Lexus gets a "Do Not Buy" Rating from Consumer Reports

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

CR has since then suspended their recommendation Toyota vehicles until the problem has been fixed. This combined with all the major news sources covering Toyota's problems still hasn't shown a decrease in sales. They were up 34% last month? Point is: Toyota's (previous) reputation has been branded into the minds of the average consumers, and despite all the negative media coverage, they still seem to come out ahead.

Toyota has also issued the largest sales incentives in their companies history.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Toyota has also issued the largest sales incentives in their companies history.

lol....

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Toyota has also issued the largest sales incentives in their companies history.

http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/04/...m-reports.html

Toyota's incentives, to which some of its Japanese competitors responded, pushed the combined incentive spending of Japanese automakers to their highest ever. From February to March, Japanese automakers boosted their spend by $224 to $2,058 per vehicle sold.

Combined incentives spending for domestic manufacturers averaged $3,413 per vehicle sold in March 2010, down from $3,463 in February 2010. European automakers increased incentives spending by $151 to $2,763 per vehicle sold. Korean automakers increased incentives spending by $349 to $1,997 per vehicle sold.

In March, the industry's aggregate incentive spending is estimated to have totaled approximately $3.07 billion, up 49.4 percent from February 2010. Chrysler, Ford and General Motors spent an aggregate of $1.7 billion, or 54.8 percent of the total; Japanese manufacturers spent $922 million, or 30.5 percent; European manufacturers spent $262 million, or 8.7 percent; and Korean manufacturers spent $183 million, or 6.1 percent.

...

Comparing all brands, Scion spent the least, $333 followed by Mini at $697 per vehicle sold. At the other end of the spectrum, Lincoln spent the most, $5,205, followed by BMW at $4,794 per vehicle sold. Relative to their vehicle prices, Saturn and Chrysler spent the most, 15.0 percent and 13.7 percent of sticker price, respectively; while Porsche spent 1.3 and Scion spent 1.9 percent.

According to this, it seems Domestics spent way more on incentives than Toyota did. These incentives, while not as much as its Domestic counterparts, combined with this seemingly immortal quality reputation is what gave Toyota just a sales jump. However, as you can tell, incentives weren't obviously what was on consumer's minds, because if that was the case then the Domestics would have vastly outsold the Japanese automakers.

[LOWDOWN]

Originally Posted by a_Username

According to this, it seems Domestics spent way more on incentives than Toyota did. These incentives, while not as much as its Domestic counterparts, combined with this seemingly immortal quality reputation is what gave Toyota just a sales jump. However, as you can tell, incentives weren't obviously what was on consumer's minds, because if that was the case then the Domestics would have vastly outsold the Japanese automakers.

Shudder to think where the Detroit 3 would be WITHOUT "these incentives"...

But it's long overdue for "Detroit" to bring more products to market that need fewer/le$$ incentives. Scotch taping checks to back bumpers is a "shell game"...

As for CR, it's NOT the first time they've picked on SUVs with driving dynamics tests you'd seldom/ever see on "public roads". I doubt many/any take their GX460s to "Track Day"...and drive them without the "electronic nannies" on.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/04/...m-reports.html



According to this, it seems Domestics spent way more on incentives than Toyota did. These incentives, while not as much as its Domestic counterparts, combined with this seemingly immortal quality reputation is what gave Toyota just a sales jump. However, as you can tell, incentives weren't obviously what was on consumer's minds, because if that was the case then the Domestics would have vastly outsold the Japanese automakers.

Did you also notice that GM and Chrysler's incentives have gone down while Toyota's went up? And GM's core brands increased their sales more than Toyota Motor Corp did. Barely, but they still went up.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Did you also notice that GM and Chrysler's incentives have gone down while Toyota's went up? And GM's core brands increased their sales more than Toyota Motor Corp did. Barely, but they still went up.

I believe this is less important than the fact that Toyota still manages to be barely behind GM, while offering ~$1300 in incentives less per vehicle, having a recall that effects 8 million vehicles, and being hassled by NHTSA and Congress over safety issues.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

I believe this is less important than the fact that Toyota still manages to be barely behind GM, while offering ~$1300 in incentives less per vehicle, having a recall that effects 8 million vehicles, and being hassled by NHTSA and Congress over safety issues.

And I believe that the absolute value of cash on the hood isn't as important when comparing relative values of incentives and sales.

Toyota Motor Corp increased their incentives against what they had last year and had less gain than GM had with Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, and GMC while lowering their incentives. To me, that indicates a huge relative change in perception between the two.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

And I believe that the absolute value of cash on the hood isn't as important when comparing relative values of incentives and sales.

Toyota Motor Corp increased their incentives against what they had last year and had less gain than GM had with Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, and GMC while lowering their incentives. To me, that indicates a huge relative change in perception between the two.

As I recall, you saying

Toyota has also issued the largest sales incentives in their companies history.

implies that incentives were a major cause in their recent sales. However, if incentives were a major worry for consumers then obviously the Big 3 would have a lot more customers. No matter which way you try to spin it, domestics still offer over ~$1300 per vehicle on incentives than their Japanese competition. Sales from the last month show barely any perception change IMO.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

As I recall, you saying implies that incentives were a major cause in their recent sales. However, if incentives were a major worry for consumers then obviously the Big 3 would have a lot more customers. No matter which way you try to spin it, domestics still offer over ~$1300 per vehicle on incentives than their Japanese competition. Sales from the last month show barely any perception change IMO.

I never denied the total value of incentives. But I'm not comparing Toyota's incentive value to GM's or anyone elses, you are. I am comparing what was done last year vs what was done this year, and the results. Not how much one spends vs the other, because then we'd also have to be talking about their total sales. But we weren't talking about total sales, we were talking about the relative increase. Therefore, it makes sense to look at the change in incentives.

Relative to last March (that chart is mislabled somehow) Toyota offered ~$700 more, an increase of nearly 50% while the industry average was down a little more than $400 or 13%. Meanwhile GM offered
~$1200 less, or down 26%.

I'm not going to go into another round of this argument. It feels like one of us is arguing oranges are round while the other says bananas are yellow.

[The_Blur]

When comparing Toyota incentives to any other manufacturer, don't forget to compare MSRPs. If a Chevy costs more than a Toyota from the factory, it may be necessary to balance that cost with a higher incentive than Toyota is willing to offer. Offering a higher incentive also implies that the Chevy may have more built-in profit than the Toyota. There are a lot of overlooked variables when comparing incentives. No two cars from two manufacturers are alike, and so their values and costs are different.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I never denied the total value of incentives. But I'm not comparing Toyota's incentive value to GM's or anyone elses, you are. I am comparing what was done last year vs what was done this year, and the results. Not how much one spends vs the other, because then we'd also have to be talking about their total sales. But we weren't talking about total sales, we were talking about the relative increase. Therefore, it makes sense to look at the change in incentives.

Relative to last March (that chart is mislabled somehow) Toyota offered ~$700 more, an increase of nearly 50% while the industry average was down a little more than $400 or 13%. Meanwhile GM offered
~$1200 less, or down 26%.

I'm not going to go into another round of this argument. It feels like one of us is arguing oranges are round while the other says bananas are yellow.

Fine, I guess we'll leave it at that lol.

[LOWDOWN]

March '09, GM was "on the brink" and, in fact, "fell in"... This year, they have several "new" hot products selling incredibly well compared to their '09 counterparts - Equinox/Terrain/SRX - (including the object of this Forum, Camaro)...

March '10, Toyota was 60 days into/beyond their "comeuppance"...NO "fresh product"...

Considering both scenarios, there'll be no wake for Toyota, while GM must incentivize their carryovers far more heavily than Toyota...

Where there IS caution: Toyota's loyal customer base, and lease pull-ahead program, are maintaining/increasing their sales rate, while "conquest" sales have slowed, relatively...so they're "fighting fire with fire" by offering higher incentives to particularly attract off-brand intenders.

BOTH need a dose of more "fresh" product, and Cruze/Volt/Spark will add that "spark" for GM...