August 2007 Sales: General Motors

[enzl]

so if toyota is dumping 50,000 camlees on the market..........that has no negative?

bull$h!. all those camrees at the auctions, same deal. 50,000 grand prixs or 50,000 cahmrhees. same deal.

i bet there are more rental return sonatas on the market right now for sale than there are new ones.

but that's ok?

1. My point, obviously missed, is that GM has made a point of stating that they are weaning themselves OFF said fleet sales.

2. 50k/500k Camrys is vastly different than 50k/100k GP's...simple math, man.

3. GM has again revealed its corporate ADD with the resumption of unhealthy fleeting....indicating a short-sightedness that extends, unfortunately, far beyond this one issue. If they can't keep their word on this, what else are they back-pedaling on? Zeta? Badge engineering?

You mistake truth for bashing..I grew up knowing that a man keeps his word. They haven't. Not on fleets. Not on badge engineering. And, mark my words, the latest Union contract will jettison more American jobs, to be replaced by Chinese/Korean and other 3rd world suppliers, engineers, et al...So, for all of you concerned by sending your $ overseas, GM will only accelerate that trend in the near term.

Harsh but true.

(BTW- Reg, if you dropped the idiotic asian-accented BS, you might sound like more than a 4th grade dropout. It's offensive---I've said it before, but VEN is too busy trying to warn me about bashing mods to notice!)

[Drew Dowdell]

But try trading a BMW or a Mercedes in after 2 or 3 years and see if you aren't 'upside down.' The only difference may be that the MB buyer would not put zero down. The culprit with being upside down is our addiction to 'cheap' money.

truth

[Flybrian]

I could easily call into question Chrysler committment on quality by allying itself with a Chinese manufacturer, Toyotas clarion call to environmental godliness in light of its poor-mileage trucks and SUVs, or Hyundais claims of offering the 'best' warranty when it offers a myriad of loopholes and processes by which dealers will refuse legitimate claims.

Why don't we wait to see solid fleet figures and more importantly where they're going before condemning this as a quasi-treasonous activity (which it isn't). This is the time of year - I believe - where governments also place their largest fleet orders. Also, if the increase in fleet numbers comes from cars like the Grand Prix and '07 Malibu, does it really matter? These cars are on their respective deathbeds anyway, implying that facet of Pontiac or Chevrolet fleeting will end when the cars cease production? if an extra 40k of these fleeted means 40k less G6s, Cobalts, etc. going to daily rental fleets, is that not better?

[regfootball]

i still don't see why all those cahmrys in the hertz lot and at the 'all buyers drive away with financing' car stores get a free pass. that's just blatant bias to say that.

percent don't mean $h! in this case because they have flooded the market with more camrys than people want to buy. 10% of 450,000 camrys is 45,000 cars flooding the market and killing the price of the new ones. so even if its only 10%, they obviously have reached a showroom threshold and they are looking for fleet to steal share or run factories. same effing deal as GM, they won't sell any more new ones regardless if they fleet or not, but with that many cars dumped into auctions it will kill new camry values.

its a market share tactic and nothing else. it apparently is ok for toyota to do that however! they get a free pass!

if you sell 500,000 camrys on the showroom floor and fleet out another 500,000, that hardly means you're guaranteed that a million folks want a camry or much less pay you a decent price for it.

its really sad that such a mediocre automobile like the camry sells so much. the bar is not very high.

Edited September 13, 2007 by regfootball

[CARBIZ]

i still don't see why all those cahmrys in the hertz lot and at the 'all buyers drive away with financing' car stores get a free pass. that's just blatant bias to say that.

percent don't mean $h! in this case because they have flooded the market with more camrys than people want to buy. 10% of 450,000 camrys is 45,000 cars flooding the market and killing the price of the new ones. so even if its only 10%, they obviously have reached a showroom threshold and they are looking for fleet to steal share or run factories. same effing deal as GM, they won't sell any more new ones regardless if they fleet or not, but with that many cars dumped into auctions it will kill new camry values.

its a market share tactic and nothing else. it apparently is ok for toyota to do that however! they get a free pass!

if you sell 500,000 camrys on the showroom floor and fleet out another 500,000, that hardly means you're guaranteed that a million folks want a camry or much less pay you a decent price for it.

its really sad that such a mediocre automobile like the camry sells so much. the bar is not very high.

I don't have time to look up the exact math - perhaps Enzl can enlighten us, but since most of the 'rental' GPs end up on the (what - double?) the number of GM lots and the same number of Camries end up on HALF the number of Toyota lots - which would give the consumer a worse impression of used cars being 'flooded' on the market?

As I said before, only people with agendas bother to count how many vehicles are 'fleeted' out. The average consumer doesn't give a $h! - unless told to by (get ready for this): people with agendas. However, what the consumer does give a crap about is how many GPs or Malibus they can see on an individual dealer's lot. Following the 'blood in the water' shark syndrome, if a Toyota lot has twice as many used Camries as a typical GM lot has used Malibus, then would that prospective consumer not assume (whether true or not, doesn't matter - PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING, RIGHT?) that they could haggle down the price of the Camry more so than the Malibu?

Just wondering, is all.

[Newbiewar]

let me break it down for everyone...

fleet sales could be good... as they appear to be in canada...

but... in the us... the automakers have taught buyers and fleet customers... that they need xyz units to maximize output at the factories... so when you hear about profit loss to fleet sales... this is because gm has made the incentives even greater for fleet then they have for retail in order to obtain a majority of the fleet market...

thus was true up until employee discout sale... where it was realized heavy discounts rebates and other programs aren't sustainable, nor is it the answer to the problem of the automakers...

rebates shouldn't be a thing consumers rely on otherwise they become accustom to deep discounts and they aren't quite sure why...

and when prices of things fall... its a recession... and discounts can do that... should I wait for next month to buy maybe it will have a better rebate... that encourages people not to buy...

but the factories can't just stop working... while people see the general is trying to price things right...

gm has been smart to reduce rebates but it can't just switch people cold turkey... same with fleet sales... the companies still need product... this is why consumers are anxious to see if gm does a classic version with the current malibu...

not all fleets are harmful...government sales are good...

lets put it to you this way... I can buy a chevy silverado classic for cheaper (retail) then its resale value... so... if I wanted to go into the business of reselling cars... one I've got the liscense two I've got the know how... and three kelly blue book is written... and so are the rebates...

but if I did that every day... it would flush the market with silverados...and would ruin the supply demand ratio for that year model used vehicle...

this is what the car rental place does... when the rental places realized people would buy them for more then they paid (when exporting gm vehicles to asia was in full strenght) they started turning them over more and more often... but now that gm has made major law suits to people who would to that... the rental places have still learned the importance and profitablity of returning the cars to the dealers after only a few thousand miles

[enzl]

I don't have time to look up the exact math - perhaps Enzl can enlighten us, but since most of the 'rental' GPs end up on the (what - double?) the number of GM lots and the same number of Camries end up on HALF the number of Toyota lots - which would give the consumer a worse impression of used cars being 'flooded' on the market?

As I said before, only people with agendas bother to count how many vehicles are 'fleeted' out. The average consumer doesn't give a $h! - unless told to by (get ready for this): people with agendas. However, what the consumer does give a crap about is how many GPs or Malibus they can see on an individual dealer's lot. Following the 'blood in the water' shark syndrome, if a Toyota lot has twice as many used Camries as a typical GM lot has used Malibus, then would that prospective consumer not assume (whether true or not, doesn't matter - PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING, RIGHT?) that they could haggle down the price of the Camry more so than the Malibu?

Just wondering, is all.

Oh Boy.

10% fleeted vs. 50% fleet..which owner group is affected more?

You're just being difficult, not applying logic, as the 'bu has 25% of the retail sales of a Camry...the GP is at 10-15% of Camry sales @ retail.

You conveniently forget that GM has indicated fleeting is bad. They've strained to say so each month BUT August for the last year in their monthly sales explanation.GM said it. Ford has said it. Chrysler has said it. I'm not making it up---why does everything you do at your showroom in Canada somehow apply to prove GM's overall success, yet when I restate a FACT, it calls for a Congressional investigation before you 'believe it'?

No agendas, only truth---which is that (again) GM has shown neither the intestinal fortitude or backbone to stick with a good plan.

Edited September 14, 2007 by enzl

[Newbiewar]

also remember that gm has been talking about incentives and discounts are to be cut back... but apparently that went out the window when they want to compete with toyota for trucks...

august incentives the same as last years...

[enzl]

also remember that gm has been talking about incentives and discounts are to be cut back... but apparently that went out the window when they want to compete with toyota for trucks...

august incentives the same as last years...

Don't bother. There's an element here that can never let facts get in the way of their opinion.

great example of another (forgotten) promise.

[CARBIZ]

Don't bother. There's an element here that can never let facts get in the way of their opinion.

great example of another (forgotten) promise.

The entire Universe does not revolve around YOUR opinions. GM's marketing is done by REGIONS.

Of all the end of the year clearances I have been involved in (ten so far), 2007 has been the quietest. There is absolutely NOTHING on the Silverado/Avalanche/Tahoe or any other truck, other than the Colorado/Canyon. We have a $500 RDC and 3.9% financing. BIG DEAL. I have Avalanche customers freaking because their lease payment is going UP $100 a month, compared to their 2004. We are not seeing huge RDCs on specific models to clear them out; in fact, the Malibu only has $2k and it is being phased out in a month!!! The only 'unusual' incentive activity going on around HERE is the 72 mo/0% incentives on the Optra, which is only to help us compete with Suzuki and Hyundai. Since you guys don't even have the Optra down there, it shouldn't cause any quantum shifts or phasal distortions in SolCal.

This is not about broken promises. Perhaps in YOUR region of the planet (where pot seems to reign supreme), GM is giving away vehicles, but in Ontario (which BTW, is still Canada's biggest market, for whatever that is worth) there have been no fire sales. We are well aware that GM and Toyota are tied for market share in the 5 million plus trading area of Toronto, and for now GM seems to be content to let it sit at that.

It isn't a matter of whether your are right and I am wrong, my friend - only that business is clearly conducted differently in Canada than in your neck of the woods.

ALL FLEET SALES GO THROUGH THE DEALERS HERE. Since there are no subvented leases, rates, 'virtual coupons,' visa points or any other incentives - other than a lousy $500 or $1,000 'fleet rebate' to the dealer, I fail to see how GM would be losing money on fleet business. And the auctions in and around Toronto have been hurting for Impalas and Malibus these days. Our dealer principle was warned about this 6 or 7 months ago - and it has proven true.

[enzl]

The entire Universe does not revolve around YOUR opinions. GM's marketing is done by REGIONS.

Of all the end of the year clearances I have been involved in (ten so far), 2007 has been the quietest. There is absolutely NOTHING on the Silverado/Avalanche/Tahoe or any other truck, other than the Colorado/Canyon. We have a $500 RDC and 3.9% financing. BIG DEAL. I have Avalanche customers freaking because their lease payment is going UP $100 a month, compared to their 2004. We are not seeing huge RDCs on specific models to clear them out; in fact, the Malibu only has $2k and it is being phased out in a month!!! The only 'unusual' incentive activity going on around HERE is the 72 mo/0% incentives on the Optra, which is only to help us compete with Suzuki and Hyundai. Since you guys don't even have the Optra down there, it shouldn't cause any quantum shifts or phasal distortions in SolCal.

This is not about broken promises. Perhaps in YOUR region of the planet (where pot seems to reign supreme), GM is giving away vehicles, but in Ontario (which BTW, is still Canada's biggest market, for whatever that is worth) there have been no fire sales. We are well aware that GM and Toyota are tied for market share in the 5 million plus trading area of Toronto, and for now GM seems to be content to let it sit at that.

It isn't a matter of whether your are right and I am wrong, my friend - only that business is clearly conducted differently in Canada than in your neck of the woods.

ALL FLEET SALES GO THROUGH THE DEALERS HERE. Since there are no subvented leases, rates, 'virtual coupons,' visa points or any other incentives - other than a lousy $500 or $1,000 'fleet rebate' to the dealer, I fail to see how GM would be losing money on fleet business. And the auctions in and around Toronto have been hurting for Impalas and Malibus these days. Our dealer principle was warned about this 6 or 7 months ago - and it has proven true.

Your anecdotes about 1 region in Canada mean zip.

You haven't answered as to why a stated policy (US fleeting) was discouraged, but is now OK (& unmentioned in monthly PR on sales #'s)? You don't find that odd?

I know nothingabout Canada or Ontario. I DO know that GM in my region will lose another 3 dealers by next spring and Regional sales are at 70% of targets..that's my anecdote for the day.

You are absolutely wrong when you neither explain or acknowlege the change in policy...and you speak like a salesman when you concern yourself with auction availability, monthly payments on the cheap and ignore resale as a valid concern of real customers...

Fleeting means discounted profits and, maybe, an upfit or two to make a buck here in the states...my fleet guy has to sell 100's of cars to match a salesman making 15 sales a month, and that's a problem!

[regfootball]

when demand for new camries nosedives (because of accord, altima and malibu).....and 200,000 a year start flooding auctions off lease.........

tell me that won't beeoch slap the resale of the fluff car.