Why can't Nissan build a few thousand more Z's in May?
Why can't Honda turn out an extra 5,000 Civic Type R's this month?
How about 25,000-50,000 more Civic Si's this summer?
Is it what I learned in college economics? Guns and butter? Make more Altimas you get less Z's?
Are we ramping up those chips yet? Is this the issue?
I heard 2025 we get to where we need to be. After having bought a new tundra, holy mother grabbing F are there a lot of screens and automated BS. The get off my lawn part of me says there wouldn't be a shortage if they'd build new vehicles with 2015 levels of tech.
Back up camera became US mandated in 2018.
I'm beginning to notice that dealerships have many cars on the lots again. My Ford dealership looks pretty full. Maybe not Mavericks and F250s but there seems no shortage of Bronco Sports.
My Honda dealer even has some inventory. Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram dealerships seem to have tons of vehicles.
Not far from me, Ford makes Econoline based box trucks. There used to be huge overflow lots of waiting "partially assembled vehicles." Those lot are nearly empty now.
No computer chips for you!
"However, GM is not the only domestic manufacturer capable of doing limited-production shutdowns, Krebs said. Ford and Stellantis are both carrying extra inventory (around 80 to 130 days' supply) and could very well cut production or offer buyer incentives to keep from over-producing. By comparison, foreign manufacturers like Toyota, Honda, and Kia are struggling to keep more than 30 days' supply."
https://www.autoweek.com/news/industry-news/a43100897/ford-gm-pickup-truck-production-shutdown/
gotta keep those inflated prices up somehow I guess.
Why make more of something if you're making a pretty good profit making less of it?
I noticed when I took the BRZ in for it's oil change and a recall, there were a lot more cars on the lot then when I picked it up in September of last year.
Still not overflowing with cars like we've become accustomed to over the past decades, but it seems to be improving, albeit slowly.
Need to find a way to substitute tortilla chips. I can buy those anywhere.
In reply to lnlogauge :
Yeah. Basically GM wants to artificially re-create 2021 by limiting production. I'm not a business savvy person, so maybe this happens way more than I realize. Still, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that GM wants to intentionally keep things so hostile for their customer.
Don't get me started on Ford and their dealers. Almost criminal the markups they've added to their vehicles.
I frequently observe that big business today doesn't just want some of your money. They want all of your money.
Come on guys. It takes years of paperwork to get a computer chip plant going before a single shovel of dirt is turned.
Scotty Con Queso said:In reply to lnlogauge :
Yeah. Basically GM wants to artificially re-create 2021 by limiting production. I'm not a business savvy person, so maybe this happens way more than I realize. Still, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that GM wants to intentionally keep things so hostile for their customer.
Don't get me started on Ford and their dealers. Almost criminal the markups they've added to their vehicles.
All it takes is 1 OEM breaking ranks and overproducing though, and their game is moot. Next two years will be interesting to see who breaks and when.
Also, I hope regulators are taking notes next time these businesses need a bailout. The answer better be, "Nope, sucks to suck, sorry you're bad at finances. I'm sure the next company will learn from your mistakes. Go free market!"
Flynlow (FS) said:Scotty Con Queso said:In reply to lnlogauge :
Yeah. Basically GM wants to artificially re-create 2021 by limiting production. I'm not a business savvy person, so maybe this happens way more than I realize. Still, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that GM wants to intentionally keep things so hostile for their customer.
Don't get me started on Ford and their dealers. Almost criminal the markups they've added to their vehicles.
All it takes is 1 OEM breaking ranks and overproducing though, and their game is moot. Next two years will be interesting to see who breaks and when.
Also, I hope regulators are taking notes next time these businesses need a bailout. The answer better be, "Nope, sucks to suck, sorry you're bad at finances. I'm sure the next company will learn from your mistakes. Go free market!"
I get it from the economy/jobs standpoint, but I've understood why every individual is expected to have enough money in savings to cover 6+ months of living expenses. But a business loses money for 1-2 quarters and it's up to ALL OF US to bail them out.
I know we all have to bow to Wall St and quarterly earnings these days, but damned if it isn't infuriating.
If there is collusion between the manufacturers.... pretty sure there are laws (antitrust) against that.
Regarding bail outs: They are frustrating, but you also have to consider letting those businesses fail not only affects that CEO donor that you golf with (which, realistically, it really doesn't, they will be fine), it potentially knocks thousands and thousands of workers out of work. That of course is a "hostage" they will be very willing to point out.
aircooled said:If there is collusion between the manufacturers.... pretty sure there are laws (antitrust) against that.
Regarding bail outs: They are frustrating, but you also have to consider letting those businesses fail not only affects that CEO donor that you golf with (which, realistically, it really doesn't, they will be fine), it potentially knocks thousands and thousands of workers out of work. That of course is a "hostage" they will be very willing to point out.
We know there are anti-trust and monopoly laws, but let's be real about how often they are enforced.
I acknowledged the bailout thing in my first sentence. But perhaps there should be more restrictions regarding being overleveraged and being able to sustain the business during lean times.
z31maniac said:I acknowledged the bailout thing in my first sentence. But perhaps there should be more restrictions regarding being overleveraged and being able to sustain the business during lean times.
I agree. The big problem is during good times, the companies willing to over leverage and take big risks tend to force others to do the same to compete just to stay in business. When there's a market blip, they all are at risk. The question is how to regulate it without destroying innovation, and the ability of new players to enter the market.
aircooled said:If there is collusion between the manufacturers.... pretty sure there are laws (antitrust) against that.
Regarding bail outs: They are frustrating, but you also have to consider letting those businesses fail not only affects that CEO donor that you golf with (which, realistically, it really doesn't, they will be fine), it potentially knocks thousands and thousands of workers out of work. That of course is a "hostage" they will be very willing to point out.
I listen to the Planet Money podcast occasionally and a while back they had one that was about collusion in the Ice Cream industry between Ben & Jerry's and Haagendaz. It's worth a listen, although I think they could take about 30%-40% of the talky-talky out of it and get straight to the point. The upshot is that while there is absolutely collusion going on, it's not really illegal and there isn't much that can be done about it. As long as the manufacturers aren't making any actual agreements or talking to each other, just sitting there and noticing that as long as production volumes are kept low they can bring in a higher GP is just smart business.
All it takes, though, is for one outfit to decide that they're willing to lose money on every sale but make it up in volume to bring that to an end and that could actually boost a smaller manufacturer in the long term if they're able to get cars on their dealers' lots for delivery today when everybody else is a month or more out at MSRP or more. Maybe you wouldn't ordinarily consider the 6000SUX, but if it's a choice between buying one of those today for an attractive price or paying out the nose for a car you might get in 90 days it could tip the scales a bit.
To me, all this still begs the question ... why go thru all the engineering, tooling up, testing, and getting government approval for a special car variant (I.e. Civic Si as one example) and then make so incredibly few of them? A Si is not exactly a halo car, but instead a reasonably equipped, mostly affordable daily driver.
In reply to wae :
"Lose money on every sale, but make it up in volume..."
How does that work?
einy (Forum Supporter) said:To me, all this still begs the question ... why go thru all the engineering, tooling up, testing, and getting government approval for a special car variant (I.e. Civic Si as one example) and then make so incredibly few of them? A Si is not exactly a halo car, but instead a reasonably equipped, mostly affordable daily driver.
Brand awareness/building.
Most racing endeavors backed by manufacturers lost money. But it raised awareness and made people think, "Wow, if that X can win on Sunday, that same engineering went into my DD E36 M3box."
Even though we know it takes years for that kind of technology to trickle down. All though it's a little quicker these days.
einy (Forum Supporter) said:To me, all this still begs the question ... why go thru all the engineering, tooling up, testing, and getting government approval for a special car variant (I.e. Civic Si as one example) and then make so incredibly few of them? A Si is not exactly a halo car, but instead a reasonably equipped, mostly affordable daily driver.
This is what I'm shooting at. No way to make a few 100,000 more?
SV reX said:In reply to wae :
"Lose money on every sale, but make it up in volume..."
How does that work?
I'll check with Milo....
You'll need to log in to post.
