Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Ford To Follow In GM's Footsteps By Reporting Sales Quarterly

      Will begin in April

    Ford will soon be joining General Motors in reporting sales every quarter. Automotive News is reporting that Ford will transition to a quarterly call and release of sales numbers beginning in April. The company will still be proving monthly sales numbers to various data agencies.

    "We feel it's kind of transitioning to more of an industry standard. We think the intense focus on month-to-month numbers is just not how we want to run the business. We believe quarterly will provide great transparency," said Mark LaNeve, Ford's vice president of U.S. marketing, sales and service during a call with analysts and the media.

    Various analysts have cautioned that moving to quarterly reporting may lead "less transparency and more speculation and errors," especially if some automakers still report monthly.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Boo. This move to quarterly is a bad thing

    I agree. 

    58 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

    I assume the move to quarterly reporting is to try and hide bad short term sales. 

    Better all the pain at once 4 times a year, i suppose. 

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Boo. This move to quarterly is a bad thing

    I actually have to disagree with you my friend as I think too much speculation by the rich using robot trading is hurting businesses who need to change over product lines and make long term changes for survival.

    4 times a year I think is more than enough info for people to research and decide if they want to invest in the company and how long they want to hold onto it.

    I welcome this as long as they do continue to grant the transparency of how the business is being run to the investment community.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think they want to report sales declines 4 times a year rather than 12.  Because we know they are going to have a lot of declines the next 2 years when you take away all the sedans some of the SUVs are dropping already.  Bad combo to kill 4 product lines and have Escape and Explorer in decline at the same time.

    I remember when they named the Furniture guy CEO thinking this can't go well, and it seems like Ford is starting to struggle now.

    Edited by smk4565
    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The thinking here is that Ford will lose some revenue and profits, but it will be selling more profitable products, so their margins will improve. The problem I see is that they boast how they increase ATP, when a good chunk of it is attributable to is getting rid of your most affordable products.

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    51 minutes ago, Suaviloquent said:

    The thinking here is that Ford will lose some revenue and profits, but it will be selling more profitable products, so their margins will improve. The problem I see is that they boast how they increase ATP, when a good chunk of it is attributable to is getting rid of your most affordable products.

     

    Selling fewer products at a higher price point worked out great for Saturn with the Astra, really turned things around for GM. 

    one might see similar results across town for Ford. Yes, I know the F series sells a ton at high Volume, but the pickup market is getting increasingly competitive. If nothing else, I would love to get rid of the chicken tax, so other companies could compete in the light truck market. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Oh the Detroit 3 (or 2 and FCA) would never allow it unless it allows them to offshore pickup production too. And the Tacoma should be made in San Antonio, Toyota is printing money with that thing riding on super old underpinnings and weak frames.

    Toyota actually touts the C channel rear of the cab as a feature for off-roading - it allows the frame to flex... 

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 minutes ago, Suaviloquent said:

    Oh the Detroit 3 (or 2 and FCA) would never allow it unless it allows them to offshore pickup production too. And the Tacoma should be made in San Antonio, Toyota is printing money with that thing riding on super old underpinnings and weak frames.

    Toyota actually touts the C channel rear of the cab as a feature for off-roading - it allows the frame to flex... 

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    How a company could say a C frame that flex's is an off road feature is beyond me.

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Going quarterly has an effect on incentive offerings.

    when you report monthly, your monthly sales are live or die.  You have to dive into the incentive basket each month.  Your corporate financials depend on it, one bad month, boom. 

    When its quarterly, the GM's get desperate on December 30th or whatever because they leave month one and two without much for incentives, and then they panic and discount the shit out of their product in month 3 to make quarterly numbers.  You have to break out the huge incentives in the last week or two of the third month now.  I think they can sit on their marketing plans longer but then panic at the end of the quarter.  Its only panic 4 times a year instead of 12.  And only 4 bad reports to the press and investors instead of 12.  Come to think of it, when we got the Malibu with all the huge discounts it was a June 30, last day of Q2.

    This doesn't even reflect any additional possible 'private offer' nor my GM card.

     

    B5F724D0-5500-4408-8E69-26797C0C3F7E.jpeg

    Edited by regfootball

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    I think they want to report sales declines 4 times a year rather than 12.  Because we know they are going to have a lot of declines the next 2 years when you take away all the sedans some of the SUVs are dropping already.  Bad combo to kill 4 product lines and have Escape and Explorer in decline at the same time.

    I remember when they named the Furniture guy CEO thinking this can't go well, and it seems like Ford is starting to struggle now.

    ^^^^^YUP^^^^^^

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How many times have we all read 'February is a notoriously slow month' or 'There was that huge blizzard in the Northeast in Dec'? as a modifier for sales numbers? I am leaning toward quarterly reporting as a tool to average out the numbers as being a good thing. I expect more OEMs to follow suit, especially as everyone's sedans continue to crater.
    Look at Porsche- they don't publish % change numbers. Of course you can pull out a calculator, but IMO it (perceptually) minimizes declines.

    1 hour ago, Suaviloquent said:

    Toyota actually touts the C channel rear of the cab as a feature for off-roading - it allows the frame to flex... 

    Holy crap; what a load of crap.

    Edited by balthazar

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Colorado/Canyon twins along with the Ranger should take care of the Tacoma by imposing lost sales on THAT Toyota.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 hours ago, Suaviloquent said:

    The thinking here is that Ford will lose some revenue and profits, but it will be selling more profitable products, so their margins will improve. The problem I see is that they boast how they increase ATP, when a good chunk of it is attributable to is getting rid of your most affordable products.

     

    The other problem is when you cut all these models our, aside from shrinking the number of people coming to your dealers, you drop revenue.  And Ford (or any car company) has massive overhead costs.   They have huge labor costs, pension and healthcare costs, that stuff doesn't go away, they have loads of factories unless they try to shutter some and sell off the real estate.  I know the F150 makes a ton of profit, but I would guess the F150's revenue isn't enough to keep the lights on at Ford.  According to their annual report they need to pay $500 million to the pension fund in 2018.  That is probably 100,000 F150's sales just to fund the pension plan.  Ford paid 73 cents per share dividends in 2018, they have 3.9 billion shares outstanding, so there is $2.5 billion dollars spent.    I think life gets rough if their revenue takes a big hit.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 hours ago, dfelt said:

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    How a company could say a C frame that flex's is an off road feature is beyond me.

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    it means that they can ensure traction when the articulation of the rear suspension isn't quite enough to allow a wheel that would otherwise be off the ground. The frame flexes because of the unsupported weight pushing on it and bam you gain an inch, inch and 1/2 of effective wheel articulation...

     

    It's so stupid but I heard a birdie wearing a Toyota shirt and ID at an event say that with a straight face. I died laughing inside. Does anyone who considers a Taco ever think of how bad it is for towing? The frames man the frames, that's why it's a 5,000 limit. GVWR is piss poor too.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It wasn't that long ago that all pickups used full C-channel frames, and they were pretty darn good off-road, and at towing and hauling.  Fully boxed frames everyone uses today just mean a larger percentage of engineering time and money has to go into the suspension to achieve a functioning final product for sale.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    And Ford (or any car company) has massive overhead costs.   They have huge labor costs, pension and healthcare costs, that stuff doesn't go away...

    Ford had 364K employees 20 years ago, that's now about 200K, so labor costs have been reduced dramatically.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    16 hours ago, balthazar said:

    How many times have we all read 'February is a notoriously slow month' or 'There was that huge blizzard in the Northeast in Dec'? as a modifier for sales numbers? I am leaning toward quarterly reporting as a tool to average out the numbers as being a good thing. I expect more OEMs to follow suit, especially as everyone's sedans continue to crater.

    Look at Porsche- they don't publish % change numbers. Of course you can pull out a calculator, but IMO it (perceptually) minimizes declines.

    1

    Porsche isn't the only who does that. See Kia, Hyundai, Jaguar/Land Rover to name a few. Its slightly annoying for me when writing up the summary - but then I have sources like Automotive News and GoodCarBadCar.net to give me the percentages.

    (I know, first-world automotive writer problems).

    • Haha 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Ford had 364K employees 20 years ago, that's now about 200K, so labor costs have been reduced dramatically.

    And they will cut more workers this year no doubt.  They still have to pay all those retirees though.  I feel like Ford is a shrinking company.  Wouldn't surprise me if in 10-15 years they say, "we can't make money on crossovers, and we are shift to trucks, and they just have commercial vehicles and F150s.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If you go back to -say- the '90s, when an SUV was a large, V8, 4WD [Explorer], then you fast forward to the car-based, much less practical & capable teeny compact CUVs & their mainstream acceptance... I'd say the answer would be 'no'.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    I wonder if the whole crossover craze will have passed in 10-15 years.  

    i think what will happen is soft looking compact crossovers will probably be 2/3 of the market, it will be all people can afford due to regulations and strangulation with MPG requirements and such.  So soft puff mini marshmallows like what the 2020 Escape looks like will become the norm even more what is forced on the market.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That disguised Escape prototype looks like a Corolla roof grafted on a Focus body.  Nothing new or different, just another appliance. 

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    I wonder if the whole crossover craze will have passed in 10-15 years.  

     

    2 hours ago, balthazar said:

    If you go back to -say- the '90s, when an SUV was a large, V8, 4WD [Explorer], then you fast forward to the car-based, much less practical & capable teeny compact CUVs & their mainstream acceptance... I'd say the answer would be 'no'.

     Its a legit thing. 

    For me, SUV and crossovers are the same thing. Let me explain. Its in the same category.  Intertwined and evolved. By different branches of the automotive tree, but eventually became one and the same branch...

    Its not as if there wasnt a crossover in the early 1970s to early 1980s with the AMC Eagle.  And the unibody mid 1980s Jeep Cherokee after that. And the body on frame small SUVs of the GMC Jimmy and Chevy Blazer (that got themselves hotrodded into the superfast Typhoon), and the Japanese 4runner and Pathfinder, The Suzuki Sidekick and its GM siblings. T he Ford small Bronco to become Explorer...and the advent of Audi Quattro and the like... All happened in the 1980s...

    So...Ill start the clock at about 1994 anyway.  1994-2004-2014-2019 That would be 25 years of SUVs and CUVs selling many units to be really counted as a segment.  As a real mainstream segment.  

    PS: I could go earlier than 1994. I could go 1990. Why?

    That small Chevy Blazer/GMC Jimmy/GMC Typhoon...  Well, Oldsmobile got a version of that in 1990.  The SUV/CUV craze was already starting to bubble and Oldsmobile saw that coming in 1990...

    So in reality, its closer to 30 years of the mainstream buyers getting their kicks with AWD and SUVs and CUVs...

    30 years.  At this point in time, it aint a fad, nor a craze. Its THE  bread and butter segment.  I think our transportation pods will be tall and hatchbacky and AWD for a long time to come.  

    PS: Poor AMC, if they could have just stuck around just another 5 or so years... 

     

     

     

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The CUV/SUV distinction is less clear than it used to be, and means nothing to most consumers.  I think of SUVs as being truck-based (Suburban, Tahoe, etc) or on purpose built RWD/AWD platforms like the Wrangler, Grand Cherokee, Land Cruiser, etc.   CUVs are on car-based platforms and almost always FWD/transverse engine...

    As far as mainstreaming, the early 90s when 5 dr midsize SUVs appeared in the Explorer and S10 Blazer marked a big growth point for the family hauler daily driver SUVs. 

    Edited by Robert Hall
    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      The COVID-19 pandemic has basically brought most of the world to halt. Orders to stay at home, businesses either having workers to their work from home or closing down, and unemployment skyrocketing is causing the economy to crater. There are efforts to try and jump-start the economy such as $1,200 stimulus checks. But an executive at Ford wants to see a return of a "cash for clunkers" like program.
      “We think some level of stimulus somewhere on the other side of this would help not only the auto industry and our dealers, which are a huge part of our overall economy, but will help the customers as well,” said Mark LaNeve, Ford’s vice president of U.S. marketing, sales and service to Bloomberg.
      “Cash for clunkers was very effective at that time. It would be nice to think we could have something equally as effective for 2020 when we get out of this because it was a great program.”
      According to LaNeve, internal discussions are taking place at Ford about doing a similar program and there are plans to bring the Government in to these talks.
      When asked by Automotive News about this, Ford spokeswoman Rachel McCleery said, "The auto industry is America’s economic engine.We are encouraging Congress to look at a variety of ways to drive job creation, increase demand, support customers and provide long-term stability for the entire auto ecosystem."
      A brief refresher on the Cash for Clunkers program. In 2009, the U.S. Government introduced a billion initiative called the Car Allowance Rebate System, which gave a voucher worth between $2,900 and $4,500 to anyone replacing a vehicle newer than 1984. Their old vehicle would be taken away and disposed of. The program was nicknamed Cash for Clunkers.
      On the surface, the program was a success. Within first month, all of the funds were exhausted. This prompted the U.S. congress infuse an addition two billion into the program, which would be all gone within 17 days. But begin to look deeper and the results are mixed. In 2012, a study published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics described the program as being a bit of a wash,
      "...the effect of the program on auto purchases is almost completely reversed by as early as March 2010 — only seven months after the program ended.”
      Other studies have come to the same conclusion.
      There's also the question of how many perfectly good used cars were taken off the road due to the program.
      Source: Bloomberg via Automotive News (Subscription Required), The Drive, The Truth About Cars

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      The COVID-19 pandemic has basically brought most of the world to halt. Orders to stay at home, businesses either having workers to their work from home or closing down, and unemployment skyrocketing is causing the economy to crater. There are efforts to try and jump-start the economy such as $1,200 stimulus checks. But an executive at Ford wants to see a return of a "cash for clunkers" like program.
      “We think some level of stimulus somewhere on the other side of this would help not only the auto industry and our dealers, which are a huge part of our overall economy, but will help the customers as well,” said Mark LaNeve, Ford’s vice president of U.S. marketing, sales and service to Bloomberg.
      “Cash for clunkers was very effective at that time. It would be nice to think we could have something equally as effective for 2020 when we get out of this because it was a great program.”
      According to LaNeve, internal discussions are taking place at Ford about doing a similar program and there are plans to bring the Government in to these talks.
      When asked by Automotive News about this, Ford spokeswoman Rachel McCleery said, "The auto industry is America’s economic engine.We are encouraging Congress to look at a variety of ways to drive job creation, increase demand, support customers and provide long-term stability for the entire auto ecosystem."
      A brief refresher on the Cash for Clunkers program. In 2009, the U.S. Government introduced a billion initiative called the Car Allowance Rebate System, which gave a voucher worth between $2,900 and $4,500 to anyone replacing a vehicle newer than 1984. Their old vehicle would be taken away and disposed of. The program was nicknamed Cash for Clunkers.
      On the surface, the program was a success. Within first month, all of the funds were exhausted. This prompted the U.S. congress infuse an addition two billion into the program, which would be all gone within 17 days. But begin to look deeper and the results are mixed. In 2012, a study published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics described the program as being a bit of a wash,
      "...the effect of the program on auto purchases is almost completely reversed by as early as March 2010 — only seven months after the program ended.”
      Other studies have come to the same conclusion.
      There's also the question of how many perfectly good used cars were taken off the road due to the program.
      Source: Bloomberg via Automotive News (Subscription Required), The Drive, The Truth About Cars
    • By dfelt
      We clearly have European, Asian and Americas auto fans. I feel this is a good place to discuss the sales of segments, models, etc. here. I have pulled the latest Statista data that can be gotten for free to show here and discuss.
      As such, there is clearly a leadership perceived image that BMW and Mercedes-Benz have carried the last few years. Yet with that, you look at over all sales and both these companies have flipped and flopped leadership of the year in specific luxury segments but lack over all auto sales in the US.
      Based on the reports that @Drew Dowdell posted in January 2020 on 2019 auto sales:
      Ford - 2,422,698 GM - 2,887,046 FCA - 2,203,663 Tesla - 367,500 Audi - 224,111 BMW - 360,918 Genesis - 21,233 Honda - 1,608,170 Hyundai - 688,771 Infiniti - 117,708 Jaguar Land Rover - 125,787 Kia - 615,338 Mazda - 278,552 Mercedes-Benz - 357,729 Mitsubishi - 121,046 Nissan - 1,227,973 Porsche - 61,568 Subaru - 700,117 Toyota - 2,383,349 Volkswagen - 363,322 Volvo - 108,234 2019 Auto Sales

      Luxury Brand Sales in 2019

      Large Luxury Auto sales 2019

      Mid size luxury auto sales 2019

      Small Auto Luxury auto sales 2019

      Best Selling Trucks ranking in the US 2019

      Car Sales over the last 30 years in the US.

      Over all Auto Sales from 1978 to now.

    • By Drew Dowdell
      Quarterly:
      Ford Motor Company - Down 1.3% for the quarter, Down 3.0% for the year
      General Motors Co. - Down 6.3% for the quarter, Down 2.3% for the year
      Tesla - Not yet Reported
      FCA US LLC - Down 2% for the quarter, Down 1% for the year
      Monthly:
      Audi of America -  Up 14.0% for the month, Up 0.4% for the year
      BMW of North America -  Up 2.4% for the month, Up 1.8% for the year
      Genesis Motor America - Up 262.4% for the month, Up 105.9% for the year
      Honda Motor Co. -  Down 12.0% for the month, Up 0.2% for the year
      Hyundai Motor America -  Down 0.6% for the month, Up 3.2% for the year
      Infiniti USA - Down 37.8% for the month, Down 21.1% for the year
      Jaguar Land Rover North America - Up 2.6% for the year
      Kia Motors America - Up 8.0% for the month, Up 4.4% for the year
      Mazda North American Operations - Up 6.5%  for the month, Down 7.2% for the year
      Mercedes-Benz USA - Down 2.4% for the month, Up 1.0% for the year
      Mitsubishi Motors North America -  Up 10.3% for the month, Up 2.5% for the year
      Nissan Group - Down 29.5% for the month, Down 9.9% for the year
      Porsche Cars North America Inc. -  Up 15.8% for the month, Up 7.6% for the year
      Subaru of America, Inc. - Down 3.4% for the month, Up 2.9% for the year
      Toyota Motor North America - Down 6.1% for the month, Down 1.8% for the year
      Volkswagen of America - Down 13% for the month, Up 2.6% for the year
      Volvo Cars of North America, LLC - Up 40% for the month, Up 10.2% for the year

      Brands (Quarterly):
      Alfa Romeo - Down 12%
      Buick - Down 4.3%
      Cadillac -  Down 2.2%
      Chevrolet - Down 6.1%
      Chrysler - Down 15%
      Dodge - Down 9%
      Ford - Down 2.2%
      Fiat - Down 49%
      GMC - Down 8.5%
      Jeep - Down 2%
      Lincoln - Up 17.8%
      Ram Trucks - Up 6%
      Tesla - Not yet Reported

      Brands (Monthly):
      Acura - Down 3.8% 
      Audi - Up 14.0%
      BMW - Up 4.0%
      Genesis - Up 419.7%
      Honda - Down 12.9%
      Hyundai - Down 0.6%
      Infiniti - Down 37.8%
      Jaguar - Up 1.9% for the year
      Kia - Up 8.0%
      Land Rover - Up 2.8% for the year
      Lexus - Down 0.6%
      Mazda - Up 6.5%
      Mercedes-Benz - Down 5.4%
      Mercedes-Benz Vans - Up 21.1%
      MINI - Down 17.4%
      Mitsubishi - Up 10.3%
      Nissan - Down 28.4% 
      Porsche - Up 14.8% 
      Smart - No Longer Reported 
      Subaru - Down 3.4% 
      Toyota - Down 7.2% 
      Volkswagen - Down 13.0%
      Volvo - Up 40%

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Quarterly:
      Ford Motor Company - Down 1.3% for the quarter, Down 3.0% for the year
      General Motors Co. - Down 6.3% for the quarter, Down 2.3% for the year
      Tesla - Not yet Reported
      FCA US LLC - Down 2% for the quarter, Down 1% for the year
      Monthly:
      Audi of America -  Up 14.0% for the month, Up 0.4% for the year
      BMW of North America -  Up 2.4% for the month, Up 1.8% for the year
      Genesis Motor America - Up 262.4% for the month, Up 105.9% for the year
      Honda Motor Co. -  Down 12.0% for the month, Up 0.2% for the year
      Hyundai Motor America -  Down 0.6% for the month, Up 3.2% for the year
      Infiniti USA - Down 37.8% for the month, Down 21.1% for the year
      Jaguar Land Rover North America - Up 2.6% for the year
      Kia Motors America - Up 8.0% for the month, Up 4.4% for the year
      Mazda North American Operations - Up 6.5%  for the month, Down 7.2% for the year
      Mercedes-Benz USA - Down 2.4% for the month, Up 1.0% for the year
      Mitsubishi Motors North America -  Up 10.3% for the month, Up 2.5% for the year
      Nissan Group - Down 29.5% for the month, Down 9.9% for the year
      Porsche Cars North America Inc. -  Up 15.8% for the month, Up 7.6% for the year
      Subaru of America, Inc. - Down 3.4% for the month, Up 2.9% for the year
      Toyota Motor North America - Down 6.1% for the month, Down 1.8% for the year
      Volkswagen of America - Down 13% for the month, Up 2.6% for the year
      Volvo Cars of North America, LLC - Up 40% for the month, Up 10.2% for the year

      Brands (Quarterly):
      Alfa Romeo - Down 12%
      Buick - Down 4.3%
      Cadillac -  Down 2.2%
      Chevrolet - Down 6.1%
      Chrysler - Down 15%
      Dodge - Down 9%
      Ford - Down 2.2%
      Fiat - Down 49%
      GMC - Down 8.5%
      Jeep - Down 2%
      Lincoln - Up 17.8%
      Ram Trucks - Up 6%
      Tesla - Not yet Reported

      Brands (Monthly):
      Acura - Down 3.8% 
      Audi - Up 14.0%
      BMW - Up 4.0%
      Genesis - Up 419.7%
      Honda - Down 12.9%
      Hyundai - Down 0.6%
      Infiniti - Down 37.8%
      Jaguar - Up 1.9% for the year
      Kia - Up 8.0%
      Land Rover - Up 2.8% for the year
      Lexus - Down 0.6%
      Mazda - Up 6.5%
      Mercedes-Benz - Down 5.4%
      Mercedes-Benz Vans - Up 21.1%
      MINI - Down 17.4%
      Mitsubishi - Up 10.3%
      Nissan - Down 28.4% 
      Porsche - Up 14.8% 
      Smart - No Longer Reported 
      Subaru - Down 3.4% 
      Toyota - Down 7.2% 
      Volkswagen - Down 13.0%
      Volvo - Up 40%
  • Posts

    • Bolted the dash substructure in "permanently" tonight. Feels good. (8) 1/2-in bolts, plus (3) diagonal braces (for effectively 3 more bolts). Made thin rubber gaskets between the substructure and the body shell- hopefully no squeaks, ever. Feels very good.
    • Brooks & Dunn (to daves) 😁
    • AGAIN, you get what you pay for. Don't you remotely wonder at all why it's 25 - 30 cents less per gallon?! It's not bulk purchase pricing either. One GM dealership is not the know all be all who know NOTHING about gasoline like my family friend who F'n worked with it for over 30 years! GM uses the Costco Auto program that gives $500-1000 rebate towards a new car or truck along with other auto makers so there's that incentive for the dealer to tell customers that as well. I love Costco merchandise and food, but would never pump their gas in anything but a U-haul rental like I have that then ran like total crap afterwards pinging away down the road, was probably half water. Here's some reading for you with no mention of Costco gasoline...  https://www.motortrend.com/news/all-fuels-are-not-created-equal-technologue/ Just go buy the EV you've been yearning for and you won't have to worry about pumping crap gas 😂  With a little bit of BS urine from @dfelt Port-a-Potty pack! 🤣
    • Boogie oogie oogie 'til you just can't boogie no more
    • Makes sense...I finally figured out who you REALLY are!  You are Yankee Doodle! You distance yourself from things expelling gas...so Im betting you ride a pony.  Although ponies also expel another type of, ahem, gas. Hear me out.   I got another clue. You got a feather in your cap.  All I gots to know if you call THAT, macaroni.         
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Kris Kurek
      Kris Kurek
      (37 years old)
    2. Phil
      Phil
      (59 years old)
    3. Polish_Kris
      Polish_Kris
      (37 years old)
    4. Tim
      Tim
      (39 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...