Toyota Motor Corp. (TM)

All Comments on TM

  • commenter
    stingray
    Oct 04 09:36 AM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    Paul,
    So we're in agreement that all forms of alternate energy sources should be pursued. I think they should all be pursued for the simple fact that no one knows which new technology will work best.

    A new battery technology (Lithium Ion) is about to become available for electric cars. The lack of a practical battery has been the key factor that has made electric cars irrelevant for the last 100 years. So, I don't understand why people dismiss the Chevy Volt concept as a "boutique" vehicle. It is more likely that in 20 years, we will see that breakthroughs like this and others will have "electrified"... auto propulsion. It is already happening, although it may not be apparent to the general population yet.

    Also, cellulostic ethanol - truely renewable energy. Another power source with great potential. How many people know that all Brazilian vehicles are powered by ethanol derived from sugar cane (three times more productive than corn based ethanol) Or that electric power for the entire Island of Maui is derived from sugar cane?

    The right things are happening, but it will cost money to bring these new ideas to market. Good to debate them, but not dismiss them.     Reply
  • commenter
    paulk8756
    Oct 03 11:16 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    Good luck to both you guys! I have a suspicion we'll need it. Reply
  • commenter
    paulk8756
    Oct 03 11:14 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    IXL,

    You're EXACTLY right about the hidden cost of mandates. They are the stealth regulations that may well bring our economy down with or without the bank bailout.

    I lived on Capitol Hill when they were just getting started 35 years ago, and it was easy to see where they would take us eventually. The evil genius behind them was that they only attacked one industry at a time, albeit almost indirectly. So voters never caught on, and they still haven't for the most part.

    Before our present economic malaise is over this time, however, we'll have to confront them directly if we're going to make any real headway.

    That is, if we don't go in the OTHER direction and regulate our economy out of existence entirely. At the moment, unfortunately, that seems to me to be more likely.

    (That's another reason why I like NGV's, actually. We've built them already, they're proven, and they fit into the present regulatory scheme. And Boone Pickens and Aubrey Mc Clendon are executing their plans to refuel them conveniently as we speak.)

    Reply
  • commenter
    workingatfor
    d
    Oct 03 11:01 PM
    September Auto Sales: Why Was Ford Hit So Hard? [view article]
    The Toyota plant in Indiana has had there company employees painting lines and reading book instead of laying them off. They have prevented a backlash from the press and employees by not laying them off and creating a negative impression. They will not be able to maintain this mirage forever. Reply
  • commenter
    paulk8756
    Oct 03 10:50 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    Sting,

    Fair enough. NGV's may not be a panacea for everyone, but nothing else is either. The problem is we're importing half a TRILLION dollars worth of foreign oil each year, and NG is the only viable substitute available. (Indeed, we have a proven 100 year supply!) .

    But just because it's been around a long time, doesn't mean it isn't a superior product to gasoline. The EPA says the Civic GX tested cleaner than the Prius Hybrid. (I don't have a problem with modern 60+ mpg diesels by the way. Bring 'em on, too!)

    I would question your notion that NG isn't cost competitive with gasoline, however. (Even if it weren't, of course, it's still DOMESTIC.) On an eqivalency basis you burn a bit more to go the same distance, but it costs 40% or more less to start with. In fact, NGV owners in OK and UT (who live in proximity to NG production, granted) fill up today for less than $1 per gallon.

    It's interesting to note that the only other alternative, EV's, have actually existed for quite awhile themselves. The only difference being they have NEVER WORKED, and they can't operate heavy duty vehicles in the first place. That's probably why 7 MILLION NGV's exist worldwide, compared to a handful of electrics.

    It is also true that the new Hybrids may be different. Great! Between them and NGV's, we can survive quite nicely. But at a cost of $45K (including its $15K REPLACEABLE battery pack, the Volt and its ilk are destined to be "boutique" vehicles throughout our lifetimes.

    And even without our present financial squeeze, TIME is one luxury not currently on our side when it comes to resolving our transportation dilemma. NGV's are ready to go, and the alternatives are only dreams in laboratories somewhere.

    In truth, I like it ALL. Drilling for oil, NGV's, hybrids, sugar (NOT corn) and switchgrass ethanol for transport. Along with wind, solar, hydro, nuclear and clean coal for electricity. Longer term, gas hydrates can do it all.

    But we've got to still be alive and kicking (which is now perhaps in doubt) just to get there!




    .     Reply
  • commenter
    IXLR8
    Oct 03 10:31 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    Paulk8756, the $50B is NOT a bailout--it is what congress should do EVERY TIME they mandate (no, that's not a Barney Frank term) any action on any entity.

    Simply put, if Congress in their dubious wisdom requires any entity to do something for the common good, they should BE REQUIRED to cover the costs with taxpayer funds since the taxpayers benefit from the increase in the common good.

    Up until now, we have had to eat a multitude of unfunded mandates, the most offensive being the requirement to sort through a tax code that has more words than the Bible. And, if a mistake is made, it's assumed that you are guilty--penalties include fines and jail time. The total cost of congressional and administration regulation on automobiles is well above $8,000 per car. And the taxpayer is paying for that TWICE--first through taxes and once again in the purchase price.

    It's high time that congress remembered who signs their checks.     Reply
  • commenter
    stingray
    Oct 03 07:50 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    Paul8756
    It would help you to remember that companies produce what consumers want to buy.
    CNG is not a panacea. It has been available for many cars and trucks for 30+ years and is subsidised in Canada, where far more CNG cars&trucks are sold than in the US. Unfortunately, cost per mile driven with CNG is greater than gasoline.
    In Europe, consumers have demanded the fuel economy in lieu of size and comfort because high fuel taxes make the gas prices so high. The governents have also favored Diesels which are very fuel efficient. In the US, increasingly strict rules against particulates and emssions are introduced with the apparent intent of legislating Diesels out of existence.
    I for one will definitely not vote Democratic.
    But when Congress passes the new fuel economy requirements that demand dramatic product changes, and as a part of the bill, allocate money to help US manufacturers retool US plants, it seems fair that they follow-up by funding the program they approved.     Reply
  • commenter
    miken
    Oct 03 03:25 PM
    September Auto Sales: Why Was Ford Hit So Hard? [view article]
    To jobu37:

    You may be correct on the comment that Ford is doing the right thing by not playing as much in the incentives and fleet sales....maybe. It all depends on the price/cost relationship of each company.

    The car business has always been a capital intensive business, thus high fixed costs are a reality, so when your sales are down the question always becomes do we shut down the factories and incur all of the fixed cost with zero revenue, or continue to run the factories (paying off the fixed costs, assuming you are making a variable profit) and have diminshed, but some revenue?

    When you shut down the factory, you still pay property taxes, depreciation, etc. plus all of the R+D for new products and layoff benefits for the workforce. You have to weigh that against the long term affect of lowering the resale value of your brand.

    Several car companies have brought down their breakeven point over the years, so I'm not sure that accepting the zero revenue solution is always the right choice in the short term.

    Having said that, temporarily shutting down the plant is certainly not a good long term solution. If the lower sales look like they are going to last for a while, decommissioning the plant and permanently reducing the workforce is the correct answer.

    In September, GM offered it's employee discount to everyone. That kept revenue flowing and allowed their unit sales to only be down 15% vs 30% for almost everyone else. One of the good things that did was to reduce national inventory by about 150,000 units going into the 2009 model year. Whether that was a good decision will depend on:
    - What was the cost of the vehicles sold?
    - How many sales will it rob from October?
    - How long will this severe period of sales sales go on (read that the credit crunch brought to us by the banks and U.S. congress)?

    Be interesting to see.     Reply
  • commenter
    paulk8756
    Oct 03 01:18 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    Oh, and lest I forget, more VOLTS at $45K apiece. If you play your cards right with Obama and Pelosi, maybe you can even replace the government's fleet with these winners! Reply
  • commenter
    paulk8756
    Oct 03 01:14 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    And don't forget to vote DEMOCRAT next month. That way you can work that into yet ANOTHER $50B before the NEXT election. I gotta admit, It sure beats WORKING for a living! Reply
  • commenter
    paulk8756
    Oct 03 01:09 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    P.S. And by the way, far from failing, U.S. domestic manufacturing has actually DOUBLED over past 15 years. Read "Fleeced," which is appropriately titled when you consider the job the Congress and Detroit have done to us. Reply
  • commenter
    paulk8756
    Oct 03 01:02 PM
    Auto Industry Recovery Once Again Postponed [view article]
    Sir,

    Some of us are still "fussing" about Detroit's lack of desire to help themselves, in lieu of simply showing up in Washington for the first of TWO promised $25 billion bailouts in return for Michigan's electoral votes this November. Why not send your lobbyists to help us secure lower gas prices, which would increase auto sales, instead?

    At the risk of sounding redundant, I'll repeat my questions that NONE of you Detroit apologists have attempted to answer so far -

    1. Why not build the 40+ mpg compacts these automakers manufacture that sell so well in Europe here?

    2. Why not offer the dual-fueled (CNG + gasoline) trucks you sell in other countries (19 models in Canada alone!) in the U.S., which Boone Pickens has spent $60 million advertising for you? You could help equip your starving dealers with CNG pumps to refuel them, which would keep them in business.

    3. Dealers could also do a brisk business in converting consumers' now worthless big trucks and SUV's to run on CNG, which costs HALF the price of IMPORTED gasoline.

    And don't tell me you can't do the above because of government red tape and regulations. If your Congressional delegation and lobbyists can secure $50B in "loans" (Right!), they could certainly figure out how to resolve such minor impediments to doing MORE BUSINESS, instead of crying for MORE HANDOUTS.

    That is, IF THEY WANTED TO !!     Reply
  • commenter
    Mister Jimmy
    Oct 03 12:32 PM
    September Auto Sales: Why Was Ford Hit So Hard? [view article]
    I've rented Camry's on several trips out of town. Toyota also sells through to rental companies ("fleets"). Reply
  • commenter
    Jobu37
    Oct 03 11:09 AM
    September Auto Sales: Why Was Ford Hit So Hard? [view article]
    The fact that Ford has not jumped into the incentive battle with GM and Chrysler for the past two months is the real reason that they performed in a more negative manner. Plus, while Ford reduced fleet sales by 29% in September, GM increased fleet sales by 19%. The only vehicle that GM has that has appeared to to actually have "true" demand was the new Malibu. But then it comes out that 54% of all Malibus sold in September were fleet sales. This does not bode well for GM. It is the same old story with GM. The GM ego is doing what they can to make sure that 2008 is not the year that they lose the title of largest automaker in the world. Unfortunately, they are making moves in the short term that are going to hurt them down the road. By this I am referring to the harm on the residuals of the Malibu that will be the result of fleet dumping your "hottest" vehicle.

    You have to admire Mulally at Ford. His goal before the bottom fell out of the market was to reduce fleet sales and fire sale discounts in order to improve the residuals of the Ford lineup along with higher margins that come with this approach. And even now Ford has not matched GM, Chrysler, and now even Nissan in giving the product away. Ford has the F150 coming out in a month and nicely updated Fusions, Milans, and MKZs in December that will help Ford increase prices and sales at the same time. Focus prodcution has been able to finally catch up due to the slow Sept. sales so the pipeline will start being able to feed demand if there is any semblance of a return to stability for the rest of the year. Ford is doing the right thing no matter how painful it is now. As I write this, Toyota just announced 0% financing on all their major models. Now let's see if Ford can still hold the line in October. Ford may have no choice but to react to Toyota's new firesale since they are quickly becoming Ford's real competition.     Reply
  • commenter
    miken
    Oct 03 10:09 AM
    September Auto Sales: Why Was Ford Hit So Hard? [view article]
    I'm a little confused by the whole premise of the article. Why single out Ford...it was a lousy month in general:

    BMW down 25.8%
    Chrysler down 32.8%
    Ford down 34.6%
    GM down 15.8%
    Honda down 24.0%
    Nissan down 36.8%
    Toyota down     Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: