Take note, Ford....

[GTRacerX.]

Ford Global Strategy

Ugg. These definitions are neither precise nor mutually exclusive. That is, a person can reasonably call a car a pony car, a sports car, a Grand Touring car or a muscle car and all be right.

Some definitions can clearly be wrong, a Prius is not a muscle car, a Miata is not a sedan, but most of the time cars like the Mustang sit in the Venn diagram where several circles overlap.

That's what you just defined. Ford is marketing towards a Global audience now.
So the Mustang needs to fill a lot of check boxes. Unfortunately when you try to make everyone happy you run the risk of making some people unhappy.

Ford is banking that Mustang fans can overlook some of the items they are not happy with. All in All the Mustang remains to be many different cars to different
people but at its heart & soul is still American Muscle. ;)

Sponsored

 

[Rinzler]

When you get into accounting and balance sheets for large publicly traded companies you had better pack your lunch. Analysts try, and then extrapolate based on their experience the perceived margins however SG&A, impairments, and literally thousands of things get baked into that cake, and massaged by unit leaders and accountants to paint a holistically healthy quarterly report. Not trying to be rude but there is no way any non Chevy insider has any real idea what the cost basis or margin truly is on the car. I do absolutely guarantee you however that if any company really had a 6 percent margin they would not exist (except TSLA). That 6-7 percent includes so much noise. If a company wanted to they could reduce spending in some areas and drop prices and still generate a quarterly report that looked as though the same car hit 6 percent.

I don't claim to be an insider for Chevy, but as a publicly traded company, their financial details are not all that difficult to decode. Actually, it's much hard for a non-publically traded company to hide financials.

If you can provide some evidence otherwise of Chevy's profit margin OR the fact that a company could not survive on a 6-7% profit margin, please let me know. ExxonMobil, for example, is the most profitable company in the world and operates on a 6% margin. https://ycharts.com/companies/XOM/profit_margin
https://ycharts.com/companies/GM/profit_margin

 

[wireeater]

A GT is exactly that, a grand touring car (G......T.....), not a Muscle car.

 

[EcoVert]

Yep, the market wants performance simplicity from a muscle car, leave the 10 speeds/magnerides/digital dashes to Audi/Merc etc.

Not true Ford does plenty of market research that stuff is what people want or Ford wouldn't have invested millions of dollars to put them into Mustang.

 

[TomcatDriver]

A GT is exactly that, a grand touring car (G......T.....), not a Muscle car.

Again, not mutually exclusive.

 

[BGM]

Nah - before GM started unloading Camaros on the rental market, they had nearly a 50% take rate on the V8 - in comparison in the U.S. the V8 Mustang take rate is far less. It's just my opinion however people that buy the non-V8 cars are looking for something fun to drive as an everyday car - not track cars. The Camaro is tiny, actually a false rear seat and the trunk is sad, it is not a good car for anyone with needs to use the back seat to seat actual human beings. Yes GM will get more sales by dropping the price, however comparison shoppers are going to look at a Mustang and for the same price they'll get a loaded non-premium Mustang for the same as that bare-bones Camaro and the Mustang will seat four. I don't see Camaro sales ever rivaling the S550 sales until a redesign puts a rear seat that will accommodate actual humans with heads and legs and a trunk that can handle luggage for two (they current one can't.)

This x1000. It's all about the sweet spot. The Camaro asks you to make more noticeable compromises (as listed) than the Mustang does. The Mustang asks you to make a slight compromise in performance, but very few can probably tell the difference, and even fewer will ever drive it in a manner where that difference becomes evident.

As I always say, 'there isn't much the Mustang can't do (fit 5 people), there are just a lot of things that it doesn't do very well (drive in the snow, maneuver in tight spaces, fit people in the backseat, haul large amounts of cargo.)'

Same goes for more mainstream vehicles, as evidenced by the death of the sedan. Before, if you wanted to get the functionality of an SUV, you had to buy an SUV that could go off-roading essentially, so you had to pay for that up front, deal with truck like driving on the road, and horrid fuel economy for those short grocery store runs. Now with car-like crossovers negating those issues, the sedan is the more compromised vehicle with its lack of interior space.

 

[Abb0nz]

...as evidenced by the death of the sedan...

I see no evidence of "the death of the sedan". Charger, Taurus, Malibu, almost every BMW, plus many more seem to disagree with your statement.

 

[BmacIL]

I see no evidence of "the death of the sedan". Charger, Taurus, Malibu, almost every BMW, plus many more seem to disagree with your statement.

Data disproves your anecdote. Sedan sales are still pretty healthy but have been declining at a significant rate over the last 5-8 years, being replaced mostly by crossovers, and also pickups.

The Taurus is a 13 year old platform, has sold poorly for a long time, and will be dying soon. The Charger is just as old, despite recent refreshes. The Malibu is a lot better than anything previously brought by Chevy in that segment but not a success compared to the 13-17 Fusion, let alone Accord and Camry. The only sedans that have kept up volumes well are luxury sedans.

 

[BmacIL]

This x1000. It's all about the sweet spot. The Camaro asks you to make more noticeable compromises (as listed) than the Mustang does. The Mustang asks you to make a slight compromise in performance, but very few can probably tell the difference, and even fewer will ever drive it in a manner where that difference becomes evident.

As I always say, 'there isn't much the Mustang can't do (fit 5 people), there are just a lot of things that it doesn't do very well (drive in the snow, maneuver in tight spaces, fit people in the backseat, haul large amounts of cargo.)'

Same goes for more mainstream vehicles, as evidenced by the death of the sedan. Before, if you wanted to get the functionality of an SUV, you had to buy an SUV that could go off-roading essentially, so you had to pay for that up front, deal with truck like driving on the road, and horrid fuel economy for those short grocery store runs. Now with car-like crossovers negating those issues, the sedan is the more compromised vehicle with its lack of interior space.

One thing I'll disagree with is snow performance. Put some snow tires on and it's just as good or better than any FWD sedan with all seasons I've ever driven in the winter.

 

[marks]

Not true Ford does plenty of market research that stuff is what people want or Ford wouldn't have invested millions of dollars to put them into Mustang.

Then Ford will lose as if they are just going to emulate Audi/Merc etc then I may as well buy a Audi/Merc. Ford need to keep a niche with the Mustang

 

[dogiebitt]

http://www.carscoops.com/2017/08/chevy-camaro-could-get-price-cut-to.html

The Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang have been outselling the Chevrolet Camaro for the past couple of months and it appears executives at the bowtie brand have taken notice.

Speaking with Automotive News at the unveiling the Camaro ZL1 race car, GM's Executive Vice President of Global Product Development revealed the company is considering adjusting the Camaro's price points. As Mark Reuss explained, "I think we've got opportunities at the very low end of the Camaro range and some remix of some of the V8 options on it so we don't force people to buy all the options with a V8, just to get a V8."

There's no word on when the changes could be enacted but the arrival of the 2018 Ford Mustang will likely put additional pressure on Camaro sales.

The 2018 Mustang starts at $25,585 and comes equipped with a turbocharged 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder engine that develops 310 hp (231 kW) and 350 lb-ft (474 Nm) of torque. For comparison, the 2018 Camaro is priced from $25,905 and has a turbocharged 2.0-liter engine developing just 275 hp (205 kW) and 295 lb-ft (400 Nm) of torque.

The pricing gap is even worse on V8 models as the entry-level Camaro SS retails for $37,000 and has a 6.2-liter V8 developing 455 hp (339 kW) and 455 lb-ft (616 Nm) of torque. Meanwhile, the Mustang GT will begin at $35,095 and feature an upgraded 5.0-liter V8 which is good for 460 hp (343 kW) and 420 lb-ft (568 Nm) of torque.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20170810/OEM04/170819963/chevy-camaro

DETROIT -- General Motors is re-assessing some trim and build options for the Chevrolet Camaro in an attempt to increase sales and better compete against the Ford Mustang and Dodge Challenger, according to product chief Mark Reuss.
The company, according to Reuss, sees opportunities to better position the muscle car's price points at the base and V-8 levels.
"I think we've got opportunities at the very low end of the Camaro range and some remix of some of the V-8 options on it so we don't force people to buy all the options with a V-8, just to get a V-8," Reuss told reporters following a media at the company's world headquarters here to unveil a new Camaro ZL1 race car for the Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series.
Reuss, executive vice president of global product development, purchasing and supply chain, declined to comment on specifics or timing of the potential changes. A Chevrolet spokesman confirmed the brand is "exploring a bunch of opportunities" to expand the vehicle's range, but also declined to comment on specifics.
"The Mustang and some of the cars in the segment will have a lower base price and that's an opportunity for us probably," Reuss said.
The 2017 and 2018 Camaro start at $26,900 with a 2.0-liter four-cylinder turbocharged engine. Opting for a 3.6-liter V-6 bumps up the price $1,495 to $28,395. That compares to the 2017 Mustang starting at $26,085 with a 3.7-liter V-6 engine and the 2017 Challenger with a base price of $28,090 for a 3.6-liter V-6. All prices include shipping.
A Camaro equipped with a V-8 engine starts at about $38,000 at the SS trim level, while the Mustang GT and Challenger R/T V-8 models start at about $34,100.
Camaro sales in the U.S. were down 2.5 percent through July to 41,280, according to the Automotive News Data Center. That compares to a 30 percent drop to 50,814 vehicles for the Mustang and 2.6 percent increase for the Challenger to 41,243.
The Camaro racer for NASCAR is expected to begin racing next year. It replaces the Chevrolet SS, which the company has announced will be discontinued as it ends vehicle manufacturing in Australia.

 

[TomcatDriver]

Then Ford will lose as if they are just going to emulate Audi/Merc etc then I may as well buy a Audi/Merc. Ford need to keep a niche with the Mustang

If you are going to price up with (or near) the Europeans people are not going to tolerate panel gaps and other fit/finish and QC issues. Those things shouldn't exist period in 2017, but there were a lot willing to look the other way since you can argue you were getting such a bargain in price/performance. That's getting a lot harder to do.

 

[BGM]

One thing I'll disagree with is snow performance. Put some snow tires on and it's just as good or better than any FWD sedan with all seasons I've ever driven in the winter.

True, but that it needs snow tires to have equivalent/superior performance is a bit of a ding.

New all-seasons are the sweet spot on my current ride. It moves around, but very predictably!

 

[BGM]

Data disproves your anecdote. Sedan sales are still pretty healthy but have been declining at a significant rate over the last 5-8 years, being replaced mostly by crossovers, and also pickups.

The Taurus is a 13 year old platform, has sold poorly for a long time, and will be dying soon. The Charger is just as old, despite recent refreshes. The Malibu is a lot better than anything previously brought by Chevy in that segment but not a success compared to the 13-17 Fusion, let alone Accord and Camry. The only sedans that have kept up volumes well are luxury sedans.

Additionally, GM is considering canceling the Impala and others: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gm-jobs-idUSKBN1A52PJ

 

[BmacIL]

True, but that it needs snow tires to have equivalent/superior performance is a bit of a ding.

New all-seasons are the sweet spot on my current ride. It moves around, but very predictably!

I was being a little modest :lol:. I embarrassed quite a few SUVs at stop lights these last two winters without even trying that hard.

Sponsored