Monday, January 18, 2010

Big Slide for Big 3 Market Share: From 90% to 45%

According to data from Ward's Automotive, the Big Three's (GM + Ford + Chrysler) market share for the U.S. went from above 90% in 1965 to below 45% in 2009. Also from Ward's, below are the top 10 best selling cars in the U.S. for 2009 (trucks not included), and then the top 20 cars and trucks for 2009.



17 Comments:

At 1/18/2010 4:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder what the chart would look like if you superimpose on a yearly basis the number of pages in the union work rules. I would gather it would be a nice inverse relationship.

 
At 1/18/2010 5:55 PM, Blogger PeakTrader said...

10 best-selling cars of 2009
By Russ Heaps Bankrate.com

"Here are the best-selling vehicles through the first six months of 2009 and the number of vehicles reported sold:"

1. Ford F-Series: 179,632
2. Toyota Camry: 150,242
3. Chevrolet Silverado: 149,949
4. Honda Accord: 131,043
5. Toyota Corolla: 121,643
6. Honda Civic: 118,459
7. Nissan Altima: 96,428
8. Dodge Ram: 94,516
9. Ford Fusion: 85,146
10. Honda CR-V: 78,917

 
At 1/18/2010 6:20 PM, Anonymous Benny The Man said...

The new Ford F-series, btw, is regarded by some pick-up critics as the best pick-up truck ever built.
In general, Ford is trying out a nvel concept: better engineering. Seems to work.
Now, if we can just get Detroit back to the days of bravura styling....
Unions are dead. Japan and Germany pay workers very well (in Germany, more than ours).
The battle now is to have the best and best-looking cars and trucks.
Win that battle and you won't need constant infusion of federal money, ala US farmers.

 
At 1/18/2010 7:29 PM, Blogger OA said...

Don't worry, D.C. has a fix for the F-150 dominance. The new fleet fuel standards will fix the truck and SUV loophole. I'm sure a 120hp F-150 will sell really well.

 
At 1/18/2010 7:33 PM, Anonymous Obey Obama said...

Union is Job #1.

 
At 1/18/2010 7:35 PM, Anonymous Titus Pullo said...

Reminds me of one of my political science class 35 years ago when my prof said GM was a "monopoly capitalist" and all they had to do was determine how much profit they wanted to make and set the price accordingly. When I pointed out my father preferred to buy Volkswagens because of price and mileage, he waved us off as not typical Americans. Maybe that's why I don't give money to the university nowadays.

It took a long time but maybe now Detroit manufacturers and union employees have learned quality matters.

 
At 1/18/2010 8:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The only Top 10 vehicle to gain sales was the Ford Fusion in 2009 vs. 2008 sales figures. Go Ford Team.

I think that GM will surprise in 2010 with an impressive line-up. Chrysler/Fiat is in trouble unless another fuel crisis hits.

 
At 1/18/2010 8:29 PM, Blogger juandos said...

From some outfit affiliated with USAToday:

What were the top 10 best-selling vehicles of 2009?

Here's the list:

-----------------2009---------------------2008
1.----------Ford F-Series------------Ford F-Series
2.----------Toyota Camry------- ---Chevrolet Silverado
3.----------Chevrolet Silverado----Toyota Camry
4.----------Toyota Corolla----------Honda Accord
5.----------Honda Accord----------Toyota Corolla
6.----------Honda Civic-------------Honda Civic
7.----------Nissan Altima-----------Nissan Altima
8.----------Honda CR-V-------------Chevrolet Impala
9.----------Ford Fusion-------------Dodge Ram
10.---------Dodge Ram--------------Ford Focus

 
At 1/18/2010 9:38 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

The Chevy Silverado and the GMC Sierra are basically the same truck and run down the same assembly line. When you add the sales of those two GM trucks together they beat the Ford F series trcuks.

 
At 1/19/2010 12:22 AM, Anonymous Lyle said...

Note that the only car from detroit is the Fort Fusion. All the rest are pickups. The reason Detroit gave up the car market was that it did not really care, falling victim to the innovators dilemma. (We don't make any money on small cars so why bother to make them better). Just what happened to the steel industry, and the mini mills, who let the mini mills chew up the rebar part of the market because it was a dog part of the market and one day they woke up and the mini mills had eaten their lunch. It started with the 1970s when Detroit thought it could push whatever pieces of junk on the public it liked (like the Volarie) and continued with the X car. Detroit got fat and happy and one sees the result.

 
At 1/19/2010 3:13 AM, Blogger sethstorm said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 1/19/2010 3:15 AM, Blogger sethstorm said...

Junk flooding.


Germany pay workers very well (in Germany, more than ours).


...in a country that is ironclad in union protections yet still manufactures & exports plenty.


From some outfit affiliated with USAToday:

Golf carts, narcostate specials with various Detroit/Transplant labels, and a few finely built domestic specials from GM and Ford.

At this point, it's just people baselessly slagging on Detroit until they get their wish of it dying. They certainly can and do make good cars/trucks; they just don't do small cars.

When the transplants make larger/muscular cars affordable(as done by Detroit) to a wide audience, then I might pay attention. Until then, they might as well be making golfcarts and gold-plated, limited run exotics.


Note that the only car from detroit is the Fort Fusion

No, that's a narcostate special.

 
At 1/19/2010 11:31 AM, Anonymous argonaut said...

The drop is hardly the surprise, but it makes me wonder how long the expected downstream effects will be felt of the 2-of-3 major bankruptcies.

Bankruptcies usually result in a marked re-evaluation of the components of a company--as their values diminish, other entities take advantage of fire-sale prices on technology, IP, facilities, etc.

Because of the interference from the federal government, that correction never took place.

So, while I am curious what the long-term effects will be, I'm also curious what these effects will look like as the classical bankruptcy never took place.

 
At 1/19/2010 12:54 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"When you add the sales of those two GM trucks together they beat the Ford F series trcuks"...

Good point Walt G...

"When the transplants make larger/muscular cars affordable(as done by Detroit) to a wide audience, then I might pay attention. Until then, they might as well be making golfcarts and gold-plated, limited run exotics"...

Well now sethstorm that's a very interesting point of view, a point of view that coincidently is one that I have also...

Both Toyota and Nissan make large vehicles...

From Edmunds: 2009 GMC Sierra 1500 vs 2009 Nissan Titan

2010 Toyota Tundra vs 2010 Ford F-150

ALL these vehicles are made in the USA and I know people who have them and NOT one of them is unhappy with the purchase of the vehicle...

 
At 1/19/2010 4:02 PM, Anonymous Lyle said...

A question what characteristics of a muscle car do you want, acceleration, high top speed or what? Saying a big engine is not an answer because you want a big engine for some reason. For example if you want acceleration one could take a hybrid, re-tune the computer and get a vehicle that really took off. (Electric cars have huge torque) Perfomance in general comes from 4s with turbo chargers and the new fuel injection rather than the old carb. (Carb icing is a thing of the past now). The muscle cars were never big on total carrying capacity. So it would be helpful to define the characteristics of muscle, if its just styling then its a question if the market demand is really there anymore.

 
At 1/19/2010 4:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The US is roughly 20% of the WW market for new cars. Can someone show the best selling new cars - worldwide in 2009? (i.e., not just in the US). Thanks.

 
At 1/21/2010 12:33 PM, Blogger sethstorm said...


A question what characteristics of a muscle car do you want, acceleration, high top speed or what? Saying a big engine is not an answer because you want a big engine for some reason. For example if you want acceleration one could take a hybrid, re-tune the computer and get a vehicle that really took off. (Electric cars have huge torque) Perfomance in general comes from 4s with turbo chargers and the new fuel injection rather than the old carb.

I can live with fuel injection and FWD(although I do prefer RWD), but a turbo in an engine just screams "corner-cutting" for too many applications.

Electric engines are still too much in the domain of the exotic. While they do show some promise, the electric-powered "pony car" is far, far off.



(Carb icing is a thing of the past now). The muscle cars were never big on total carrying capacity. So it would be helpful to define the characteristics of muscle, if its just styling then its a question if the market demand is really there anymore.


If there's something that could describe what I'm asking for, it's found in surplus Crown Victoria Police Interceptors or in GM's 1990's era equivalent, the Chevrolet Caprice/Impala. That is, something that has some performance to it but not necessarily a part of the luxury segment.



Both Toyota and Nissan make large vehicles...

The problem is that it only applies to their trucks. I'll admit that the numbers certainly look good for the Titan.

Outside of that, they only seem to do well making small-for-the-body cars (save for some exotics).

When I step into one of the Japanese/Korean brand cars, it seems like they're trying but not completely capturing the idea of how Detroit designs automobiles.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home