Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
NewsFeeder

AutoBlog: STUDY: Cash for Clunkers helped Japanese way more than Detroit 3

18 posts in this topic

Filed under: Government/Legal, Chrysler, Ford, GM, Honda, Nissan, Toyota

cfc_630-getty.jpg

While there is no question that Obama's Cash-for-Clunkers program accelerated vehicle sales this summer, a new report by the University of Michigan's Transportation Research Institute shows the big winners were from Japan, not Detroit.

According to the study, nearly 85 percent of the trade-ins were from General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler, yet they only sold 39 percent of the new cars moved off the lots. On the other hand, 8 percent of the trade-ins came from Toyota, Honda, and Nissan, manufacturers who accounted for 41 percent of new car purchases.

While these numbers may be justified by the large quantity of inefficient domestic trucks and SUVs that were deemed clunkers, customer loyalty also seems to have taken a big shift. About 68 percent of owners who traded in Toyota, Honda, or Nissan vehicles replaced them with another from one of those Japanese brands, while only 43 percent of consumers who traded in Detroit steel purchased another General Motors, Ford, or Chrysler product. The program cost the U.S. taxpayers about $3 billion.

[source: USA Today | Image: Justin Sullivan/Getty]

STUDY: Cash for Clunkers helped Japanese way more than Detroit 3 originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

di
di

autoblog?i=x8or8j14Wq8:FIliUHSMD3k:wF9xT autoblog?i=x8or8j14Wq8:FIliUHSMD3k:V_sGL
x8or8j14Wq8

View the full article
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This makes me mad and could sooo easily turn political, so I will bite my tongue.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "Buy American" provision was prevented by the World Trade Organization if I remember correctly. Not quite as bad as the same provision being scuttled in the stimulus by a few Southern gentlemen.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sensationalist journalism at it's best?

39% of vehicles sold under clunkers were from GM/Ford/Chrysler

41% of vehicle sold under clunkers were from Toyota/Honda/Nissan

To how many of you does 2% become "way more"?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good portion of the remaining 20% likely went to Hyundai/Kia, so the imbalance is there, just poorly stated.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people in the know agree that this is easily the stupidest government program in recent memory. Hopefully Obama learned his lesson.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the imbalance is there in real life also. Unless someone wants to go around and restart Hudson, Studebaker, Packard, Nash, Auburn, Duesenberg, and Cord..... most automotive companies are going to continue to be foreign.

If C4C benefited Toyota/Honda/Nissan and GM/Ford/Chrysler just about equally... then it actually worked out kinda fair. (as much as I'd have liked the domestics to get all the benefit).

I'm guessing that Hyundai, Mini, and VW made up the remaining 20%

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"Unless someone wants to go around and restart Hudson, Studebaker, Packard, Nash, Auburn, Duesenberg, and Cord..... "<<

Stop toying with my emotions !

OK; I have no special affinity for Nash...

I just read that the used car market in India features taxes & tariffs that equal 150% or more of the value of the car, all to protect their domestic industry. Too bad those that continually cry 'why can't we be more like Country X' don't pipe up here.

This country is weak in so many ways, and it's only getting worse & worse.

Edited by balthazar
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the sales numbers as anything out of the ordinary. How does that 39% domestic figure compare to normal, day-to-day sales?

The fact that lots of domestics were traded in doesn't really mean much to the Big 3, I think... look at it this way. Does it really help GM to have a 1990 Grand Prix on the road if the owner never brings it into the dealership for service? I doubt many of the people with qualified 'clunkers' were spending much at their dealerships.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My F-150 never went to the dealer- too well built I guess.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh...

Methinks that this helped Detroit in a way. A lot of the vehicles traded in (but by no means all of them!) were really at the end of their lifespan.

It doesn't really help the image of Detroit to have a bunch of ratty older GM, Ford and Chryco products on the road.

And I feel fairly confident that all three of the big three are on the right track with the right products to win back market share.

To me, this stimulated the economy, put some people back to work, helped some people who played by the rules get newer cars, etc.

I'd rather see money spent here than in a lot of other ways they will spend it.

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...interesting...you can read a trade in on the windshield of the cars in the pic in the first post. I may be seeing things...but doesn't the red GMC have Hyundai Elantra written in smaller red ink?

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and one final thought-I'd rather the Japanese get our Money than the Saudi's.

I'll gladly clunk a 200,000 mile ratty truck to put a TDI VW on the road...

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that Hyundai, Mini, and VW made up the remaining 20%

I'd be willing to bet Hyundai was the bulk of that 20%, they advertised like crazy during that time. Why weren't Subaru, Mitsubishi and Suzuki included in the Japanese percentage? I realize they dont sell much (who in their right mind buys a Mitsu or Suzuki, seriously?) but those numbers have to be taken into account.

I'd say that C4C was a net positive, and to all you haters, I say that you can relax, because its in the past (which you cannot change) and its unlikely you'll ever see a C4C-like program again.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We actually will at some point I think have another clunker type program like this.

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Wouldn't be surprised; what with it being one of the few arguably successful programs of the administration, AND factoring in the admin's penchant for printing/ wasting money....

Any more word on the 'Cash 4 Appliances' proposal ?? My major kitchen appliances are now 17 yrs old.... ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Wouldn't be surprised; what with it being one of the few arguably successful programs of the administration, AND factoring in the admin's penchant for printing/ wasting money....

Any more word on the 'Cash 4 Appliances' proposal ?? My major kitchen appliances are now 17 yrs old.... ;)

It still out there, but it's up to the states to determine how to disperse it. Here in PA it isn't very high on Rendel's priority list.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could handle Cash for appliances.

Seriously, it would be nice if you could buy American made stuff. More and more of the stuff is made overseas. Our dishwasher died, and 95% of the stuff is foreign made. Right now just on the principal of the thing I'm actually washing by hand.

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0