Do we want to place bets on how soon Chrysler will shift its sales strategy back towards fleet sales? Unfortunately for Americas struggling automakers, $565M in low-profit sales probably isn’t enough to make much of a difference to anyone’s bottom line. Especially considering that the expenditure is set to take place over the next ten years. On the other hand, AT&T is only replacing about 15,000 vehicles, meaning the average price per vehicle is budgeted at about $37K, which is pretty decent for fleet costs. So who will benefit? Ford, hybrids and natural gas, says Automotive News [sub]. The Telecom giant plans on buying about 8,000 compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles from Ford, and will fill out its portfolio with hybrid and “other advanced technology power system” vehicles. Sorry, ChryCo!
Is there a mandate that AT&T must use American branded vans?
To my knowledge, AT&T didn’t receive any TARP yet (correct me). Why not use Tundras or Sequoias?
wsn : To my knowledge, AT&T didn’t receive any TARP yet (correct me). Why not use Tundras or Sequoias?
Because (from what I’ve seen) Toyota is less configurable for aftermarket additions aimed at fleet use. And there’s more aftermarket crap available for the Detroit iron, esp Ford and GM.
Not to mention the obvious Patriotism/marginal fuel economy advantage/FFV angles of the F-series.
And don’t be surprised if the utility box on the bed of the F-150 pictured above is re-used for its 2009 replacement…right before it’s sent off to auction.
Tundras are possibly competitive, but not at all clearly superior. Plus they do not come in greater than 1/2 ton versions, cost more, and do not have as much dealer and upfitter support.
Toyota does make some competitive commercial trucks, but they say Hino, not Tundra.
A Sequoia is not a van, it is an expensive luxury SUV. By vans they mean E-series trucks.
AT&T is buying Priuses, so it this isn’t a Detroit only bias:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/05/24/atandt-adds-105-alternative-fuel-vehicles-to-service-fleet/
Thanks for the insights!
So how fast can GM get the Volt to market and discount it for fleet sales? It’s not too far from $37k, right?
$37k per vehicle probably includes both the cost of the vehicle and the cost of upfitting it with storage/utility equipment. So, it’s not like they’re going to be buying loaded-up, high-markup trucks. Also, the figure probably includes quite a few heavy-duty bucket/lift trucks to skew the average. I’m sure those cost well over $37k.
Let’s split some hairs here…
I don’t believe fleet sales in general are the evil that the automakers are trying to distance themselves from. Yes, they don’t make as much money and they are a loss leader but they do move metal.
What everyone was running from was RENTAL fleet sales. Why? To keep costs down, rental companies only buy the bottom of the barrel for the vehicle line in question. It was these base models with the worst possible motors and worst possible option lists that people would sit in (while paying $50 a day) and complain about.
Work fleets are quipped about less since you are the one getting paid while sitting in that stripped-out vehicle.
“Why not use Tundras or Sequoias?”
The vehicles are going to be converted to CNG by a third party. If you were a North American third-party CNG conversion shop, which platforms would you specialize in? Ford and Chevy/GMC are the top sellers by far. Everyone else is an also ran.
Fleet operators are natural early adopters for CNG because they can afford the refueling infrastructure and can do the ROI calculations retail consumers almost never do. Does anyone know if CNG sold to power motor vehicles currently escapes federal and state motor fuel excise taxes?
Interesting that they’re likely to use the F-150. Most telecomm contractors and utilities service personnel (Bell, Allstream, Telus) I know pick the panel-van versions of the Caravan or Uplander, both for the ride, fuel economy and more useful space (getting at anything in racks at the back of a boxed pickup is much harder than in a minivan). I can’t see the point of a pickup or E-Series except for the guys doing underground routing.
Ford’s lack of a minivan was a sore point with dealers, one that got even more sore when the Focus wagon went away. I know more than a few who are comping at the bit to sell Transit Connects and get back the sales they’re losing to the Uplander and Caravan.
My brother drives a company vehicle and just recently got an announcement that they are replacing his Caravan (crap) with a Chevy Traverse. His Fortune 500 employer might be trying to save GM. Sorry Chrysler.
Both major telecom companies in my area use mostly Ford trucks and vans. In fact one of them leases their entire fleet from what I’ve heard.
My brother drives a company vehicle and just recently got an announcement that they are replacing his Caravan (crap) with a Chevy Traverse.
I’ve seen more than a few companies using Traverses. I find that surprising, as they’re not cheap, economical or particularly capacious. Unless GM is really discounting them (and you need to really discount in order to outprice a Caravan) it seems a bad idea all around.
I’ve never seen a telco vehicle that wasn’t a F150/Silverado/Sierra or E-Series/Express, but I suppose companies elsewhere in the country might use other stuff…
The truck in the photo, which appears to be a fairly recent model F150 regular cab XL V6 with an 8′ bed stickers somewhere around $22,000 with automatic and A/C before rebates and discounts, so, yeah, the 37K per vehicle is going to include a lot of fairly heavy duty stuff and money to cover the conversion to CNG.
A few different things…
If anything, Chrysler is trying to expand their fleets sales OUTSIDE OF RENTAL CARS. Go read about the new business centers they’re opening, or the updates to their class 2-5 Rams from the Chicago Auto Show.
The Uplander is gone. I believe that the Caravan C/V is the last of its kind (unless there’s a Sienna or Odyssey cargo van that I’m missing).
And I’ve seen a couple businesses use a NITRO for their vehicle once (for simple courier work). Point? Not all business owners are smart.
I’m pretty sure it isn’t $37k per vehicle but an average of $37k per vehicle. That would share the cost of those bucket trucks and other expensive add ons across the entire fleet.
According to the fleet sales manager at my local Ford dealer, these trucks are going to run on propane, not CNG. Roush Performance will do the conversions for $8,000 per vehicles. See http://www.roushperformance.com for more details.
Roush may be doing some, but BAF in Dallas already has a contract for the initial shipment of CNG E-250s. BAF was the only converter that offered a CARB certification, which will not be required in some other states. It looks like there will be a few companies with EPA certified systems. There’s also a good system coming for the Transit Connect.
CNG can be MUCH cheaper that gasoline, plus all the tax incentives and environmental benefits. That’s what I burn in my 08 Silverado and 08 Focus. I love it.
CNG may be cheaper, but the e-series CNG delivered to our area have small fuel capacity and only one refueling station in reasonable distance. A contractor has to check and re-fuel at night several times per week. The regulators are prone to fail, and one has leaked. (dangerous)