Automotive Death Watch

[vonVeezelsnider]

Out of that list of Defunct companies... The only one I'd really like to stick around is Sears... Besides, I think JC Penney is closer to death anyway.

[carman21]

Audi,Hyundai,Jaguar, Kia, Mazda, Mercury, Mini, Mitsubishi, Scion, Smart, Subaru, Suzuki, VW, and Volvo will all be out of the US or shut down by 2020.

Acura-Virtually no growth through 2020

BMW-A passing fad as a new generation comes of age

Buick-The best turnaround of all the brands,

Cadillac-#1 selling luxury brand in US, # 2 in the world behind Mercedes

Chevrolet-#1 Selling Brand in US and world.

Chrysler-Stronger position by 2020

Dodge-Stronger position by 2020

Fisker-Becomes the BMW what BMW was to the 1980s

Ford-#2 in US, #3 in world

Honda-Decline along with Japanese automakers, bought Hyundai's dealer network and factories in US.

Infiniti-Virtually no growth through 2020

Lexus-Rapid decline as buyers buy Cadillac, Lincoln, and Infiniti

Lincoln-#2 luxury brand in US

Mercedes-Benz-A passing fad as a new generation comes of age, buyers prefer Cadillac.

Nissan-Decline along with Japanese automakers

Pontiac-Moderate Growth as the American Holden

Saturn-Moderate Growth as the American Opel

Toyota-Severe decline in market share as buyers choose American brands, average buyer age 76, oldest ever.

No success from Chinese or Indian brands.

Edited March 14, 2008 by carman21

[Cory Wolfe]

The above is a truly delusional post.

[Drew Dowdell]

Audi,Hyundai,Jaguar, Kia, Mazda, Mercury, Mini, Mitsubishi, Scion, Smart, Subaru, Suzuki, VW, and Volvo will all be out of the US or shut down by 2020.

Acura-Virtually no growth through 2020

BMW-A passing fad as a new generation comes of age

Buick-The best turnaround of all the brands,

Cadillac-#1 selling luxury brand in US, # 2 in the world behind Mercedes

Chevrolet-#1 Selling Brand in US and world.

Chrysler-Stronger position by 2020

Dodge-Stronger position by 2020

Fisker-Becomes the BMW what BMW was to the 1980s

Ford-#2 in US, #3 in world

Honda-Decline along with Japanese automakers, bought Hyundai's dealer network and factories in US.

Infiniti-Virtually no growth through 2020

Lexus-Rapid decline as buyers buy Cadillac, Lincoln, and Infiniti

Lincoln-#2 luxury brand in US

Mercedes-Benz-A passing fad as a new generation comes of age, buyers prefer Cadillac.

Nissan-Decline along with Japanese automakers

Pontiac-Moderate Growth as the American Holden

Saturn-Moderate Growth as the American Opel

Toyota-Severe decline in market share as buyers choose American brands, average buyer age 76, oldest ever.

No success from Chinese or Indian brands.

Not when I become President and impose a tarrif on all cars built buy companies headquartered outside of the U.S. and use that tarrif to pay the legacy costs of the Big 3. The size of the tarrif imposed will be determined by the percentage of world market share the foreign company has. The Japanese want to play tough in their home country? So can we.

Edit: My campaign slogan.... "You will buy American... and like it!"

[Satty]

The above is a truly delusional post.

+1

[Robert Hall]

Not when I become President and impose a tarrif on all cars built buy companies headquartered outside of the U.S. and use that tarrif to pay the legacy costs of the Big 3. The size of the tarrif imposed will be determined by the percentage of world market share the foreign company has. The Japanese want to play tough in their home country? So can we.

Edit: My campaign slogan.... "You will buy American... and like it!"

Sounds delusional and isolationist. Wouldn't work in the modern reality. 1950 is gone and isn't coming back.

Edited March 14, 2008 by moltar

[carman21]

My prediction is based on the basis of the rapid Growth of the Japanese automakers was due to their push to globalize first. Now that GM and Ford are equal in quality and superior in style, and now that they are rapidly globalizing. Detroit will rebound rapidly. I predict imports will go from 1/2 of the US market to 1/3 by 2020 with the greatest decline with Toyota. I believe their will be a backlash. Buyers will switch to Honda if they prefer Japanese cars or if they are patriots they will buy American.

[carman21]

Sounds delusional and isolationist. Wouldn't work in the modern reality. 1950 is gone and isn't coming back.

All Detroit needs to do is make great automobiles and globalize to save money.

If you want a pro-Detroit policy, help Detroit get rid of idle workers and give them a tax cut.

Tariffs never work, the Japanese are losing because, they are so protectionist. Remember in 1993 they were wealthier than the US per capita, now they are only worth 70% of Americans per capita.

Look up the results on the US and Global Economy of the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act. It deepened a severe recession into the Great Depression.

[Bimmer325]

Audi,Hyundai,Jaguar, Kia, Mazda, Mercury, Mini, Mitsubishi, Scion, Smart, Subaru, Suzuki, VW, and Volvo will all be out of the US or shut down by 2020.

Acura-Virtually no growth through 2020

BMW-A passing fad as a new generation comes of age

Buick-The best turnaround of all the brands,

Cadillac-#1 selling luxury brand in US, # 2 in the world behind Mercedes

Chevrolet-#1 Selling Brand in US and world.

Chrysler-Stronger position by 2020

Dodge-Stronger position by 2020

Fisker-Becomes the BMW what BMW was to the 1980s

Ford-#2 in US, #3 in world

Honda-Decline along with Japanese automakers, bought Hyundai's dealer network and factories in US.

Infiniti-Virtually no growth through 2020

Lexus-Rapid decline as buyers buy Cadillac, Lincoln, and Infiniti

Lincoln-#2 luxury brand in US

Mercedes-Benz-A passing fad as a new generation comes of age, buyers prefer Cadillac.

Nissan-Decline along with Japanese automakers

Pontiac-Moderate Growth as the American Holden

Saturn-Moderate Growth as the American Opel

Toyota-Severe decline in market share as buyers choose American brands, average buyer age 76, oldest ever.

No success from Chinese or Indian brands.

Annnd...this thread has officially gone to $h!.

[Drew Dowdell]

Sounds delusional and isolationist. Wouldn't work in the modern reality. 1950 is gone and isn't coming back.

How many trillions of dollars in debt to the Chinese isn't delusional?

When the only overseas markets that are open are labor markets, then yes, we need to be a bit isolationist. All I'm saying is that we impose the same rules on foreign products sold here as are imposed on our products sold over seas. I am tired of having our entire country outsourced to south east asia and then have it sold back to us at Every Day Low Prices at Big Box Mart*

*Please watch the link....

[Robert Hall]

How many trillions of dollars in debt to the Chinese isn't delusional?

When the only overseas markets that are open are labor markets, then yes, we need to be a bit isolationist. All I'm saying is that we impose the same rules on foreign products sold here as are imposed on our products sold over seas. I am tired of having our entire country outsourced to south east asia and then have it sold back to us at Every Day Low Prices at Big Box Mart*

*Please watch the link....

The problem is the manufacturing of many categories of consumer goods is by and large dead in US...I can't see all that has gone away (TVs, clothes, home electronics, etc, etc) coming back.. I just don't see how what has happened over the last 40 years or so can be undone.

Edited March 14, 2008 by moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

The problem is the manufacturing of many categories of consumer goods is by and large dead in US...I can't see all that has gone away (TVs, clothes, home electronics, etc, etc) coming back.. I just don't see how what has happened over the last 40 years or so can be undone.

stop rewarding companies for offshoring labor.

stop allowing products to be sold here from countries that severely limit our products being sold there.

Do something about healthcare.

[CARBIZ]

The problem is the manufacturing of many categories of consumer goods is by and large dead in US...I can't see all that has gone away (TVs, clothes, home electronics, etc, etc) coming back.. I just don't see how what has happened over the last 40 years or so can be undone.

The link is probably the funniest and scariest thing I've watched in a while. I don't understand why we are being so blind. Clinton and Obama are blaming each other and NAFTA. Are they high? Canada is losing just as many jobs. If all the jobs are in Mexico, then why are they still flooding across your borders?

But here is the really scary part: It isn't enough that our manufacturing base is desintegrating, or even that Asia practically owns Washington. The truly scary part is what is Bejing going to do with their nearly $1 trillion in treasury bills? What could the U.S. have that they could possibly want????

[Lamar]

They've been gone around here since around '99 when Carl's Jr bought them out.

From what I heard, they're all Carl's Jr. in the West, but still Hardee's in the East. Same restaurant, different name. Like Rally's and Checkers.

[PurdueGuy]

From what I heard, they're all Carl's Jr. in the West, but still Hardee's in the East. Same restaurant, different name. Like Rally's and Checkers.

pretty much, but there seem to be some small differences. The Carl's Jr I went to out here didn't have the mushroom swiss burger that the Hardees' I'd been to in IN had.

[Hudson]

Actually they are not doing as well as you think.

I worked for Suzuki for like 4 years.....and I guarantee you, you WILL see the automotive division pull out of N.A. It's only a matter of time.

Suzuki had great promise.....and alot of good employees that worked there. BUT, contrary to what you find at companies like Honda, Toyota, etc., (which rely heavily on input from North America) Suzuki was almost arrogant (in a Korean-type way) about it's position in the U.S......blaming the N.A. employees.....insisting that because they are one of the largest auto companies in the world (primarily from it's strength in Japan and India) that they should be as big as Honda or Toyota here. Feedback from the U.S. on product decisions was never heard and/or understood.

Amazing......contrary to their overwhelming success in the motorcycle and ATV divisions......

I still have a few friends inside Suzuki....and they tell me the "new" XL7 is a HUGE disappointment. Also, with the demise of the Korean entries (a huge mistake in my mind to offer those to begin with) they are back down to 3 vehicles......SX4, XL7, and Grand Vitara.....none that are all that competitive in the marketplace.

Unless Suzuki's new larger sedan tanks (which is possible), I don't see Suzuki pulling their automotive division no matter what your "insiders" say. They've got a couple of really good products (and atleast one so-so product) coming in the next two years.

Where did you work for Suzuki? And what kind of position did you have?

[The O.C.]

Unless Suzuki's new larger sedan tanks (which is possible), I don't see Suzuki pulling their automotive division no matter what your "insiders" say. They've got a couple of really good products (and atleast one so-so product) coming in the next two years.

Where did you work for Suzuki? And what kind of position did you have?

Worked at their NA headquarters......in a management role.

They always had decent products (except the Korean products which were complete crap) but Suzuki has never invested the time or money into marketing the brand....especially not at a level they have their motorcycle and ATV products.

The Japanese there were also far less likely to listen to their American employees and dealers regarding product decisions that needed to be made in order to make the vehicles more attractive in the marketplace.....

I don't recall saying "for sure" that they would pull the automotive division.....only that I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

XL7 is a complete turd.....piss poor quality control, and dealers report it's not doing well at all. SX4 is interesting.....but a small player in a HUGE market segment. Grand Vitara would be an attractive RAV4 and CRV competitor.....but suffers from a lack of marketing and advertising support......

It's too bad. When I was there, I was part of a small contingent of us that were pushing the whole mantra of capitalizing on their success with motorbikes.....the excitement behind their class-leading sportbikes.....but all of our suggestions fell to deaf ears......

[ehaase]

Nobody, even inside of Ford, can give a reason why Mercury should remain on the market.

Grand Marquis is the only reason for Mercury to survive. I think the Mercury brand still means something for the shrinking demographic who still buys the Grand Marquis. I think Mercury will be gone when Ford drops the Panthers.

[SuperSport623]

i can tell you one thing.... i have two suzuki products, an 80 cc quad and 80 cc dirtbike... tiny little things.. but, especially the bike, they will NEVER EVER die.... this dirtbike is the bike i let all my friends ride, we were actually riding today. it has been crashed, dropped, flipped, dumped at 40mph, and abused in pretty much any way possible.... beater in every sense of the word.... before today its been 4 months since we rode it. ONE kick, and the thing is started.... moral of the story?

LONG LIVE SUZUKI!

[PurdueGuy]

i can tell you one thing.... i have two suzuki products, an 80 cc quad and 80 cc dirtbike... tiny little things.. but, especially the bike, they will NEVER EVER die.... this dirtbike is the bike i let all my friends ride, we were actually riding today. it has been crashed, dropped, flipped, dumped at 40mph, and abused in pretty much any way possible.... beater in every sense of the word.... before today its been 4 months since we rode it. ONE kick, and the thing is started.... moral of the story?

LONG LIVE SUZUKI!

Well, yeah, that's entirely different. I notice you don't list a car among your suzuki's... and that's their problem. People love their bikes & other small motorized recreation stuff... but generally forget their cars even exist, and don't take them seriously if they do think of them.

[SuperSport623]

Well, yeah, that's entirely different. I notice you don't list a car among your suzuki's... and that's their problem. People love their bikes & other small motorized recreation stuff... but generally forget their cars even exist, and don't take them seriously if they do think of them.

one of my friends has a suzuki SX4... its a cool little car.... its not for me because im not into FWD 4 bangers, doesnt detract form the fact its a cool little go cart

[Hudson]

I don't recall saying "for sure" that they would pull the automotive division.....only that I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

....and I guarantee you, you WILL see the automotive division pull out of N.A. It's only a matter of time.

Sounds kinda "for sure" to me.

Well, yeah, that's entirely different. I notice you don't list a car among your suzuki's... and that's their problem. People love their bikes & other small motorized recreation stuff... but generally forget their cars even exist, and don't take them seriously if they do think of them.

I've owned a 1991 Suzuki Swift GT since new and love the car. There simply has not been a more-fun-for-the-money car ever built. It's been my autocross car for over a year now and it's still running great. I've driven other Suzuki (actual Suzuki-built) cars and enjoyed them a great deal. And I'm looking forward to driving the new Swift.

[SuperSport623]

my brother had a Geo Tracker, obviously suzuki built... and as much as i made fun of it, it was an awesome little truck... 4WD, Convertible, 5 Speed and 80 raging HP!.. i kinda wanna get one as a daily driver...

[daves87rs]

Sounds kinda "for sure" to me.

I've owned a 1991 Suzuki Swift GT since new and love the car. There simply has not been a more-fun-for-the-money car ever built. It's been my autocross car for over a year now and it's still running great. I've driven other Suzuki (actual Suzuki-built) cars and enjoyed them a great deal. And I'm looking forward to driving the new Swift.

That's wild, I know a few people who auto X swifts...and they love those things....

[PurdueGuy]

Sounds kinda "for sure" to me.

I've owned a 1991 Suzuki Swift GT since new and love the car. There simply has not been a more-fun-for-the-money car ever built. It's been my autocross car for over a year now and it's still running great. I've driven other Suzuki (actual Suzuki-built) cars and enjoyed them a great deal. And I'm looking forward to driving the new Swift.

Is that the one that's a 4cyl? I know the swift & metro are near twins, but the swift had a 4cyl version, which scoots...

[Hudson]

Is that the one that's a 4cyl? I know the swift & metro are near twins, but the swift had a 4cyl version, which scoots...

Yes, all US-market Swifts had four-cylinder engines while all first-generation US-market Metros (and prior Sprints) had 3-cylinder engines. The Swift GT that I have has a DOHC 16-valve 1.3L (compared to the base models with their 8-valve SOHC 1.3L engines) which was rated at 100hp, nearly double that of the 3-cylinder Metro and almost 50% more than the base 1.3L or turbocharged 3-cylinder. In an 1800lb car (with 4-wheel disc brakes and a decent 5-speed), it's a great car.

[Satty]

In an 1800lb car (with 4-wheel disc brakes and a decent 5-speed), it's a great car.

Thats a great power/weight ratio, but my god those things are tiny. Driving a Swift/Metro is like driving a first-gen Miata, I'm just too tall to do it.

[The O.C.]

Well, yeah, that's entirely different. I notice you don't list a car among your suzuki's... and that's their problem. People love their bikes & other small motorized recreation stuff... but generally forget their cars even exist, and don't take them seriously if they do think of them.

Hudson, look at PurdueGuy's post here......

He slams my point home.

I'm not saying Suzuki EVER made a bad product.......but they haven't taken the steps and made the decisions to insure long-term automotive success in this country......that's MHO from being directly involved for over 4 years as of very recently......

(edit: It's the main reason that I left the company.....voluntarily.....not fired. I didn't see a long-term future.)

Edited March 24, 2008 by The O.C.

[regfootball]

i drove a metro once, and I was FRIGHTENED.

[Hudson]

I've never felt unsafe in my little Swift, and I've put many miles on it. I prefer little cars since they are much more "tossable" than bigger sporty cars. And when you're driving a sub-$10,000 car (like my car was in 1992), people avoid you on the road because they think you don't care about your car as much as they do about theirs when they're driving their $30,000 cars.

Hudson, look at PurdueGuy's post here......

He slams my point home.

I'm not saying Suzuki EVER made a bad product.......but they haven't taken the steps and made the decisions to insure long-term automotive success in this country......that's MHO from being directly involved for over 4 years as of very recently......

(edit: It's the main reason that I left the company.....voluntarily.....not fired. I didn't see a long-term future.)

I'm not saying that Suzuki's future plans are secure. They need to do something different. Subaru learned the same thing about 15 years ago when they decided to aim their products directly at Toyota and Honda...and failed. Once Subaru decided to make their products different by concentrating on their strengths (all-wheel drive), they've bloomed. Suzuki could do the same thing by focusing on inexpensive, sporty products...things that made Suzuki great in the first place like the Samurai and the Swift GT/GTi. And with the current recession and record gas prices, the new Swift would be a great starting point (when it gets here about 3 years late).

The SX4 has the potential of helping to establish a compact car for the brand (as the Esteem and Aerio failed to do). Then they can bring out the mid-sized sedan they want to sell.

I liked the Verona and (in theory) the Forenza/Reno, but they were mainstream products focused at making Suzuki another mainstream brand. I want to see more quality sporty products at affordable prices.

[ZL-1]

The Swift GT that I have has a DOHC 16-valve 1.3L (compared to the base models with their 8-valve SOHC 1.3L engines) which was rated at 100hp, nearly double that of the 3-cylinder Metro and almost 50% more than the base 1.3L or turbocharged 3-cylinder. In an 1800lb car (with 4-wheel disc brakes and a decent 5-speed), it's a great car.

It's a great little car! I just flashed back to my teen years.

[Z-06]

It's a great little car! I just flashed back to my teen years.

I have a soft corner for the one below. A great little car which I will not mind having as my fourth vehicle, if they come with 120 hp engine and get 40 mpg highway.

[The O.C.]

I'm not saying that Suzuki's future plans are secure. They need to do something different. Subaru learned the same thing about 15 years ago when they decided to aim their products directly at Toyota and Honda...and failed. Once Subaru decided to make their products different by concentrating on their strengths (all-wheel drive), they've bloomed. Suzuki could do the same thing by focusing on inexpensive, sporty products...things that made Suzuki great in the first place like the Samurai and the Swift GT/GTi. And with the current recession and record gas prices, the new Swift would be a great starting point (when it gets here about 3 years late).

Let me cite two recent examples of where Suzuki management dropped the ball on wonderful opportunities......

A few years ago, prior to the introduction of the new Swift, Japan offered the car to Suzuki NA. Dealers were shown pics and specs.....and they wanted it BAD. Even the enthusiastic non-mgmt employees wanted it BAD. The Japanese management in NA decided against the car.

The Swift has been getting RAVE reviews in Europe.....and really could have been almost a "poor-man's" MINI here in the U.S. (with a similar style and proportions actually if any of you have seen the car.) Boy if we had that Suzuki Swift now......what a right-car, at the right time.

(edit: see picture in above post.)

Botch number two actually happened while I was there. Suzuki had plans to offer a small, lightweight sports-car powered by a Hayabusa motorcycle engine, re-engineered for passenger-car duty. Think of the car as a poor-man's Lotus Elise/Exige (certainly it would have been far less expensive) but it reminded me even more of an Ariel Atom (but a bit more realistic for passenger car duty with a full windshield and passenger compartment, but removable targa-type top.)

I actually had seen the car on numerous occasions......sat in it....poured over the specs. There were actual prototypes. This car (or at least the concept) actually existed.

Now, I don't know what ultimately killed it.....but man what a great halo car for Suzuki this would have been. Talk about building upon the great brand image Suzuki has for motorcycles. Maybe cost. But Europe loves these kinds of little sports cars so I'm sure the car could have been marketed easily overseas as well. Additionally, I'm sure if Suzuki kept volumes low enough, they most likely could have sold every one they could have built. We were talking about prices in the high-teens to mid-20's for this car.

Edited March 25, 2008 by The O.C.

[Hudson]

Let me cite two recent examples of where Suzuki management dropped the ball on wonderful opportunities......

I'm not going to defend Suzuki management or try to refute your claims, but I will give you possible alternatives to your theory on their mismanagement.

Perhaps they have (had?) a myopic view of their future, like Subaru did. Back in the early 1990s, someone I know at Subaru proposed that the then-new Impreza be promoted as a great AWD compact. Instead, SoA management decided to take the opposite tack and promoted the car as an alterative to the Civic or Corolla. Management was wrong and took my associate's advice a couple of years later...when Subaru went all-AWD.

Suzuki's decision to NOT bring the Swift over was (as I saw it...when that was my job) two-fold. First was the problem that the Swift needed to be re-engineered for the US market. Second, and probably a precursor to the first, was probably Suzuki's desire to be more than just an entry-level brand...and take on Toyota and Honda. The Swift would not have competed with the Mini because the Mini is an image more than it's a car. The Mini is great to drive, but it's sold on the image of the last 50 years of Mini. Suzuki doesn't have that legacy to fall back on.

If Suzuki had brought the Swift over initially, they probably would not have sold many no matter how good it is. BMW sold 42,000 Minis in the US last year. With that success, my guess is that Suzuki would have sold about 20,000 to 25,000 Swifts. At less than $14,000 each, the Swift would not have been much of a money-maker, especially when their goal was to sell more than that in Veronas which were sourced from Korea (costing much less than the Japanese- or European-sourced Swift), and the Verona would have generated far more profit when retail price was thousands more than they would have received from the Swift.

The sports car you mentioned would have sold in lower volumes and would have been a difficult sale when (as I see it) Suzuki's idols (Toyota and Honda) had pulled their sporty cars from the market to concentrate on more mundane vehicles.

As much as I'd like to see the return of a sporty Suzuki, I can't imagine that MY Suzuki is in the pipeline. But my guy at Suzuki has been promising me such a car for about a decade...still waiting.

[The O.C.]

I'm not going to defend Suzuki management or try to refute your claims, but I will give you possible alternatives to your theory on their mismanagement.

Perhaps they have (had?) a myopic view of their future, like Subaru did. Back in the early 1990s, someone I know at Subaru proposed that the then-new Impreza be promoted as a great AWD compact. Instead, SoA management decided to take the opposite tack and promoted the car as an alterative to the Civic or Corolla. Management was wrong and took my associate's advice a couple of years later...when Subaru went all-AWD.

Suzuki's decision to NOT bring the Swift over was (as I saw it...when that was my job) two-fold. First was the problem that the Swift needed to be re-engineered for the US market. Second, and probably a precursor to the first, was probably Suzuki's desire to be more than just an entry-level brand...and take on Toyota and Honda. The Swift would not have competed with the Mini because the Mini is an image more than it's a car. The Mini is great to drive, but it's sold on the image of the last 50 years of Mini. Suzuki doesn't have that legacy to fall back on.

If Suzuki had brought the Swift over initially, they probably would not have sold many no matter how good it is. BMW sold 42,000 Minis in the US last year. With that success, my guess is that Suzuki would have sold about 20,000 to 25,000 Swifts. At less than $14,000 each, the Swift would not have been much of a money-maker, especially when their goal was to sell more than that in Veronas which were sourced from Korea (costing much less than the Japanese- or European-sourced Swift), and the Verona would have generated far more profit when retail price was thousands more than they would have received from the Swift.

The sports car you mentioned would have sold in lower volumes and would have been a difficult sale when (as I see it) Suzuki's idols (Toyota and Honda) had pulled their sporty cars from the market to concentrate on more mundane vehicles.

As much as I'd like to see the return of a sporty Suzuki, I can't imagine that MY Suzuki is in the pipeline. But my guy at Suzuki has been promising me such a car for about a decade...still waiting.

Summary: Hence my original prediction that they (auto unit) won't be around all that much longer.

They can't wrestle with Toyota and Honda.......they don't have the image, recognition in the marketplace, or the sheer advertising and marketing dollars to take them there.

SO.....the alternative is to try to be something different.....hence the "motorcycle, excitement, speed" image.....the sporty, small cars.......the "halo" motorcycle-type sports car. As you've said....Subaru did it (focusing on AWD and the legacy of the WRX/STi)....and it seems to be working for them......

btw.....Swift could've been re-engineered (or was already) for the U.S. From my inside sources, (this occurred after I left) Japan presented this car as "ready-to-go" for the U.S.

The "Korean Experiement" sounded good to many of us at the onset......but ended up a disaster. Forenza/Reno were plagued by seemingly never-ending reliability and engineering problems.....and the Verona was such a dud in the marketplace, it was embarrassing. (Not to mention the car's major failing was a thirsty inline-6 engine that not only didn't provide the fuel economy of the 4cyl Camry/Accord-type competition, it didn't even provide 4cyl type performance!!!!!!!)

As far as the "Hayabusa" sports car......you are right.....it wouldn't have been huge volume (obviously) but just as you stated.....Toyota and Honda are abandoning their "sporty" cars.....so here was another chance to boost/build upon Suzuki's image for fun machines.

If you are serious about being a player in this marketplace, you've got to be able to make the committment to taking the chances and making the decisions that will bring products to the market that will capture the consumers' attention.....

Consider this.......Kia and Hyundai have embarrassed Suzuki when you consider how fast and far they've grown, and how poorly Suzuki continues to do. That's sad.....when you consider what Suzuki could have done with their solid image (for motorcycles and ATVs) in the marketplace. Kia and Hyundai started with a poor image.....and although it's improved, they still have an image problem....but they sell SO MANY more cars here NOW than Suzuki.....it's an embarrassment.

[The O.C.]

OK.....not to but.....

Consider this......why would ANY mainstream consumer (re...not a "Suzuki" enthusiast) be drawn to a Suzuki dealership? What product or product feature do they offer that in any way differentiates them from the mainstream, more accepted brands? (or <gasp> even the Korean brands?)

XL7....? Based on the (now) old Equinox/Torrent architecture. Third seat and V6? Pretty mainstream these days.

Grand Vitara....? Underpowered, truck-like chassis.....but even at that, not properly set up to cash in on it's (supposed) off-road prowess. Why choose this over Escape, RAV4, CR-V, Rogue, Santa Fe, Sorento?

SX4....? Awkward styling (ok subjective) and heavy for it's class (which blunts performance and fuel economy.) Why choose this over Corolla, Focus, Civic, Cobalt, Spectra, or Elantra?

[Hudson]

You can't turn the ship around quickly whether it's the Queen Mary (GM) or a dingy (Suzuki). It takes time.

Suzuki seems to be trying the Subaru approach. Suzuki's recent advertising has been tying their successful motorcycle image into their non-existent car and truck image. Sales of Suzuki products in 2007 was up over 2006...in a market that was down. Even sales of the well-positioned XL7 (good price, reasonable power for a 7-passenger SUV) are up and continuing to go up in 2008. Even SX4 sales are climbing helping pull the brand, year over year, up in February.

One of the differences between Hyundai/Kia's success and Suzuki's failure to emerge in the full-range market is their range. Suzuki had to borrow Daewoo's compact and mid-sized cars (agreed, low-quality) to fill out their lineup. Hyundai and Kia had a range of vehicles already on the market in South Korea that they had engineered to American standards. Suzuki has been world-reknowned for its small cars and light trucks...and should have concentrated there.

Suzuki's desire to sell 200,000 vehicles annually in the US has always been almost absurdly optimistic. With the current market conditions, their SX4 (least-expensive AWD vehicle on the US market) could lead the way as the LARGEST car in their lineup with several versions of the Swift below that. The (now defunct) Cappucino would have been another good addition to a fuel-sipping lineup well-poised for $4/gal gas.

[The O.C.]

You can't turn the ship around quickly whether it's the Queen Mary (GM) or a dingy (Suzuki). It takes time.

Suzuki seems to be trying the Subaru approach. Suzuki's recent advertising has been tying their successful motorcycle image into their non-existent car and truck image. Sales of Suzuki products in 2007 was up over 2006...in a market that was down. Even sales of the well-positioned XL7 (good price, reasonable power for a 7-passenger SUV) are up and continuing to go up in 2008. Even SX4 sales are climbing helping pull the brand, year over year, up in February.

One of the differences between Hyundai/Kia's success and Suzuki's failure to emerge in the full-range market is their range. Suzuki had to borrow Daewoo's compact and mid-sized cars (agreed, low-quality) to fill out their lineup. Hyundai and Kia had a range of vehicles already on the market in South Korea that they had engineered to American standards. Suzuki has been world-reknowned for its small cars and light trucks...and should have concentrated there.

Suzuki's desire to sell 200,000 vehicles annually in the US has always been almost absurdly optimistic. With the current market conditions, their SX4 (least-expensive AWD vehicle on the US market) could lead the way as the LARGEST car in their lineup with several versions of the Swift below that. The (now defunct) Cappucino would have been another good addition to a fuel-sipping lineup well-poised for $4/gal gas.

I would agree with the vast majority of your post.....I just don't think it's a viable long-term strategy.....because I don't see them doing innovative things like a city-car, or sub-SX4 vehicle.....OR something unique and fun like the tiny Cappucino...

I haven't seen year-to-year numbers, but I can tell you that I still keep in contact with many local Suzuki dealers that I knew well, and the "word on the street" is that the XL7 is doing very poorly.....alot resulting from fit-and-finish issues, cheap-looking and poor quality interior, and price (all compared to the previous-gen XL-7 which, ironically, had a much higher-quality interior in it's last form, and was relatively bullet-proof, and was priced and incentivized better.)

Again.....just word on the street from what I hear from dealers and people I still know at ASMC.

[Hudson]

I haven't seen year-to-year numbers, but I can tell you that I still keep in contact with many local Suzuki dealers that I knew well, and the "word on the street" is that the XL7 is doing very poorly.....alot resulting from fit-and-finish issues, cheap-looking and poor quality interior, and price (all compared to the previous-gen XL-7 which, ironically, had a much higher-quality interior in it's last form, and was relatively bullet-proof, and was priced and incentivized better.)

I can't argue against the interior quality of the XL7, because I hate it. The last XL7 test vehicle I had was an abomination. And the interior quality of most under $20,000 vehicles sold in the US is poor (cheap, in my opinion) compared to my 1991 Swift GT. All I can say is that the sales numbers are up and that Suzuki has invested more money in advertising. I look forward to their upcoming introduction of the new Swift and I'm waiting to see how the market likes their upcoming mid-sized car. I think the Swift will do well (assuming Suzuki doesn't screw something up in the process, either in the vehicle or the marketing) and the mid-sized car will, at best, tread water.

While I haven't worked at Suzuki, I have worked in the industry VM and Tier 1 industry as a consultant and analyst for a number of years.

[The O.C.]

I can't argue against the interior quality of the XL7, because I hate it. The last XL7 test vehicle I had was an abomination. And the interior quality of most under $20,000 vehicles sold in the US is poor (cheap, in my opinion) compared to my 1991 Swift GT. All I can say is that the sales numbers are up and that Suzuki has invested more money in advertising. I look forward to their upcoming introduction of the new Swift and I'm waiting to see how the market likes their upcoming mid-sized car. I think the Swift will do well (assuming Suzuki doesn't screw something up in the process, either in the vehicle or the marketing) and the mid-sized car will, at best, tread water.

While I haven't worked at Suzuki, I have worked in the industry VM and Tier 1 industry as a consultant and analyst for a number of years.

We'll see....the new midsizer looks good....

But....history will repeat itself unless Suzuki does something innovative with it to get consumers into a Suzuki showroom to look at a midsize sedan. It better have something other than simply styling......as we all know, and this is a huge understatement, the midsize market is perhaps THE most competitive........

[Hudson]

...the midsize market is perhaps THE most competitive........

I'm going to add emphasis to your statement...I think it IS the most competitive in the US. Name one company that has a "mediocre" mid-sized car that's selling well.

[daves87rs]

We'll see....the new midsizer looks good....

But....history will repeat itself unless Suzuki does something innovative with it to get consumers into a Suzuki showroom to look at a midsize sedan. It better have something other than simply styling......as we all know, and this is a huge understatement, the midsize market is perhaps THE most competitive........

A midsize will help, but there still has to be a way to get people into the dealership....

Good, solid, compacts could help start these guys back on their way..

The compact class could use a little sporty...

You only have to look at the lame class of cars (Versa, Yaris, Aveo) to see where there is an opening....

There is the Fit, but that is overpriced....

The swift along with a couple other compacts could help them out....

Besides, the truck thing is lame.

People who have those branded bikes tow them with a truck (f150, Slivy) anyways...

[Satty]

Bump

Who is next?

[A Horse With No Name]

I am still hoping for Suzki to die.

They can take Mitsubishi with them...although Mitsu has too much of a foothold here to die.

My thoughts...I still see Scion dieing, as they have really unimaginative product right now that is not going to win over the younger or older generation.

The new xB is already loosing out to the Cube and the Soul...the TC is way behind the Civic Coupe/Civic Si. The just looks like the one toad in the forrest that no princess will ever kiss to make into a prince. Sales are way off.

We'll see.

Chris

Edited November 28, 2009 by 66Stang

[Robert Hall]

The brand I see most likely to die soon that hasn't been announced is Mercury. Only 4 models for '10, all rebadges. Nothing new announced. I'm skeptical if Ford will keep it around. They didn't do any Mercury versions of the recent crossovers (Edge, Flex) or the Taurus..

Edited November 28, 2009 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

Mercury will probably end up with the Ford EU lineup.

[Satty]

Mercury will probably end up with the Ford EU lineup.

If they dont soon, they're out simply because they're squeezed out by Ford and Lincoln.

[Robert Hall]

Mercury will probably end up with the Ford EU lineup.

I've seen that rumor in a few places, but since Ford hasn't actually announced anything, I assume the worst.

[A Horse With No Name]

Given how hot the new Taurus looks...I think we've got a few good suprises coming from Ford.

Chris

[mustang84]

The brand I see most likely to die soon that hasn't been announced is Mercury. Only 4 models for '10, all rebadges. Nothing new announced. I'm skeptical if Ford will keep it around. They didn't do any Mercury versions of the recent crossovers (Edge, Flex) or the Taurus..

I don't see Mercury dying anytime soon. Rumor has it there will be a new Mercury shown at one of the autoshows this year, mostly likely Chicago. Mercury is moving toward small premium cars, so Taurus and Edge rebadges have not been in the plan under Mulally.

I'm going to go with Mitsu and Scion, and then maybe Chrysler and Dodge if the Fiat thing fails to pan out (which I would really hate to happen because I want to see Chrysler move upmarket). Toyota is hurting right now and Scion has had poor sales since before the recession. It would be the easiest brand to fold since the dealer base is all wrapped up with Toyota. Other than that, I don't think there is much else on the horizon after the massive shedding of brands in 2009.

Edited November 29, 2009 by mustang84