Quote:
Originally Posted by hotlap
Agree. The third shift wasn't needed. Dropping the prices or shooting for rental car fleet and base trim sales isn't going to change that. Mustang's 32% drop proves that and they appear to have a real capacity problem.
Fact is, GM was able to scale production back 30% to meet the actual demand. Camaro sales were not inflated by "rental car fleet" and "base trim" sales so volume is stable with 90% being retail customers.
As Ford dropped 12% and FCA 10.3%, GM went down 1.7%. Thor asked how is "lower sales numbers working out for them". GM answers "we want to build sustainability". They do appear (to me anyway) to be approaching the market better than they did in the past when they chased volume for volumes sake.
|
Percentages don't tell the whole story. Mustang was putting up sales numbers that were completely dominating the pony car market. Now the numbers are more in line with Camaro, which due to pricing incentives increased a little. Now using the percentage in decrease of overall sales it looks like Mustang is in trouble, when in reality it's selling about the same as Camaro these last couple months. Which are winter months. It tells the story of a Camaro that's been in trouble since day one and a Mustang that's recently slowed some. Hardly what you are describing. Does sustainability mean consistently poor sales? Camaro didn't catch up until all the 20% off red tag events. Were they still making the huge profits per unit at these prices that they bragged about in the sustainability speech?
