By on May 18, 2018

Image: Steph Willems/TTAC

You need cash if you’re going to make it in this industry, and Toyota CEO Akio Toyoda wants more of it. The automaker’s top executive, who characterizes the dangers facing his company in the same manner of a military general defending the Japanese mainland, has launched an all-out assault on what he fears is Toyota’s biggest threat: unnecessary expense.

“With our rivals and the rules of competition also changing, a life-or-death battle has begun in a world of unknowns,” Toyoda said during a fiscal update last week. “Cost reduction is crucial. It is a fight to restore our original strength.”

To shore up his business’s finances in preparation for new investments, Toyoda has seven warriors ready to slash costs wherever savings can be found.

As reported by Automotive News, the effort comes even as the automaker reports record global revenue for the just-ended fiscal year. Is it paranoia, or just an abundance of caution? Toyoda claims the latter, as those boosted revenues came as a result of pleasing exchange rates and a one-time U.S. tax cut.

“Only the fat remained,” Toyoda said of earlier cost-cutting efforts. “In the fiscal years to follow, we must make sure Toyota becomes a muscular company so that we can take up the challenge of new competition.”

The goal here is finding $1.22 billion in efficiencies by March 31st, 2019.

Heading up the latest round of cost cutting is a group of like-minded executives Toyota calls the “Seven Samurai,” whose job is to peer into every corner of the company in search of savings. The plan goes as far as slashing non-essential meetings and setting a one-hour time limit for those that remain. Vehicle specifications won’t escape scrutiny, either.

If the automaker hopes to compete in the realm of electric vehicles and autonomous technology, Toyoda claims, it first needs to grow its profit margin — especially in North America.

In the last fiscal year, Toyota nearly halved its operating losses in that key region. However, its operating margin stood at just 1.3 percent at the end of March. Toyota’s chief financial officer (and one of its “Samurai”), Koji Kobayashi, wants 8 percent, and he wants it by 2020.

Volume fell in North America in the first quarter of 2018, with sales down 2.5 percent. While the automaker’s North American boss, Jim Lentz, claims Toyota will always have a more car-heavy mix than its rivals, it does want to bolster its light truck sales. There’s room for more crossovers in the brand’s portfolio, the company suggested recently, and its ancient full-size Tundra pickup (and the Sequoia SUV derived from it) is long overdue for a revamp.

In the product sphere, Toyota has a new Corolla hatch, Corolla sedan, Avalon, and RAV4 arriving in the next year and change.

[Image: Steph Willems/TTAC]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

70 Comments on “War Footing: Toyota CEO Unleashes ‘Seven Samurai’ in Bid for Survival...”


  • avatar
    dima

    Here we go. Expect even more cheap interior of Toyota products.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      Don’t know about that one. They’ve been on an upward trajectory in the last generation. But it will never be 1995 again.

      • 0 avatar
        gtem

        30 mile after messing with trying to repair the glovebox handle on the in-law’s ’13 Rav4 last weekend, I’m afraid I disagree. That little plastic bit is the biggest piece of crap I’ve seen in my life. And Toyota only sells the entire glovebox assembly as a whole $300 unit, no individual components. Compare that to the previous ’06-’12 gen (itself not dazzling with material quality) in the parts diagrams, the old ones still had a locking glovebox as standard and all of the individual parts could be purchased seperately at reasonable cost. I’m frankly not holding out too much hope of the next gen ’19s, especially with this cost cutting announcement. This episode was a pretty big eye opener as to where the trajectory of Toyota quality and cost savings is going. Between that, the crappy paint even on Lexuses these days, and the widespread issues the 3rd gen Taco is getting dinged for, things look bleak indeed.

        • 0 avatar
          Pete Zaitcev

          So, what’s an alternative? Honda does not have anything off-roadable. I don’t expect Bronco to be anything better than 4Runner, I’m sorry to say.

          • 0 avatar
            Peter Gazis

            @Pete Zaitcev

            But the 4Runner completely sux on the road. Walking is more enjoyable.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            “But the 4Runner completely sux on the road. Walking is more enjoyable”

            Then walk, Mr. Hyperbole.

            While you’re out on your own two feet you can spend the time locating an SUV as capable as the 4R that handles better without resorting to air suspensions and a $50K price tag.

            If only Chevy made that killer Colorado ZR2 in a 5-door SUV. But then it would probably be $50k.

          • 0 avatar
            Peter Gazis

            30-mile-fetch

            I’m not joking!

            Drove my dad underpowered 2016 4Runner piece of sh’t once, when it was brand new.
            -The radio was terrible made everything sound like an AM station
            -Phone connection was choppy at best
            -Navigation was from the Garmin/Tom Tom era.
            -Cloth seats, Hard Plastic everywhere, controls that looked like they were taken off a late ’70s Hi-Fi
            -Ride was rough
            -Engine struggled at 40mph
            -Plus it still used Keys.

            If it was my vehice. I would have abandoned it in the worst neiborhood on Chicagos south side, and reported it stolen when I got home.

            BTW- My Dad buys a new vehicle every 3 years. This is his 7th Toyota. Currently looking to replace it with an Explorer or MKX
            My brother after 30 years of owning nothing but Imports. Picked up a New Impala last year.
            I traded in my fully loaded European Passat 2 years ago, for a AWD Buick GS. Never been happier.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            “Currently looking to replace it with an Explorer or MKX”

            I see that stupidity is heritable through the paternal line. Did you get the obnoxiousness from mom, or was that learned?

        • 0 avatar
          30-mile fetch

          I’m not sure a glovebox handle on a single model introduced six years ago proves the point. The new RAV looks nicer and the Camry, new Corolla hatch, Highlander, Avalon suggest and upward trend.

          We’ll see, though. I’m already far less enamored with the new Tacoma compared to its predecessor and wonder why Toyota will not outdo Mazda on interiors, so my patience with the brand isn’t endless.

          • 0 avatar
            gtem

            30 mile I really hope you’re right. But I can’t tell you how infuriating it was for a guy like me that’s pretty familiar with wrenching on older Toyotas and I KNOW how high quality of a vehicle they can make and how they used to sweat the details including making vehicles easy to work on and good factory support for parts. Flimsy interior pieces breaking by the 60k/5 year mark is just inexcusable. The fact that this frustrating experience is followed up with an announcement by the company of further reduction in costs going forward was just the cherry on top.

        • 0 avatar
          sgeffe

          Interesting about the paint; I’ve never heard complaints about Toyota paint, though as a fanboi — albeit hopefully an objective and critical one — for Honda, that’s always been a problem, particularly with the switch to “Earth-friendly” paint (non-VOC, presumably). For me, PPF is mandatory, otherwise a week-old Honda will have a sandblasted-looking front-end after just a few of my commutes.

          Yes, this almost screams that the bean-counters will have carté-blanche! My guess is that a 2022 Lexus LS will have the interior build-quality of today’s Camry, and it’ll get worse from there!

          • 0 avatar
            gtem

            Toyota’s paint has gotten thin and weak since at least the late 2000s. My wife’s 2012 Camry has had more stone chips fly right through the e-coat and start to rust in 6 years of ownership than my 25 year old 4Runner. It’s really bad IMO. I think this switch to water based paints perhaps had something to do with it?

    • 0 avatar
      SSJeep

      Or a lack of product refreshing for a decade. Not that it hasn’t happened yet with the Tundra, Sequoia, 4Runner, Land Cruiser, GX570, etc…

      Any company, especially the size of Toyota, cannot cost cut their way to success. They need fresh ideas and new products in order to compete, not lack of funds and cheapened product.

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        “Or a lack of product refreshing for a decade. Not that it hasn’t happened yet with the Tundra, Sequoia, 4Runner, Land Cruiser, GX570”

        If we want a new 4Runner, someone needs to get their arses in gear and provide a competitor for it.

        Tundra & Sequoia? I suspect brand loyalty is a bigger factor than product newness in those segments. And that goes both ways: Toyota loyalists overlooking the product’s age, and domestic loyalists who wouldn’t stop by the Yota dealership even if it had the superior product. It kind of did in 2007 and still the needle wasn’t moved on sales. Those are probably very expensive segments to compete with Ford and GM in.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Toyota’s economists know how fiercely competitive things are going to become globally, and they’re preparing also for the next credit crunch.

    • 0 avatar
      piro

      Impressive. I didn’t think that was possible.

  • avatar
    dividebytube

    >>The goal here is finding $1.22 billion in efficiencies by March 31st, 2019.

    ie – even more boring vehicles, more engine/platform sharing, less risk taking.

  • avatar
    ajla

    “to slash costs wherever savings can be found.”

    “Vehicle specifications won’t escape scrutiny, either.”

    “about 35 percent of Toyota’s $10 billion annual r&d budget is earmarked for next-generation technologies.”

    I did a ‘ctrl+f’ on that Automotive News article and the word “quality” was no where to be found.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    If I were an employee I’d now feel like a target for a samurai sword slash.

    If I were the 4Runner I’d now feel like the 3.5L is a given.

    If I were the Ghost of MR2, I’d now feel like I will forever be a spirit in search of a new body.

    But the real sin is cutting meeting length and frequency. How dare he.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      “The plan goes as far as slashing non-essential meetings and setting a one-hour time limit for those that remain.”

      I used to work for Lexus-Nexus legal publishing. They could have saved far more than 8% with this policy alone. Eliminating the sorts of people who call useless meetings might have kept me from leaving.

  • avatar

    do they wear watches on their right wrist?

    Inaki, is that you? don’t leave Spain, Jack is still ticked.

    Buickman
    Founder
    GeneralWatch.com

  • avatar
    geozinger

    A more car-heavy mix when the market is moving (for better or worse) to S/CUVs? Or is this a case of having a hammer and only seeing nails? Also see: ancient, less fuel-efficient and higher polluting pickup truck and SUV platform.

    Could a German or Italian (or any other national) automaker claim “defending the mainland” in a speech and not receive approbation for using such language? I’d love to see what would happen if a MB or BMW exec were to use a similar phrase. The optics on this are bad.

    Does the cash cow American market not deliver like it used to? Resting on the hybrid laurels too long? Not enough investment in upcoming technologies?

    Slashing costs? Where’s Inaki when you need him?

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      “Does the cash cow American market not deliver like it used to?”

      In a world with increasing trade barriers, they have to protect their business against this.

      Also, we’re near the top of the business cycle, and so a business with a 5 year product cycle had best be ready for the next recessionm. It doesn’t really matter whether the coming recession is a “natural” recession, or caused by the swaggering erection of trade barriers that American voters chose — the company’s job is to stay in business.

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        Through this lens, Ford’s decision to abandon markets where they are not competitive (small cars), and Toyota expecting to own the small car business (as they did with small/midsize pickup truck busoness) both appear to be the right move for their respective companies.

      • 0 avatar
        Peter Gazis

        When you are designing vehicles for 140 different countries using many of your own parts. $10 billion is not that much money.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      You’re right, geozinger, but keep in mind Toyota’s core markets also include Japan and Europe, which aren’t nearly as CUV-gonzo as the U.S. is. In any case, Toyota certainly has plenty of crossovers and SUVs to sell here, and they’re damned good at selling them. If they wanted to, they could probably sell a lot more trucks too.

      • 0 avatar
        geozinger

        @Freed: I would respectfully argue that Europe is following in the US’ footsteps, S/CUVs are becoming more popular over there. I’ve seen several articles about this happening.

        I would also posit that Toyota’s core market IS the US, as they’ve made tons of money here. Japanese cars don’t have as big a following in Euro-land because Diesel (although that will change soon) and I would hope they would have a good footing in Japan.

        Going forward, China is the new Wild West. It’s how GM is staying afloat right now. How are the centuries of conflict between China and Japan going to play out? A while back when China and Japan were disputing the ownership of a few islands, the Chinese took out their frustrations on Japanese cars and dealers in some instances. I don’t currently see a lot of growth opportunites for Japanese car makers in China…

        WRT to S/CUVs and trucks: their BOF vehicles are pretty old and get worse mileage. With all of the cost cutting in mind, it seems unlikely they will roll out a new line of BOF trucks for the USDM, although I think it would be a good idea.

        They do have plenty of CUVs, and there’s where the meat is in the USDM. But, the latest CUV (apparently I have CRS) seems to have fallen flat in sales. I don’t know if it’s a harbinger of things to come, but it is noteworthy.

  • avatar
    celebrity208

    I never considered Toyota’s fiscal wealth their “original strength”. I always thought it was making better cars than everyone else. If they really think that’s their “original strength” then their “journey to the dark side is complete”.
    https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/01/too-good-to-be-true-how-toyotas-success-caused-killer-decontenting/

    • 0 avatar
      Lorenzo

      Toyota has reached the GM plateau marked by Alfred P. Sloan in the mid-1950s. It was then that the longtime GM chief described GM as a money making corporation that builds cars. If history repeats, Toyota has a couple decades (at most) of prominence left, before the organization unravels, and other car companies eat their lunch.

  • avatar
    Fred

    In my career we did dozens of cost reduction projects. I’d been there so long that I would console the younger engineers about how we did that before and this is how it worked out. Besides after so many years there is nothing left to cost reduce, unless you want to go down market.

    • 0 avatar
      Lorenzo

      Doesn’t that ultimate trip down market depend on the product range? With cars, higher model trims can be offered to fetch higher prices to pay for better materials/engineering. Toyota has Lexus, and could probably expand the Avalon into multiple mid-priced models, leaving base Toyotas as the down market stripped models. They’ve already started that with the Yaris being a cut below the Corolla in terms of price and quality.

      • 0 avatar
        Fred

        Do they make enough money on the Avalon? They have had lesser cars than the Corrolla, remember Tercel? I don’t think most folks want a stripper car. Especially with the Koreans selling feature laden cars. They mention changes to the office and personally I’ve never seen an office that couldn’t be made more efficient.

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          Yaris: It’s a car!

          https://youtu.be/eiWPXRb1eOY

          Can’t go too far down market from there.

        • 0 avatar
          sgeffe

          Rode in a Tercel once, and my impression was that it was a little cheap, but more substantial than anything in its class had a right to be! All plastic, but nary a squeak or rattle!

          Rattles and squeaks take my OCD into another dimension, at least until I can identify the source, and whether a fix can be found, even if some of the materials are cut-rate! In that vein, my 2013 Accord has been pretty good; unlike any of my previous Honda products, I didn’t have the car back to the dealer within two weeks of ownership with a weird noise here, or a tick there!

          Toyota has always been so, until lately, when the reviews have been full of notes of interior noises not usually associated with the brand. And now this, no mention of quality!

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      There are always efficiencies to be gained but eventually the only way to maximize profits and not cut quality is to belly up to the trough that offers the best regional or national corporate welfare.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Toyota needs better PR. Nobody, not even shareholders, want to hear about aggressive cost cutting. Fluffier language like “getting better return on capital” and “finding more efficiencies and synergies across operations” makes for better press fodder. This is a bit strange.

    I’m pretty surprised to hear that their margin is so low as well. Is that just for the Toyota brand? They must be losing money on a good bit of their fleet.

    • 0 avatar
      Lorenzo

      You’re right, this kind of talk doesn’t sell cars. But the audience may be Wall Street. It’s a capital-intensive industry, and even if Toyota can internally finance needed investment, Wall Street analysts can do a number on stock prices.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    That cost cutting is likely to end up hurting Toyota’s reputation for reliability. You have to pay more if you want durable products because ANY change in the specs designed to lower costs is going to sacrifice strength. This includes in the electronics.

  • avatar
    tomLU86

    I just googled Toyota financial results.

    For year ending Mar 31, 2017, their net income was $16.95 billion (down 20%) on sales of $255.5 billion. That’s about 6.5% profit margin.

    Their North American Net Income was about $3 billion

    Per Bloomberg, they had $53 billion in cash. That’s more than any automaker, I’m sure.

    The cars will build they way they must build. Trying to save pennies is risky and usually costs more in the long run, either indirectly (loss of reputation and sales, hard to measure), or directly (warranty or recall).

    It is so foolish, IMO, for a huge enterprise, to push minor things to the limit to save pennies. The updside is small, but the potential downside is….huge.

    In any case, Mr. Toyoda would do well to spend an extra few yen, or dollars, per car, for rodent-resistant wires.

    • 0 avatar
      spw

      This year it was $24 billion in net income…. By far the most in the industry.

      Toyota talks about cutting administrative expenses, not decontenting their cars.

      Whole point of their new tnga platform is to cut costs and capital expenses and use that to one up competition in quality of vehicles and standard features.

      As can be seen with new Camry, Corolla, Avalon and Rav4… All have ton of equipment standard like expensive suspensions, leds, state of the art powertrains with previously expensive tech like d4s, etc, etc. They also dradtically improved their hybrids in mpg and power while cutting their price.

      Little context should be given, example of cost cutting includes Toyota hq elevators running to every 2ND floor. Not every follows industry enough to know that Toyota just announced largest profits in their history.

      • 0 avatar
        sgeffe

        When cost-cutting is a goal, it just seems to usually follow that quality will suffer. Penny-wise, pound-foolish has consequences! I’m sure they will always try to save five cents a car over 400k units, so now they’ll try for ten!

        • 0 avatar
          spw

          lol, did you even read what I wrote? They are increasing the quality of their vehicles, not decontenting them.

          Just look at new and upcoming Camry, Avalon, Corolla and Rav4 and compare to old models.

          They have the best interior quality in the industry for the price in >2018 models, as well as best base equipment levels.

          • 0 avatar
            sgeffe

            It just seemed to me that the 2018 Camry wasn’t the leap forward that I might have expected, in terms of interior fitment. My impression of the interior was that it seemed OK, but not much different from the last generation, and I know a couple of folks who drive the previous generation who’ve stated that they’ve had more issues with interior noises, rattles and other things which never were a problem. (But like me, they’ve only driven Toyotas for so long that, warts and all, they are the best choice for them, barring any major issues, just because of the comfort level with the brand, if nothing else. Just like the fact that the next car to grace my garage will probably be another Accord, despite the fact that the car will be down one liter of displacement, two cylinders short of, and one turbocharger, more than the smallest engine in any of my Accords to date, and something about which I’ve burned many packets on this and other sites voicing my misgivings.)

            Credit due for not “me-tooing” it like the company which used to be known as an engine company which happened to put a car body around them, with compromised durability and other costs inherent, all in the name of having the need to teach the car to the test, though as I’ve argued, the penalties which kick in beyond an arbitrary displacement in certain Asian markets are likely a factor; I don’t know if Toyota sells the same Camry in China as is sold in the NADM, because if so, we might have seen what was predicted at the end of 2016, where Toyota was predicted to have possibly offered an NA base engine, with an uplevel turbo, where Honda was thought to be offering the 1.5T as vase, with a V6 as the upgrade. We know that the Honda predictions were half-right, and Toyota kept the simpler NA engines throughout the lineup.

            The tone of this announcement just seems to say that “adequate” is good enough, versus continuous improvement to offer the undisputed best products in their segments.

          • 0 avatar
            spw

            There is a reason why 2018 Camry outsells 2018 Accord by 40%.

            Obviously people prefer state of the art 2.5l NA engine or 2.5l Hybrid to 1.5t with CVT. And yeah, that 2.5l NA engine is very advanced.

            You can also take it as Toyota thinking of USA as their important market and creating specific powertrains for US, instead of using global one like Honda… hence both 2.5l NA and V6, which are both made mostly for USA. Chinese version is using 2.0l but not only that, neither Toyota or Honda sell 400k Camry’s/Accord’s in China like they do in the USA. Camry is product made for the USA first and foremost.

            Cost cutting would indeed be to use same powertrain they developed for somewhere else… like Honda did.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    I have no idea if this will work or not, but I’m respecting the hell out of the Kurosawa reference.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    Meet the new GM, this completes the transformation.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      I swear I’ve been hearing this for 10+ years. If it is true, it is taking its sweet time showing up as unreliable product with slumping market presence, alienated customers, and insolvency necessitating government life support. Doesn’t mean they can’t get there, but rhetoric and reality are different things.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        It’s not like GM got to bankruptcy overnight. It took them 30 years for them to get to that stage.

        Lets take a look, releasing an engine w/o proper durability testing, check google Toyota Sludge. Giving up on a segment and re-badging a competitor’s vehicle to stay in the game, check see Yaris, high fleet sales including massive year end fleet dumps to maintain market position and bragging rights, check see 2017 Camry, creating a new brand to attract a segment of buyers they have driven away, check see Scion, de-contenting check see 1997 Camry.

        Yeah from here it looks a lot like the old GM and they have really built up a head of steam in the most recent years. Essentially it only took them a decade to do what took GM two.

        • 0 avatar
          30-mile fetch

          The knack for cherry-picking in defense of a position never fails to amaze me. The 30 years prior to GMs bankruptcy defined the term “Malaise” in the automotive context, with decades of offerings that fell far behind Toyota and Honda.

          You are attempting to rebrand “Malaise” as a 1997 Camry that was still was head and shoulders above the GM offerings and decontented only relative to the ridiculous 1992, a single V6 that sludged if not maintained properly, re-branding a Mazda because the profitless b-segment is not worth bothering with, and fleet sales in large segments which Toyota still makes profits and sells in large numbers to retail customers.

          You could argue that Toyota has lost its once-defining edge in refinement, tactile quality, and mechanical durability but you can’t argue that Toyota sits below GM in the way GM sat below Honda and Toyota in the Malaise era. I won’t buy that one yet.

          I’d personally stick to the argument that GM has it all over Toyota in the enthusiast segments, because that is absolutely true. ZR2, Camaro, Corvette, V, V-Sport, SS. Products to be proud of.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            No cherry picking just noting that Toyota is following in GM’s footsteps. This has nothing to do with whether or not a 1997 Toyota was better than a 1997 GM. And it isn’t just one engine that sludged there are lots of ways that Toyota durability and reliability has dropped. All out cost cutting isn’t going to help that.

            And all information points to the fact that they aren’t making money on the Camry in the US. From the article

            “If the automaker hopes to compete in the realm of electric vehicles and autonomous technology, Toyoda claims, it first needs to grow its profit margin — especially in North America.

            In the last fiscal year, Toyota nearly halved its operating losses in that key region. However, its operating margin stood at just 1.3 percent at the end of March. Toyota’s chief financial officer (and one of its “Samurai”), Koji Kobayashi, wants 8 percent, and he wants it by 2020.”

            You don’t have operating losses to halve if you are making money.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            It looks like you are probably correct about North American car profitability of late. Ugh. I really don’t want more crossovers.

          • 0 avatar
            road_pizza

            “A single V6 that sludged if not maintained properly”… a V6 that sludged WHEN MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER’S MANUAL’S RECOMMENDATIONS. FIFY.

        • 0 avatar
          sgeffe

          It just seems as though, on its face, Toyota is exhibiting some of the behaviors as a company that affected GM, including chasing every last penny and every last division of market share at the expense of the product.

          AFAIK, the dealers won’t blow-off warranty claims at two months or two miles past warranty expiration, but certainly, something will suffer if costs are cut to the bone! It’s a case where the ends don’t seem to justify the means.

  • avatar
    cdnsfan27

    If people were willing to pay what a vehicle is worth, then maybe the manufacturers wouldn’t have to cut corners to save every penny.

    A Mercedes-Benz E-Class costs about the same today as it did 5 years ago because that is what the market will bear. Even with manufacturing efficiencies you can’t have the same car for the same price so MB cut corners and it shows.

    Then at the dealership the customer will not buy the vehicle unless they are given all the profit, the rebates and part of the holdback. Oh, and they want to be treated like a VIP when they basically paid wholesale.

    The present model is unsustainable, Ford will stop selling cars in NA, Dodge already has and GM is sure to follow.

    You can’t get something for nothing forever.

  • avatar
    an innocent man

    Needz moar drum brake

  • avatar
    Erikstrawn

    “The goal here is finding $1.22 billion in efficiencies by March 31st, 2019.”

    If you don’t know how much waste you have, how do you set a goal? Setting a goal means that when you’ve found most of your inefficiencies, if you’re at $800 million, your managers will cut $420 million in real needs just to meet your target. Fixing that will cost you twice as much, and erase the $800 million you found elsewhere. Tread carefully.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Toyoda is correct, the actual cost to mfg has gone up significantly and has outpaced wages. He cannot directly change the economic stagflation being experienced in the West, all he can do is attempt to reduce his cost to bring his out the door pricing more in line with what the market can actually afford.

  • avatar
    AtoB

    Dear Toyota.

    Want to cut useless spending?

    Phase 1: Ditch hydrogen. Hydrogen is stupid.

    Phase 2: Instead use the Mirai fuel tank tech to make a serial hybrid CNG cars. Use the monies you’d have used for the hydrogen network to improce CNG access instead.

    Phase 3: Profit!


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ToolGuy: Latest Proposal to OEM’s Which Will Not Be Adopted… “Road Warrior Edition” or model...
  • ToolGuy: Corey, I don’t think Mopar was necessarily referring to the input side of the equation.
  • ToolGuy: I think the idea is that many EV fans have or are perceived to have a religious fervor for electricity and a...
  • ToolGuy: Serious comment: These guys are becoming masters of doing more with less. People love this stuff. Jackass...
  • ObviouslyCarGuru: Boy, a whole bunch of you poor babies heads are gonna explode when country hating politicians are...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States