Quote Of The Day: Alternate Reality Edition

by Edward Niedermeyer

Published: April 1st, 2010

quote of the day alternate reality edition

We no longer have the dubious honor of leading this category. We’ve been down that road before, and we know it’s a dead end.

We didn’t listen to GM’s monthly sales call today, but it we had, we would have been even more likely to screw up the headline for Edmund’s incentive report [ed: for which we deeply apologize]. The cognitive dissonance between Susan Docherty’s triumphalist quote and Edmunds’ harsh version of reality left even Automotive News [sub] scratching its head. “GM says it avoided spiff frenzy — but Edmunds numbers beg to differ,” runs the shit-starting headline. Docherty claims that GM pays a mere $2,800 in incentives per vehicle, far short of Edmunds’ chart-topping $3,519 “true cost.” So what gives? Well, GM’s numbers do come from JD Power…Needless to say, neither Edmunds nor the Power want to be caught guessing. AN [sub] reports:Both Edmunds.com and J.D. Power measure customer cash, interest and lease incentives, along with cash to dealers for specific vehicles. But J.D. Power also includes cash that automakers give dealers for meeting sales volume objectives.

Still, that shouldn’t make J.D. Power’s per-vehicle numbers lower for GM, said Edmunds.com analyst Jessica Caldwell.

“We’ve been doing the same thing for years, and it’s weird that we’re coming to a point where all of the sudden we’re showing a huge discrepancy,” Caldwell said.

So, is this a core-brand, non-core-brand issue? Is it the perception gap? Or did JD cook up some numbers that would allow Ms Docherty to preach the second coming of responsibility? Either way, both GM and Chrysler are having a hard time walking their talk on incentive spending. But hey, they aren’t playing with their own money.

#Incentives #PR #Sales

Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 5 comments

Niky on Apr 02, 2010

First they lost their biggest volume crown, nowt they're losing their incentive crown? What next? We'll find out GM isn't king of non-salary employee benefits anymore? Woe is me!

Like Reply
Jimboy on Apr 02, 2010

Well since you did so deeply apologize, so will I. I shouldn't have lost my cool over your misrepresentation of incentive spending, but you have a responsibility to your readers to present facts, not fiction (April Fools notwithstanding). I understand that TTAC loves to bash Chrysler because it does bring readers to the site, but bash where it's due, not because you have failed to get the correct information. Many of your readers support this company precisely because they have been trashed repeatedly, first by Daimler, then by Cerberus. Your smarmy, tongue in cheek comments, are like kicking a dog that's been run over already. Someday, you may find yourself in that position, and I hope that you receive better treatment than you've given.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Redapple2 Love the wheels
Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”