As part of some research I would liike to do....

 

 

I pose this question to you.

 

 

Are US Automakers Overextended?

 

i.e. do they have too many brands?

 

Positives and negatives would be greatly appreciated along with anything that can be linked to the topic.

 

 

Gotta get discussion going now.

Yes. There are too many "new" models, that's for certain.

Yes. There are too many "new" models, that's for certain.

 

 

Are you looking at new as a brand new redesigned model? Or something never before seen?

Yes. There are too many "new" models, that's for certain.

 

 

Are you looking at new as a brand new redesigned model? Or something never before seen?

 

I think redesigning models is good, it gets people talking about that manufacturer. But IMO there are too many "never before seen" models that are not all that different - but the manufacturer is pouring God knows how much money into the R & D for it.

Look at GM

_________

 

GM has 12 brands, Ford has 8 brands. Toyota has 3 brands and outsells both of them combined.

 

Look at GM: They made one horrible looking minivan and marketed it to four of their brands, do they think anybody is going to buy a Buick minivan for $8,000 more then the Chevy with the same features? American carmakers have always been behind foreign companies and they need to catch-up and surpass them.

 

They need to consolidate into a Company with an entry division (lets say, Chevy), a performance division (Pontiac), Luxury division (Cadillac), and a Truck division (GMC). In that scenario I got rid of Buick, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. That's hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

Yes, they have too many brands, but they do a poor job with those brands to begin with. There has been a big decline in the reliability of US cars the last few years, along with the fact that nobody likes the designs of those cars either.

Look at GM

_________

 

GM has 12 brands, Ford has 8 brands. Toyota has 3 brands and outsells both of them combined.

 

Look at GM: They made one horrible looking minivan and marketed it to four of their brands, do they think anybody is going to buy a Buick minivan for $8,000 more then the Chevy with the same features? American carmakers have always been behind foreign companies and they need to catch-up and surpass them.

 

They need to consolidate into a Company with an entry division (lets say, Chevy), a performance division (Pontiac), Luxury division (Cadillac), and a Truck division (GMC). In that scenario I got rid of Buick, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. That's hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

 

 

that over simplifys it.

 

though you are on the right track. And GM only has 11 brands, Ford has the 8 brands, Toyota technically has 4, though one only two you will still find in the states, Honda with 2 and then Dodge with 3 of them.

What I want to eventually happen is the removal of 'numbered vehicles'

 

Why can't they just all have names?

 

Firebird, Mustang, etc...

 

 

I'm not 'too' familiar with cars, and all the Mercedes, BMW, etc names are so confusing sometimes. I get that it's 'prestigious' and 'luxurious', but I want it to change. :whistle

what do you mean by numbered vehicles?

The automakers aren't overextended, they're bogged down by the UAW and inferior products. The interiors are worse, they don't offer as many features, they're not as reliable, they're just not desirable to the American purchaser. I don't think the amount of brands really factors into it. Some companies suck and they only have to take care of themselves (see: Rover [not Land]).

 

I'm assuming by "numbered vehicles" he means things like 330Ci, E55, RX-8, etc.

The automakers aren't overextended, they're bogged down by the UAW and inferior products. The interiors are worse, they don't offer as many features, they're not as reliable, they're just not desirable to the American purchaser. I don't think the amount of brands really factors into it. Some companies suck and they only have to take care of themselves (see: Rover [not Land]).

 

I'm assuming by "numbered vehicles" he means things like 330Ci, E55, RX-8, etc.

 

 

 

So GM's problem has nothing to do with having Chevrolet, Pontaic and Saturn essentially offering the same products in terms of automobiles?

 

 

And you can argue that the inferior products are due in large to the heavy marketing needed to sell all the various brands. I think they are tied together. Especially when you look at Toyota who have a grand total of 2 brands in the United States.

 

 

The UAW you just have to deal with.

One of the major problems with these companies, especially GM, is their inability to upgrade their systems to compete with foreign competitors. They have spent countless time and money trying to streamline their processes between their different brands, but they don't have the balls to flat out make it happen. Their development times can't compete with foreign automakers. They are afraid to step on the toes of the leaders of their individual brands and it's costing them money. Their information systems, while improving, are still outdated and it's what kills them.

 

So, what I would say, is no they're not overextended, they're just not handling them properly. Their biggest mistake is the lack of communication and inability to streamline between the brands. Obviously, you don't want to streamline the products, but you put together a process that works and use it across the board.

I only drive Chrysler and Dodge products because that's what I like. I don't really have a problem with them. I'd like to be able to afford a Chrysler 300, but that's for the future.

 

I like DaimlerChrysler's philosophy when it comes to making cars, I wish I could afford more, I'd buy them. I'd like more money and thought put into alternative energy, but we all know they have to be pushed into it (granted the first Dodge Charger concept was a hydrogen fuel model).

The automakers aren't overextended, they're bogged down by the UAW and inferior products. The interiors are worse, they don't offer as many features, they're not as reliable, they're just not desirable to the American purchaser. I don't think the amount of brands really factors into it. Some companies suck and they only have to take care of themselves (see: Rover [not Land]).

 

I'm assuming by "numbered vehicles" he means things like 330Ci, E55, RX-8, etc.

 

 

 

So GM's problem has nothing to do with having Chevrolet, Pontaic and Saturn essentially offering the same products in terms of automobiles?

 

 

And you can argue that the inferior products are due in large to the heavy marketing needed to sell all the various brands. I think they are tied together. Especially when you look at Toyota who have a grand total of 2 brands in the United States.

 

 

The UAW you just have to deal with.

Toyota has three brands in the USA (Toyota, Scion, Lexus). Sure, Chevrolet, Pontiac, and Saturn sell what are essentially the same cars with some slight differences, but they're doing it to keep costs down which is cool with me. If GM didn't make crappy cars, they'd be in a lot better shape. The quality for their vehicles just isn't there. Step inside a $25,000 Toyota and a $25,000 Chevrolet and there's no comparison. The quality is just lightyears better in the Toyota. Heck, my $20,000 VW has a nicer interior than most Cadillacs as far as fit and finish and quality of interior materials is concerned.

 

As far as the UAW goes, I think the American manufacturers either need to go elsewhere or tell the UAW to go stick it where the sun don't shine because they're a big reason that the US manufacturers can't make money (big pensions, healthcare, etc) and the UAW also does crap work and doesn't give a damn about the product. They're in it for the paycheck and there's no pride behind the work, regardless of what that stupid little UAW sticker on the back window says.

The automakers aren't overextended, they're bogged down by the UAW and inferior products. The interiors are worse, they don't offer as many features, they're not as reliable, they're just not desirable to the American purchaser. I don't think the amount of brands really factors into it. Some companies suck and they only have to take care of themselves (see: Rover [not Land]).

 

I'm assuming by "numbered vehicles" he means things like 330Ci, E55, RX-8, etc.

 

 

 

So GM's problem has nothing to do with having Chevrolet, Pontaic and Saturn essentially offering the same products in terms of automobiles?

 

 

And you can argue that the inferior products are due in large to the heavy marketing needed to sell all the various brands. I think they are tied together. Especially when you look at Toyota who have a grand total of 2 brands in the United States.

 

 

The UAW you just have to deal with.

Toyota has three brands in the USA (Toyota, Scion, Lexus). Sure, Chevrolet, Pontiac, and Saturn sell what are essentially the same cars with some slight differences, but they're doing it to keep costs down which is cool with me. If GM didn't make crappy cars, they'd be in a lot better shape. The quality for their vehicles just isn't there. Step inside a $25,000 Toyota and a $25,000 Chevrolet and there's no comparison. The quality is just lightyears better in the Toyota. Heck, my $20,000 VW has a nicer interior than most Cadillacs as far as fit and finish and quality of interior materials is concerned.

 

As far as the UAW goes, I think the American manufacturers either need to go elsewhere or tell the UAW to go stick it where the sun don't shine because they're a big reason that the US manufacturers can't make money (big pensions, healthcare, etc) and the UAW also does crap work and doesn't give a damn about the product. They're in it for the paycheck and there's no pride behind the work, regardless of what that stupid little UAW sticker on the back window says.

 

Riddle me this...

 

GM makes Chevy, Pontiac and Saturn, you say they are basically the same car....

 

So how is it that they are reducing costs with 3 different makes with the same auto, when you factor in the advertising one must do for each make. So how exactly are they keeping costs down?

 

and Toyota might want to update their corporate website to include Scion.

Riddle me this...

 

GM makes Chevy, Pontiac and Saturn, you say they are basically the same car....

 

So how is it that they are reducing costs with 3 different makes with the same auto, when you factor in the advertising one must do for each make. So how exactly are they keeping costs down?

 

and Toyota might want to update their corporate website to include Scion.

 

The costs should be spread out because they're usually not advertising the three hypothetical cars concurrently, it's usually one brand pushing one car or another. The spreading of platforms does help cut costs. Nissan uses the VQ35DE (and it's VQ25DE and VQ45DE permutations) engine and the FM (Front-Midship) chassis on a huge amount of cars and it keeps costs down. Everything from the 350Z to the FX45 to the Sentra uses either an engine or chassis that has some type of commonality that keeps costs down. GM does pretty much the same thing, but with far less successful results.

 

As for Scion...they're a US-only marque so they probably won't be on the Toyota website. Just a niche to sucker highschoolers and collegiates into the Toyota brand and "growing up" with the brand.

i dont have a problem with many car brands, i have a problem with 95% of them needing fossil fuels to run...it took the US 3 years in the 40's to make a nuke...and its takin us over a 100 years to make a car that can burn "clean" fuel...come on...lets get this done like the marlins stadium so we can drive along cleaner roads with cleaner air flowing through our hair on our way to a game in the new retractable roof stadium

i dont have a problem with many car brands, i have a problem with 95% of them needing fossil fuels to run...it took the US 3 years in the 40's to make a nuke...and its takin us over a 100 years to make a car that can burn "clean" fuel...come on...lets get this done like the marlins stadium so we can drive along cleaner roads with cleaner air flowing through our hair on our way to a game in the new retractable roof stadium

 

 

ya except the auto industry keeps paying off the government to not care.

 

 

and the public dont care by and large neither.

 

 

so what you gonna do?

Look at GM

_________

 

GM has 12 brands, Ford has 8 brands. Toyota has 3 brands and outsells both of them combined.

 

Look at GM: They made one horrible looking minivan and marketed it to four of their brands, do they think anybody is going to buy a Buick minivan for $8,000 more then the Chevy with the same features? American carmakers have always been behind foreign companies and they need to catch-up and surpass them.

 

They need to consolidate into a Company with an entry division (lets say, Chevy), a performance division (Pontiac), Luxury division (Cadillac), and a Truck division (GMC). In that scenario I got rid of Buick, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. That's hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

 

 

that over simplifys it.

 

though you are on the right track. And GM only has 11 brands, Ford has the 8 brands, Toyota technically has 4, though one only two you will still find in the states, Honda with 2 and then Dodge with 3 of them.

 

GM has 11 brands: Chevy, Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Saturn, Hummer, Saab, Cadillac, Holden, Opal, and Vauxhill.

Ford has 8 brands: Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Mazda, Volvo, Land Rover, and Aston Martin. Maserati is under controlling interest by Ford.

Dodge has 3 brands: Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep.

Toyota has 3 brands, all of which you can buy in the U.S.: Toyota, Lexus, and Scion.

Honda has 2 brands: Honda and Acura. You also have Honda Motorcycles, and ATV's.

i dont have a problem with many car brands, i have a problem with 95% of them needing fossil fuels to run...it took the US 3 years in the 40's to make a nuke...and its takin us over a 100 years to make a car that can burn "clean" fuel...come on...lets get this done like the marlins stadium so we can drive along cleaner roads with cleaner air flowing through our hair on our way to a game in the new retractable roof stadium

 

 

ya except the auto industry keeps paying off the government to not care.

 

 

and the public dont care by and large neither.

 

 

so what you gonna do?

 

bitch until someone realizes that our reliance on foreign oil is what is not only going to make life on this planet unlivable and will probably result in nuclear war eventually...

i dont have a problem with many car brands, i have a problem with 95% of them needing fossil fuels to run...it took the US 3 years in the 40's to make a nuke...and its takin us over a 100 years to make a car that can burn "clean" fuel...come on...lets get this done like the marlins stadium so we can drive along cleaner roads with cleaner air flowing through our hair on our way to a game in the new retractable roof stadium

 

 

ya except the auto industry keeps paying off the government to not care.

 

 

and the public dont care by and large neither.

 

 

so what you gonna do?

 

bitch until someone realizes that our reliance on foreign oil is what is not only going to make life on this planet unlivable and will probably result in nuclear war eventually...

 

tell that to joe blow who doesnt care.

 

until the actual price of oil goes to a level that joe blow actually wont pay for it, nothing is going to change.

 

 

no matter how much I really want it to happen. The trend to hybrids and E85 is mostly lip service and to capture the small market of people that actually want those vehicles, funny thing is that there are very few E85 stations in this nation in most places.

 

The US switch to hybrids is laughable.

Look at GM

_________

 

GM has 12 brands, Ford has 8 brands. Toyota has 3 brands and outsells both of them combined.

 

Look at GM: They made one horrible looking minivan and marketed it to four of their brands, do they think anybody is going to buy a Buick minivan for $8,000 more then the Chevy with the same features? American carmakers have always been behind foreign companies and they need to catch-up and surpass them.

 

They need to consolidate into a Company with an entry division (lets say, Chevy), a performance division (Pontiac), Luxury division (Cadillac), and a Truck division (GMC). In that scenario I got rid of Buick, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. That's hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

 

 

that over simplifys it.

 

though you are on the right track. And GM only has 11 brands, Ford has the 8 brands, Toyota technically has 4, though one only two you will still find in the states, Honda with 2 and then Dodge with 3 of them.

 

GM has 11 brands: Chevy, Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Saturn, Hummer, Saab, Cadillac, Holden, Opal, and Vauxhill.

Ford has 8 brands: Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Mazda, Volvo, Land Rover, and Aston Martin. Maserati is under controlling interest by Ford.

Dodge has 3 brands: Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep.

Toyota has 3 brands, all of which you can buy in the U.S.: Toyota, Lexus, and Scion.

Honda has 2 brands: Honda and Acura. You also have Honda Motorcycles, and ATV's.

Ford doesn't have anything to do with Maserati. Maserati is under the Fiat Auto Group which controls Ferrari, Fiat, etc. Also, Dodge isn't Dodge. Dodge is DaimlerChrysler which is Mercedes-Benz, Smart, Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep. You're more or less right on the other stuff. GM has a stake in Subaru and owns Daewoo, but you're pretty much spot on.

 

I've never really understood the fascination with hybrids because they're pretty much a scam and really aren't much more beneficial than gasoline or diesel powered cars while being more complex, expensive, and unreliable.

 

Also, if anyone brings up hydrogen or solar power, I'll laugh.

Look at GM

_________

 

GM has 12 brands, Ford has 8 brands. Toyota has 3 brands and outsells both of them combined.

 

Look at GM: They made one horrible looking minivan and marketed it to four of their brands, do they think anybody is going to buy a Buick minivan for $8,000 more then the Chevy with the same features? American carmakers have always been behind foreign companies and they need to catch-up and surpass them.

 

They need to consolidate into a Company with an entry division (lets say, Chevy), a performance division (Pontiac), Luxury division (Cadillac), and a Truck division (GMC). In that scenario I got rid of Buick, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. That's hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

 

 

that over simplifys it.

 

though you are on the right track. And GM only has 11 brands, Ford has the 8 brands, Toyota technically has 4, though one only two you will still find in the states, Honda with 2 and then Dodge with 3 of them.

 

GM has 11 brands: Chevy, Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Saturn, Hummer, Saab, Cadillac, Holden, Opal, and Vauxhill.

Ford has 8 brands: Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Mazda, Volvo, Land Rover, and Aston Martin.

Dodge has 3 brands: Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep.

Toyota has 3 brands, all of which you can buy in the U.S.: Toyota, Lexus, and Scion.

Honda has 2 brands: Honda and Acura. You also have Honda Motorcycles, and ATV's.

Ford doesn't have anything to do with Maserati. Maserati is under the Fiat Auto Group which controls Ferrari, Fiat, etc. Also, Dodge isn't Dodge. Dodge is DaimlerChrysler which is Mercedes-Benz, Smart, Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep. You're more or less right on the other stuff. GM has a stake in Subaru and owns Daewoo, but you're pretty much spot on.

 

I've never really understood the fascination with hybrids because they're pretty much a scam and really aren't much more beneficial than gasoline or diesel powered cars while being more complex, expensive, and unreliable.

 

Also, if anyone brings up hydrogen or solar power, I'll laugh.

 

Hybrid cars are stupid. You pay $4,000, $5,000, or more for a hybird that gets 5 miles better fuel economy. You just threw away all of your gas savings buying the damn thing, then if the battery dies, for example on the Toyota Prius, which they are not proven to pass 75,000 miles then you have to pay around $6,000 for a battery. There goes all of your gas savings times 30. I don't now that many people that can take $6,000 out of their wallet to pay for a new battery.

 

Hydrogen and solar power are not good alternatives as of this time. It's been proven that solar power can not power a modern automobile and Hydrogen uses more fossil fuel to make it then it saves, not to mention it wil be 15-30 years before you see it in the showroom. The most promising alternative right now is E85; which is 85% Ethanol (Corn fuel for example or sugar cane) and 15% gasoline. GM says by 2010 it will make up 15% of it's total sales and by 2015 hopefully (stress that!) about 40% to 50%. Its a great altenative but their is no distribution network across the United States. It will be 5 to 10 years before we even see that go mainstream.

The problem with the US automarket is simple:

 

1. They banked on SUV's, trucks, and large luxury vehicles. That's what we are good at and that's where the money was. Then oil prices went crazy and nobody wanted gas guzzlers anymore. And oh, by the way, oil is critical in steel production. That means that steel is more expensive now and larger vehicles use more steel than smaller vehicles so larger vehicles become more expensive to manufacture but you can't raise the price without causing an uproar which impacts your bottom line. In other words, it was a perfect storm of financial hardship created by a myopic strategy.

 

2. Chrysler is the only US car company that can go from design to production in less than 5 years. Think about that. A 2006 model was actually designed based on ideas and technology from 2001.

 

3. The US can not compete in manufacturing. Period. It doesn't matter if we are talking about cars, toys, or light bulbs - we have a minimum wage and OSHA and retirement plans and benefits and so on. How can a US company compete with Mexico where they pay an employee less in a year than we have to spend in a month? Ever notice how many "American" cars are made in Mexico and Canada now? There's a reason for that.