Interesting article
Originally Posted by MarkB' date='Jan 20 2009, 05:50 PM
Polemicist should come too - I can buy him one too and tell him he's a pinko liberal lefty (and he can find out just how close to his house I now live......).
you'll have to get another Impreza
LOL
I wish I was a Porsche driving wanker, now I'm in a scummy BMW driver, oh the shame of it.
Regarding my choice of car, I've never been the type to worry what other people think to any great degree, but didn't agree with some of your statements, so thought I'd post a response from the other side of the fence.
Our view points are different, because I see a small minority buying for branding, while you see it as the majority being seduced. I guess it
I wish I was a Porsche driving wanker, now I'm in a scummy BMW driver, oh the shame of it.
Regarding my choice of car, I've never been the type to worry what other people think to any great degree, but didn't agree with some of your statements, so thought I'd post a response from the other side of the fence.
Our view points are different, because I see a small minority buying for branding, while you see it as the majority being seduced. I guess it
nasty plastics, cheap leather/coth and assorted squeaks and rattles in Jap cars
absolutely no contest with the premium German brands
Jap cars are also the most reliable on the planet
No car provides a sense of occasion like an Italian car
Anything made in Spain is shit
And nothing will bore you like a Swedish car
all generally speaking
absolutely no contest with the premium German brands
Jap cars are also the most reliable on the planet
No car provides a sense of occasion like an Italian car
Anything made in Spain is shit
And nothing will bore you like a Swedish car
all generally speaking
I am going to steer clear of the German Vs Japanese discussion, that's not really what this thread is about.
After reading the article in full and this thread I had a few comments...
1) BMW have spread themselves too thin with too many models for niche sectors.
Not entirely and not as much as others. Honda currently have 26 different models of car available for sale in Japan(http://www.honda.co.jp/auto/), BMW have about 16 or 17 (including coupe, estate, cab etc).
But, many of the 'niche' models should be made fairly efficiently due to the sharing of platform, parts etc??
2) BMW are in trouble due to the above.
Not completely true. BMW are suffering due to the global recession, especially the major economic issues in the US. They are also suffering as their high value vehicles are now not selling as well as owners downsize.
Their financial division (BMW Finance) is suffering due to the unpresidented collapse of residual values as they fund high value vehicles.
Due to the changes to the Credit Act, the
After reading the article in full and this thread I had a few comments...
1) BMW have spread themselves too thin with too many models for niche sectors.
Not entirely and not as much as others. Honda currently have 26 different models of car available for sale in Japan(http://www.honda.co.jp/auto/), BMW have about 16 or 17 (including coupe, estate, cab etc).
But, many of the 'niche' models should be made fairly efficiently due to the sharing of platform, parts etc??
2) BMW are in trouble due to the above.
Not completely true. BMW are suffering due to the global recession, especially the major economic issues in the US. They are also suffering as their high value vehicles are now not selling as well as owners downsize.
Their financial division (BMW Finance) is suffering due to the unpresidented collapse of residual values as they fund high value vehicles.
Due to the changes to the Credit Act, the
No, it is interesting to have my suspicions confirmed, as with Mark's contributions.
The BMW/Honda comparo is valid, but a little misleading: A lot of the cars in Japan are very closely related; the Life and Zest are girls' any boys' versions of the same Kei car.
Honda has far fewer engine and chassis and trim options, so the whole shebang is a lot cheaper to do than it at first looks. Although it IS confusing, and one wonders if they really need so many minivans. And they do not get the Acura TL, RDX or MDX, so you could say 29!
If Audi are looking at 40 models, yet there are still VWs, Skodas and SEATs, it simply sounds stupid. That's before the miriad of options, which tend to make german cars generally expensive and unreliable. I cannot entirely make sense of it and BMW's model looks a lot less daft in that light.
The BMW/Honda comparo is valid, but a little misleading: A lot of the cars in Japan are very closely related; the Life and Zest are girls' any boys' versions of the same Kei car.
Honda has far fewer engine and chassis and trim options, so the whole shebang is a lot cheaper to do than it at first looks. Although it IS confusing, and one wonders if they really need so many minivans. And they do not get the Acura TL, RDX or MDX, so you could say 29!
If Audi are looking at 40 models, yet there are still VWs, Skodas and SEATs, it simply sounds stupid. That's before the miriad of options, which tend to make german cars generally expensive and unreliable. I cannot entirely make sense of it and BMW's model looks a lot less daft in that light.
Good post Moff.
Aren't BMW finance also screwed on more than one front?
As with other manufacturers who chose to bring financing 'in house' (I know VAG do, one of my mates is an Audi finance manager) and essentially run their own lending bank, are't they suffering from the lack of liquidity in the commercial lending market too?
It's not like BMW have deposits of cash from savers to securitize their lending, so presumably they securitized using the markets - can't see too many investors wanting securities with BMW's name on when luxury car prices are in freefall globally, can you?
As for PCP, I wonder how many people will come to the end of their agreement and like the next deal the manufacturer offers them, they may be laughing now on their current deal, but they'll have trouble when they want the same deal again, won't they? And how many of those will have to trade down quite severely as the credit becomes too expensive or simply unavailable to them to buy a similar car again?
Aren't BMW finance also screwed on more than one front?
As with other manufacturers who chose to bring financing 'in house' (I know VAG do, one of my mates is an Audi finance manager) and essentially run their own lending bank, are't they suffering from the lack of liquidity in the commercial lending market too?
It's not like BMW have deposits of cash from savers to securitize their lending, so presumably they securitized using the markets - can't see too many investors wanting securities with BMW's name on when luxury car prices are in freefall globally, can you?
As for PCP, I wonder how many people will come to the end of their agreement and like the next deal the manufacturer offers them, they may be laughing now on their current deal, but they'll have trouble when they want the same deal again, won't they? And how many of those will have to trade down quite severely as the credit becomes too expensive or simply unavailable to them to buy a similar car again?
That's EXACTLY where it started in the US (whose economy still runs a year ahead of ours) and only A1 customers can get credit now. Usually the ones who need it the least.
And that's before weaker residuals have upped the lease for the same PoS they bought last time.
I see a lot of similarities with the situation in the 'eighties, when the Japanese economy was considered unstoppable - until the bubble burst.
And that's before weaker residuals have upped the lease for the same PoS they bought last time.
I see a lot of similarities with the situation in the 'eighties, when the Japanese economy was considered unstoppable - until the bubble burst.
It's not just the motor industry. It's part of a market driven economy that, when the going's good, shareholders ask "where's our short-term chunk of cash?" rather than "what are you planning for the inevitable crash that historically happens every 10-20 years?".
There's a similar parallel in the energy industry. When fuel is cheap, the profits are expected to be handed on to the customer/shareholder, rather than saving for large investment in infrastructure (something which has been overlooked severely for nearly 20 years now); when fuel's expensive, the company is expected to cut its margins to the wire because they were making big profits!
You'd've thought everyone would've learnt from this short-termist attitude the last time. Listening to a different government say it's all sustainable growth should've rung bells after the 1990s recession.
There's a similar parallel in the energy industry. When fuel is cheap, the profits are expected to be handed on to the customer/shareholder, rather than saving for large investment in infrastructure (something which has been overlooked severely for nearly 20 years now); when fuel's expensive, the company is expected to cut its margins to the wire because they were making big profits!
You'd've thought everyone would've learnt from this short-termist attitude the last time. Listening to a different government say it's all sustainable growth should've rung bells after the 1990s recession.
Originally Posted by Useful' date='Jan 21 2009, 10:43 AM
It's not just the motor industry. It's part of a market driven economy that, when the going's good, shareholders ask "where's our short-term chunk of cash?" rather than "what are you planning for the inevitable crash that historically happens every 10-20 years?".
There's a similar parallel in the energy industry. When fuel is cheap, the profits are expected to be handed on to the customer/shareholder, rather than saving for large investment in infrastructure (something which has been overlooked severely for nearly 20 years now); when fuel's expensive, the company is expected to cut its margins to the wire because they were making big profits!
You'd've thought everyone would've learnt from this short-termist attitude the last time. Listening to a different government say it's all sustainable growth should've rung bells after the 1990s recession.
There's a similar parallel in the energy industry. When fuel is cheap, the profits are expected to be handed on to the customer/shareholder, rather than saving for large investment in infrastructure (something which has been overlooked severely for nearly 20 years now); when fuel's expensive, the company is expected to cut its margins to the wire because they were making big profits!
You'd've thought everyone would've learnt from this short-termist attitude the last time. Listening to a different government say it's all sustainable growth should've rung bells after the 1990s recession.
Nothing much is looked at beyond the financial year end. This has now become the norm I think.
The US is obsessed with reporting figures which mean little and will be used for nothing at all except making graphs to show senior managers what they wanted to see in the first place. I'd say this was pretty standard across most industries and in many ways it's the reason why this recession may well bite so hard as not enough is done to plan for a downturn, let alone the near collapse of credit availability for a while.


