impala LS would sell for about $26k, including freight. That is before visa points, stackable credits (a $1,000 one just started yesterday, BTW), etc. That is not MSRP - I am allowing the dealer to make some money! Most people on this board pay CASH, I suspect, so they do not factor in the cost of money, but let me do that.

$26 + taxes = $29,640 (this is Canada, after all) The new Impala is 0%, 60 months, so your payment is $494.

Currently, a 2006 Impala with about 25k km, sells for about $19k on our used car lot. $19 + tax = $21,660. Ah, you say, the used one depreciated $8,000 if you include the tax. True, but that is for the CASH customer. What happens if you throw in the 8.75% interesest (two of our banks just raised their rates this week). Your payment becomes $448 for 60 months.

Do the math 494-448 = $46 a month cheaper for a 1 yr old car with nearly half the comprehensive gone. 46X60= $2,760 in REAL savings? Is that much depreciation for the AVERAGE consumer? I'd say not.

Do your own math, even if you had a line of credit secured against a home and got the used car loan at 5%, the payment would be $409 a month, for a total savings of $5,100.

But you can use up to $2k in visa points and there is the stackable credit.

This is why I chirp about the cost of ownership and the true selling price of vehicles, not some fictional MSRP that blue book and all these other revered sources use.

Your example is accurate, but I'm speaking from a consumer perspective...

Lets take your example and apply it to the guy whose wife is having twins, thus necessitating a trade from Impy to SUV/minivan:

If your lot has the Impy for $19k, you guys probably brought it in at $17k (or less)....

So, the new Impy was $26, Mr. 6-pack paid that 1 year ago and is 12 months into a 60 month note....

If my man is lucky, he owes $17k on that Impy. Now he's got to reach into his pocket for a min. of tax, tags & fees for that new Tahoe.

He just lost $9000...in one year and needs to fish aroung for another $3k (min) just to be upside-down within minutes of his NEW vehicle purchase...

That's where fleeting kills. My dealership is happy....Mr. 6 pack, not so much

[CARBIZ]

Your example is accurate, but I'm speaking from a consumer perspective...

Lets take your example and apply it to the guy whose wife is having twins, thus necessitating a trade from Impy to SUV/minivan:

If your lot has the Impy for $19k, you guys probably brought it in at $17k (or less)....

So, the new Impy was $26, Mr. 6-pack paid that 1 year ago and is 12 months into a 60 month note....

If my man is lucky, he owes $17k on that Impy. Now he's got to reach into his pocket for a min. of tax, tags & fees for that new Tahoe.

He just lost $9000...in one year and needs to fish aroung for another $3k (min) just to be upside-down within minutes of his NEW vehicle purchase...

That's where fleeting kills. My dealership is happy....Mr. 6 pack, not so much

But as with any fire sale, if the guy is in a hurry and can't take his time to wait for a deal, then he is going to get hosed, for sure. Ever try to sell a house in a quick sale? Not pretty, especially in a contracting market.

Mr. 6-pack doesn't get a lot of sympathy from me if he is shopping a Tahoe anyway

It is a bit of a "in-one-hand-out-of-the-other" really. "Lose" 5k on an Impala that you bought 2 years ago, but "gain" loyalty credits, stackable RDCs, you name - GM has got it. They just announced 72 month financing up here for the first time. Ford is doing "family pricing," GM has to counter with something. Toyota does not offer any of this stuff, so who is getting the better deal? You would be surprised at the number of people who come in and buy just because of the "deal." They get pissed because Honda "won't deal." I lost a deal to two women on an HHR who bought a Mazda 5 because the guy gave them "invoice," whatever the hell that means.

Products be damned, as long as the Big Three are thrashing it out amongst themselves, the marketing boys are going to be drunk on incentives. I forsee a repeat of the mid-1950s when Ford and GM went at each other's throat. There are a lot of parallels, frankly.

In the meantime, a one or two year old buy is only a deal if you can afford to pay cash, or at least put a lot of money down. That is true of all used cars, not just GM. Both Canada and the U.S. are headed for a crash because consumers are carrying record amounts of debt. There will be very few cash buyers in the future.

[enzl]

But as with any fire sale, if the guy is in a hurry and can't take his time to wait for a deal, then he is going to get hosed, for sure. Ever try to sell a house in a quick sale? Not pretty, especially in a contracting market.

Mr. 6-pack doesn't get a lot of sympathy from me if he is shopping a Tahoe anyway

It is a bit of a "in-one-hand-out-of-the-other" really. "Lose" 5k on an Impala that you bought 2 years ago, but "gain" loyalty credits, stackable RDCs, you name - GM has got it. They just announced 72 month financing up here for the first time. Ford is doing "family pricing," GM has to counter with something. Toyota does not offer any of this stuff, so who is getting the better deal? You would be surprised at the number of people who come in and buy just because of the "deal." They get pissed because Honda "won't deal." I lost a deal to two women on an HHR who bought a Mazda 5 because the guy gave them "invoice," whatever the hell that means.

Products be damned, as long as the Big Three are thrashing it out amongst themselves, the marketing boys are going to be drunk on incentives. I forsee a repeat of the mid-1950s when Ford and GM went at each other's throat. There are a lot of parallels, frankly.

In the meantime, a one or two year old buy is only a deal if you can afford to pay cash, or at least put a lot of money down. That is true of all used cars, not just GM. Both Canada and the U.S. are headed for a crash because consumers are carrying record amounts of debt. There will be very few cash buyers in the future.

Again, no argument, however, if his vehicle has decent resale, shouldn't Mr. 6-pack conserve about 10% of his cash in the above example if its a Camry rather than the Impy? That's the approximate spread, if you go by the book.

[Satty]

A car with good resale is more appealing to trade in than a car with bad resale. Smart people know that rading in upside down is a bad idea, so if they dont want the mileage constraints of a lease but want a new car every 2-3 years a Camry or Accird makes more sense than an Impala. Better resale also helps when you total a car.

[VenSeattle]

Buick Lucerne - 13.1%

Toyota Avalon - 15.3%

Nissan Maxima - 15.9%

Hyundai Azera - 22.7%

Kia Amanti - 42.5%

Chrysler 300 - 44%

Dodge Charger - 56.2%

[Satty]

Better than that Ven, at least from the retail standpoint, is that the Charger and 300 carry $2500 in rebates while the Charger R/T and 300C have $3000. The Lucerne on the other hand has a max of $2150 in rebates, per Buick's website.

The LXs are totally doing as awesome as the Dodgeophiles would have you believe.

[The O.C.]

I guess fleet buyers know a good deal when they see one. Look, we've beaten this to death before. Fleet is a sale. In Canada, they still go through the dealer, the dealer still gets paid. Usually, the deal is a couple hundred over invoice, then there is some kind of fleet "rebate" of $1,000 to the dealer. Big deal. GM employees get a better deal than that. There are some 30 year veterans in Fleet departments at dealers than I know of. They've got relationships with government agencies, big companies, etc. that goe back to Studebaker days!

Toyotas and Hondas COST more to buy, COST more to maintain and they have to break into established Fleet Departments at Big Three dealers. I don't know where the impression is made that somehow Detroit is losing their shirts on selling these vehicles. Since they don't offer 0% and a lot of other things on Fleet deals, I suspect they may make MORE on some of the deals.

Do you think Sony cares if Future Shop dumps 1,000 TVs at their cost? No. They laugh all the way to the bank.

Notwithstanding the figures listed here (I am assuming they are American numbers, no?) Malibus and Impalas are quite scarce at the auctions up here these days. GM warned us about 6 months ago that they would be cutting back, and it looks like they have.

Still, if a rental car company comes to my boss and wants to place an order for 200 Malibus, is he going to say no?

All the major rental car companies DO NOT go through dealers. The rental car fleet sales are made directly through the manufacturer and benefit the dealer not one iota......(except in 12-18 months when the dealer buys the program cars back through the auction at drastically reduced values....thereby hurting new vehicle sales.)

[CARBIZ]

All the major rental car companies DO NOT go through dealers. The rental car fleet sales are made directly through the manufacturer and benefit the dealer not one iota......(except in 12-18 months when the dealer buys the program cars back through the auction at drastically reduced values....thereby hurting new vehicle sales.)

You stick to what you know and I will stick to what I know. I guess the Fleet Manager of our dealership must be playing PacMan all day in his office. Oh, and Enterprise is the name of a starship, not the rental company that picks up vehicles every couple months - to the tune of a hundred at a time. Revenue Canada? Yeah, the Tooth Fairy supplies their cars. Gee, where does the Toronto Transit Commission get their trucks?

What're ya smokin' man?

[The O.C.]

You stick to what you know and I will stick to what I know. I guess the Fleet Manager of our dealership must be playing PacMan all day in his office. Oh, and Enterprise is the name of a starship, not the rental company that picks up vehicles every couple months - to the tune of a hundred at a time. Revenue Canada? Yeah, the Tooth Fairy supplies their cars. Gee, where does the Toronto Transit Commission get their trucks?

What're ya smokin' man?

Small rental companies might go through dealerships but definitely not the large-scale companies.

Sorry "bud"

And I guarantee that if Enterprise is picking them up at your dealership, it's because you guys did the PDI. I can guarantee you made no profit on those cars (other than being paid to do a PDI.)

Seems you don't know all that much about what you stick to.....