LexBob2

What would you suggest the automakers do? They certainly can't continue to keep producing cars that aren't selling and are in decline and they can't force consumers to buy them.

mmarshall

Well, to start, they could do a lot better job of simply marketing their sedans. When was the last time you saw a serious ad for any Ford or GM sedan? The ads with Shaq O'Neal and Peyton Manning, emphasizing the Lacrosse and Verano, haven't been run for several years. And the "THAT's a BUICK?" ads generally emphasized the Encore. Chevy, likewise, has basically neglected ads for all of their regular cars from the Spark all the way to the Impala....ditto for Cadillac, which has done nothing to call attention to any of its sedans, almost totally focusing on the SUVs. Ford, in many ways, has done even less to advertise their sedans and hatchbacks. We, here, on Car Chat, know what's available, because we keep up with the market and discuss it every day, but the Average John Q. Public doesn't. So, when it's time for a new vehicle, unless they have been reading Consumer Reports or another credible source, they're going to remember those smiling-face ads on TV...and come home with a new Escape or Equinox instead of a Fusion or Malibu.

mmarshall

For the umpteenth time, it isn't about me. I am just one human being....a grain of sand on the beach. This is an enormous issue that goes way beyond me....it has gone as high up as Trump and Trudeau.

tex2670

You know the answer to this. They should keep making all variations of sedans, despite what their sales numbers tell them; and they should keep every employee for life. Because that's what public companies are supposed to do...according to some here on CL. Car companies are just brainwashing everyone to buy crossovers....we don't have the power of free will any more.

mmarshall

It isn't brainwashing. It is simply manipulation. There's a difference.

tex2670

You keep saying this, but you have nothing to back up what you say. And what you say that "so many" people want just coincidently is right in line with your own personal views. These are public companies that have obligations to their shareholders to continue to grow the company and its profits. If sedans were so profitable and desirable, they wouldn't cut them.

GM and Ford employ thousands of people in their market research departments, and have budgets of millions of $$$ each year....but somehow YOU know what the average customer wants better than they do. THAT's why so many people here on CL challenge your view points.

tex2670

But the analysis is the same...we as customers are all lemmings with no free will or independent thought.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

that's quite correct. and since the 'average profit' on many if not all of gm's average sedans is nothing or actually a LOSS, why should they continue to sell them? they're not a charity. more importantly, as the old saying goes, they can't lose a dollar on each sale yet make up the difference in volume.

you just can't seem to accept that there is insufficient demand to sell sufficient quantity of some sedans at sufficient price points to make a profit, and thus make it worthwhile.

re: what could they do, you say:

tv ads costs MILLIONS and even high end print campaigns also can cost millions. why should gm or ford spend that money, when they can make money more easily, with less spending, with utility vehicles? regardless of that, it would be a HUGE gamble that they'd ever make their money back if they spent tons of money on great ads for sedans. while you are just one person, a grain in the sand as you said, gm is not, it's a HUGE organization with many talented market research and marketing people, plus the firms they hire, and they've all reached the same conclusion... it's hopeless right now. so they quit trying to push water up hill, and are going with the flow. as the article says, the car companies know they're in a race for survival and must spend right now on electrification and autonomous vehicle tech which costs billions. they've concluded if they don't do that, they're toast down the road.

i know you won't accept anything i've written, so it will be my last post here to try to convince you.

mmarshall

I have respect for everyone in Car Chat.....including you. But I've also watched the auto industry for more than 50 years, and know a snow job when I see it. Likewise, though, I agree....no sense in either of us continuing to beat the same issues. Life's too short.

mmarshall

BTW, since some of you may (?) want to track the stock prices (on the Dow) with this proposed merger coming up, GM closed today at $34.79, and Ford at $9.71.

Toys4RJill

Toyota closed yesterday at $119.

Pathetic.

mmarshall

Low prices often mean being a buying opportunity. More shares for the dollar.

I myself wouldn't buy any Ford or GM shares right now, for a number of personal and ethic reasons, but there's a lot of people out there to whom these concerns don't apply, and who simply want to make money.

Toys4RJill

I completely agree. It makes no sense in any way to market sedans at this point. Cross overs are where GM is growing and trucks is what they do well at. And yes, they need to prepare for the future. I do not agree with some of things GM has done, but cancelling the Lacrosse, Cruze, and XTS is a worthwhile option for them to grow.

I am going to join you.

FrankReynoldsCPA

Mullally's retirement was the worst thing that could have happened to post-recession Ford.

Mark Fields and Jim Hackett have clearly been in over their heads.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

Stock prices don’t mean much, because the number of outstanding shares aren’t the same. Market cap is more meaningful.

Still, Toyota’s market cap at 197B is many times bigger (5x) than Ford at 39B, and GM (4x) at 50B.