Maybe. I thought it was reported here that the campaign for the

Car We Can’t Produce
Car We Can’t Sell
Car You Can’t Ignore

was $150 million. Maybe it costs more to sell a truck nobody wants than a car nobody wants.

Then consider the enormous goodwill benefit to Toyota of developing the Prius and the Hybrid Synergy Drive, and how that’s placed the company in the limelight as an environmental innovator. Priceless.

Net result: once again, Toyota has increased their relative cost/economic advantage against the whole rest of the industry. This is a brilliant strategy, and the proof of the pudding is in their annual profits (about $15billion).

For their billion bucks, TMC got an R&D advancement in the form of hybrid technology that has helped to increase their brand equity and boost their market share, while preserving their margins. It has given them tremendous cred with the American consumer (read: their biggest market) and will help them to bury their largest competitors in the US.

Whether they recouped the cost from selling that original vehicle is almost irrelevant. With the benefit derived, it could have cost twice that much and still been well worthwhile. Money well spent, a hell of lot wiser than GM blowing $4 billion to partner with and then avoid buying FIAT.

Accounting is more of an art than science.

Besides, those cars will last a REALLY long time. Parts for them will be profitable.

1. Are they pushing nothing but heavily loaded Touring models to dealers or are strippers readily available?

- If they aren’t forcing heavily loaded models onto the dealers, I’d think it unlikely that they are selling them at a loss with respect to unit manufacturing cost.

2. What’s the history of the MSRP and invoice on this car?

- It seems to me that they haven’t tested an MSRP increase. They initially flew off dealer lots, often with dealer markup and an MSRP increase would have improved Toyota’s share without actually hurting the dealers.

3. What’s the quantity situation? Plenty of ‘em or a waiting list?

- Notes posted here recently pertaining to Ford made me wonder if Ford’s building the Escape hybrid at a unit cost loss. They’re reasonably priced, all things considered, but hard to get. That could be a supply issue, of course. Toyota does not appear to be rationing Priora.

All in all, Toyota might have excluded some beans but I don’t think those beans amount to (forgive me) a hill of beans.

The payoff will be enormous. Unlike some on this forum, as a professional cheapskate, I can assure you that when they offer hybrids across the board their sales will increase enormously as its not the eco freaks but the cheapskates of the world that are flocking to this car.

Those buyers aren’t cross shopping Kias, typically…

“The company earns about $6,000 before taxes in the U.S. on an SUV,” David Healy of Burnham Securities insists. “That compares with a $1,000 profit on a Corolla and a small loss on a Prius.”

Healy is the one making the claim.

As for the assignment of costs, although most hybrids they sold were Prii, some were Highlanders and Camries, using the same exact technology (HSD). Shouldn’t the development cost be spread accordingly?

Which means that I’m quite appreciative of Mr Reinert’s refreshing honesty, as compared to the kind of Lutzian nonsense we’re usually served by the rep’s of carmakers.

If that’s so, the Sierra Club should be thanking the folks who buy the SUVs because they’re subsidizing the Prius. If not for them, the Prius would cost a lot more and sell a lot less.