A week ago we displayed a chart which showed GM’s decreased passenger car emphasis over the last fourteen months. Yes, GM’s U.S. car sales are slowing even as the manufacturer’s U.S. volume is increasing, but that wasn’t the point of the chart, nor was the chart (on its own) even capable of displaying that fact.
With strong pickup truck volume, a rebirth of the automaker’s full-size SUV portfolio, and steady sales from other utility vehicles, GM’s overall U.S. sales are better through the first two months of 2015 than they were at this stage a year ago.
But you deserve an even broader picture with greater specificity and more of a long-range view. So this week we have two charts, one for General Motors, and one for the industry as a whole.
Rather than displaying the passenger car emphasis, these charts track the sales of broad vehicle types over the course of the last decade: cars, pickup trucks, SUVs/crossovers, and vans, where “minivans” and commercial vans are thrown together. In GM’s chart, there’s also a distinction made between the company’s all conquering full-size SUV juggernaut. We didn’t make that distinction on the industry chart because outside of GM, full-size SUVs form a very small part of the overall utility vehicle sphere.
Perhaps the most interesting fact of all? With a two-month 15% decline in car sales to start the year and a 39% increase in pickup truck sales over the same period, GM’s cars are outselling GM’s trucks by just 10,216 units so far this year. The cars outsold the pickups by fewer than 1700 units in February.
Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures.
Huh, so back in 2005, everyone was screaming bloody murder over GM relying on Fullsize trucks and SUVs to survive, they were actually only selling 1.6M FS truck/SUV vs 1.8M cars,
Today however, at 950k trucks plus ~350k FS SUVs( that sounds high even with the five of them combined) 1.3M of those outshines the ~950k cars.
Imagine if they had kept fullsize SUV prices in line with fullsize truck prices, this would be the second coming of the Fullsize era.
One thing that doesn’t make sense, is in 05 GM seemed to be selling a lot more FS SUVs with the 6 different trucks than they do now with the 5 different trucks, the Tahoe I thought was over 200k sales while its hasn’t even hit the 100k rate today?
Oh NVM 05 had already started the decline with 225k Tahoe and Yukon combined…. Plus 51k escalade…. 140k suburb/XL… And 33k H2.
The fullsize numbers are still less than impressive, but I suppose if your making an extra $15,000 per unit, what does volume matter? If the demand gets too high how much can the Texas plant take, isn’t the Indiana Fullsize plant still considered at idle? I believe that’s also part of the reason they’ve priced them so high, if demand exceeds the Texas plants capability, opening a second plant would require them to drop prices to justify keeping two plants open after the initial demand slows.
Yeah imagine. They would ve gone bankrupt when the market turned. Or there was a crisis or another. Or somebody came up with something that does almost everything an SUV does albeit more comfortably and economically (CUV).
Hope they learned their lesson. Build trucks, cuvs whatever the market wants but don’t abandon cars which keep you up when times are bad.
Yes, but the mix of cars as changed, as has the mix of trucks. GM is selling far fewer full sized cars, and far more 4-door pickups. The full sized car was once GM’s bread and butter, but now its “family sized” pickups. A FWD V6 full sized car would be cheaper to run, but the RWD V8 truck likely is perceived as more durable and has better resale value.
Very good point, though, in 2005 GM really didn’t have a fullsize car worthy of note, the impala at the time is about the same size as today’s midsize offerings. Nonetheless, the fullsize pickup is really making yards wiping out the fullsize car category, granted the current FS cars outside FCA aren’t anything special.
That’s the colorado’s true test, can it steal market share from midsize cars.
I drive a 2005 Buick LeSabre, and that’s a full sized car, though not a RWD V8. But that was the last year for the old fashioned style, replaced by the Lucerne, which didn’t have the column shift, front bench option.
People are losing sight that GM actually is doing pretty well with smaller cars – the Spark, Sonic and Cruze, despite all of them being at the end of their life cycles and soon to be replaced.
The big problem is the mid-size Malibu which was handicapped by its lack of rear passenger space from the start and the otherwise very good Impala not being able to carry the larger sedan load as large sedans sales continue to fall.
And imagine what GM could be doing with crossover sales if both Buick and Cadillac had a full line of CUVs.
Lincoln has a full line of CUVs and look how they’re doing. Um, maybe that’s not the full answer.
@Lorenzo
Are you kidding me?
Aside from the MKC, Lincoln’s CUV lineup is aged and were nothing more than thinly disguised Fords to begin with; same goes for the Navigator despite its refresh.
Nonetheless. Lincoln’s CUVs/SUV make up 62% of Lincoln sales YTD.
The new MKX should help Lincoln sales way more than the new MKS will; and Lincoln will add at least one other new CUV (a replacement for the MKT which doesn’t sell at all).
Would not be surprised once Lincoln finished redoing its CUV lineup and redoes the Navigator that they make up close to 70% of all Lincoln sales.
All of this brings up another point.
General Motors has lost a very large amount of volume in the past 10 years, even recently with Chevrolet being shuttered in Europe, Holden basically shuttered in Australlia, Cut backs in Russia, and Indonesia.
As of right now, I would say it’s looking like General Motors is continuing its way down from a world point of view. I wonder how long they can hold the company in the top 5 biggest selling auto manufacturers.
Chasing the imaginary European image GM and Ford so longs for, has done more harm to the car sales than help.
Valid point.
The well-established track record of the American car makers over the decades past has helped their foreign competition enormously, at the expense and hindrance of Detroit.
Flips!de of the coin is the subdivision of Fiat, formerly known as Chrysler. Under the leadership and guidance of Sergio they have accomplished miracles in quality and marketing, and attained indisputable sales records.
But all this talk about GM only matters to those who care. Although at one time I was a flag-waving GM fan, I have outgrown that phase in my life since I found better elsewhere.
I suspect the majority of Americans did the same.
GM needs to adopt the Monroe Doctrine. Eliminate foreign influence in the Americas. Continue in China and keep an eye on Africa. Europe is a declining market, and a lost cause.
GM should set itself up in Africa, even if they lose money for a decade if they have a strong brand image whenever parts of the continent (outside the northern and southern tips) start industrializing they will have a good start at the market provided they don’t screw up. Toyota has been very smart to do this with its trucks and its a crying shame GM is so shortsighted to not see how beneficial setting up brand image in pre-industrial parts of the world could be.
This is where International Harvestor succeeded, in America, somewhat in Europe and especially Australlia they developed a brand name and power that is still recognized and praised. Whoever owns the IH trademark is doing very well selling novelty items.
Toyota trucks are the most widely used Technicals on the planet, sporting armaments as varied and wide ranging as machine guns, cannons, rocket launchers and RPG-wielding individuals, used in drive-by attacks.
Cadillacs could be used as inauspicious car bombs in Africa because no one would suspect any insurgents to blow up luxury cars.
The Mercedes sedans heretofore used as car bombs were all taxi-grade.
Too soon?
@highdesertcat,
Maybe a Mercedes Benz, Rolls/Bently, BMW, but not a Caddy.
Caddy isn’t very well known as you guys might think outside of the US.
That’s why I’m amazed at the effort GM is placing in it.
Why not make Buick the prestige/luxo brand.
It has a better name outside of the US.
I do not believe that Cadillac is a known brand outside of the US. I don’t think Cadillac is a well-known brand even in the US.
But what I do believe is that GM should make Buick a Chinese brand and import the Made-in-China Buicks to the US for that niche market, while folding GMC into the Chevrolet Division, keeping its prestige trims such as Denali as top level trims.
My vision of a viable and profitable GM would be to focus on two Divisions, Chevrolet and Cadillac, and do each well.
In 2005 GM had recently retired Oldsmobile, but it still had Saturn and Pontiac selling passenger cars. GM’s sales per dealer might be as high now as they were in 2005, with fewer passenger cars. GM’s passenger cars are all due for a refresh soon. If the sales don’t pick up in a year or two, some people will be shown the door.
Is there anyone who thinks that GM sales will pick up in a year or two?
First-time buyers of real pickup trucks often choose the Silverado over all others because the Silverado still has a V8 as its primary offering.
This may result is more GM pickup trucks being sold and fewer sedans and CUVs, while sales of Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon and Yukon XL will remain the same.
Those sales may more than make up for the loss of car sales.
@highdesertcat,
I think you’ll see the Colorado become the preferred first time pickup buyers choice.
Yes, I’ve heard that from my friends who sell GM products. I have no doubt that GM will sell a lot of these smaller pickup trucks, just like they sold millions of the S10/S15 and Colorado/Canyon compacts.
I like to see what the Toyota Tacoma will offer in response to this new genre of GM midsize pickups.
Toyota doesn’t upgrade anything unless threatened by newer and better, and the Tacoma is woefully overdue for an upgrade and refresh.
“If the sales don’t pick up in a year or two, some people will be shown the door.”
That’s what the “new” GM should do, but somehow I suspect that the last cohort of the entrenched “old” GM will find a way to not only survive, but use the process to get rid of some of the people who gave them trouble.
GM is just a hungry short sighted animal that will feed at the easiest trough. It’s still here because it has been added to the protected species list.
+1, I have little interest/trust in GM any more.
Right – cuz there isn’t a new Spark, Sonic, Cruze and Verano on the way (as well as a new Malibu, LaCrosse, Regal, etc.), not to mention the Volt 2.0 and a crossover version with the Voltec powertrain.
Let’s try not to ignore the, you know, facts.
I’m waiting to see what happens in the FS van segment.
I have a feeling that fleet managers and other Luddites will be scared of the new-style vans, Transit and ProMaster vans. When their trusty Econolines die, they will beeline for the Chevy and GMC dealers to pick out something that’s familiar and not so scary.
Much like how FoMoCo kept making money on Panthers for the fleet market after everyone else abandoned BOF sedans, the Express and Savanna will soldier on until GM starts losing FS van sales, and then they’ll join the others in having a modern van.
The Ford transit is the number one selling van in America, fleet managers have been buying ford’s for 40 years will continue to do so as sales have shown
I’m still not understanding why a station wagon would be considered to be a passenger car while a crossover would not. They seem very much the same to me.
Well, take the situation of the Toyota Venza, as an example. The Venza is by all accounts a stationwagon-type passenger car, but marketed by Toyota as a crossover, especially in V6 AWD trim. Check out pricing and availability.
Immensely popular with the demographic of seniors and drivers needing easy ingress/egress, the Venza was cannibalizing sales from other Toyota products, although taller than a passenger car and lower than a crossover.
A specialty niche if I ever saw one, yet what does Toyota in all its infinite Japanese wisdom do? They discontinue the Venza! The end result will force Venza buyers into Camry or Highlander the next time they trade, buy or Lease.
So you are right in not understanding why a stationwagon and a CUV cannot be classified as the same.
Sometimes it isn’t about appearances. Sometimes it is all about how to classify a product in the industry and how to market and price them.
hdc: “A specialty niche if I ever saw one, yet what does Toyota in all its infinite Japanese wisdom do? They discontinue the Venza! The end result will force Venza buyers into Camry or Highlander the next time they trade, buy or Lease.”
Is it really a niche? From here, it just looks like a wider Rav4, maybe a little nicer, with worse fuel economy. Much worse with the V6. And sales haven’t exactly set the world on fire.
I would think Toyota could more cost-effectively address the Venza market with a more appropriate Rav4 package.
I wonder if it was pulling sales from the RX350.
Kix, the Venza is the rage with a very narrow but specific audience and demographic, as I have been led to believe.
Older people in retirement communities often choose it as their main ride to/from doctor appointments, traveling and sightseeing becausew of its utility and ease of ingress/egress.
I know two old ladies who bought one together so they could travel all over the US and Canada in it. And they have. It’s basically a Camry Stationwagon on stilts, and theirs has AWD, something that really came in handy at Telluride, CO, in winter.
But, like you said, there are other options to fill the Venza void and, no doubt, people who bought Venza will seek other alternatives within the Toyoita line-up, if their Toyota ownership experience was good.
I again find some of the comedy in this thread entertaining.
We have one guy who’ll I’ll name 4×4, as I don’t want to give away his identity has completely forgotten why the US large car market is/has disappeared.
The situation is called “The CAFE Effect”.
The US manufacturers are not really competitive in building small vehicles. The “trucks” as you guys call them, ie, CUV, SUV, pickup, van, etc are protected to a degree giving a false impression of your manufacturers.
CAFE regulatory requirements for “trucks” is slacker than that of cars.
CAFE has killed of the large Amercian car.
CAFE with it’s softer “truck” requirements at the behest of the US manufacturers, along with a tariff called the chicken tax and up until recently lax safety regulations has allowed for the proliferation of these “trucks” in comparison to “cars”.
The change we see in the US market has as much to do with government intervention as consumer choice.
Maybe some of the commenters (4×4 and others) on TTAC should spend a day or two reading up on the impact of the “barriers” that are allowing for the changes in the US market, especially the “truck” segment.
This is why the pickup has lost ground. More want a CUV/SUV to drive than a pickup. The price of a pickup has risen in cost significantly, above and beyond the CPI.
This isn’t rocket science for most, only the challenged.
Both charts would be slightly more informative as a % per year.
One needs to show the statistics for Ford and Chrysler. I’m sure that they would have similar sales patterns as GM.
The USA market as a whole shows cars as being more dominant because most transplants don’t make pickups and the ones that do are just bit players.
I’d like to see a graph showing profits. Perhaps GM has finally learned the fact that being #1 in sales matters little if you are standing hat in hand in front of congress asking for protection.
Chrysler (make that Fiat) got lucky in the sense that Jeep was launching a slew of all-new products just as the auto market was recovering and the move to CUVs continued to increase (Subie has also benefited from this).
When was the last time GM launched a new crossover? Pretty much just the Encore/Trax within the past few yrs.
The Lambdas and the Equinox/Terrain are long due for the next gen model and Cadillac, in particular, has been short of CUVs.
@Lou_BC,
I do think you are correct in that GM has concentrated on quantity to be number one at the expense of profit.
The only reason I think GM does this is because GM thinks a vehicle sold by them irrespective of profit margin is one less sold to a competitor.
Sorry, “by a competitor”.
@BAFO™ – Big land yachts were a dying breed long before CAFE cracked down on them. They’ve always been expensive to fuel, even when gas was under a dollar a gallon. And always hard to drive and park. You’d definitely get ridiculed for sailing around a big boat.
But it’d be stupid to set FE standards for various forms of light trucks, same as passenger car FE. What market does that???
It’s frackin’ commonsense they’ll burn more fuel than normal passenger cars, no matter what you do. And light trucks are a huge part of commerce too.
So OEMs will game the system, but loopholes are there for any and all OEMs to take advantage of. It’s all fair game.
The regulations may give OEMs a “false impression” of what the market would be like if CAFE was not more lenient or “soft” on “trucks”, but CAFE would then be creating a false market by forcing consumers away from their natural tendency for bigger people movers, never mind commercial uses for bigger vehicles, including pickups, big and small.
But the Chicken tax is there for any and all OEMs to enjoy what little “protection” it may or may not offer. It’s certainly not helping the Ridgeline, Titan or Frontier. The Tundra and Tacoma do marginally well.
Think of what’s missing from global “truck” OEMs and which OEMs would be hurt the most if the Chicken tax went away. Yes Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Hyundai, VW, Subaru, etc. would be harmed the most, though marginally so. But say Proton, Ssangyong, Mahidra, etc, all entered the US market, they’d enjoy what ever “protection” you speak of too. But it’s a very wide assumption you make that they’d want to join in on a dying market, packed with fleet, cheapskates, and bottom feeders. Mitsu, Mazda, Isuzu, VW, Subaru, Ford and others, got to enjoy this “potection” and they still jumped ship on the compact pickup market like it was the Titanic.
The pickup market is hotter than ever, so explain what you’re talking about. That’s why pickup prices keep rising faster than anything else. That couldn’t happen if the market was “losing ground” to CUVs/SUVs.
Some interesting comments.
Big Al From Oz, an interesting perspective on the external impact of regulations on vehicle production – CAFE, taxes, safety regs, etc.
And DenverMike refuting the impact of the above. In particular, nullifying the chicken tax by producing domestically yet not seeing a sales improvement.
I’m certainly not smart enough to reconcile this, but I enjoy reading the different viewpoints.
One comment for Timothy Cain (and others), I find it a bit misleading to quote GMC and Silverado separately in sales figures, yet F-series are combined, I assume by F-series, you include all F150, F250, F350 etc. I get the argument that GMC and Chev are technically separate legal entities, but really ?
@OldWingGuy,
I agree with you regarding the breakdown of pickup sales in the US.
I do think the lack of transparency is driven by the manufacturers.
Maybe, pickups should be broken down into classes and not manufacturer models, ie, 150/1500, 250/2500, etc.
As for DiM, there is a massive amount of literature, working documents, articles, etc regarding the impact of the Chicken Tax in the US light commercial vehicle segment.
DiM has yet to provide links supporting his views.
I have used a link from VW to illustrate the problems that manufacturers encounter regarding the importation vs manufacture of pickups in the US/NAFTA.
VW claims for them to invest in a factory to manufacture the Amarok at least 100 000 Amaroks would be required to sell in the US.
The other option was for the removal of the Chicken Tax. I mean if the Chicken Tax had no effect then why does it exist?
The US has 3 different regualtions controlling, emissions and FE standards. There are 2 differing CAFE standards, one for cars and one for light commercials up to 8 499lbs. Then there are light trucks which don’t use a footprint method like CAFE, but have in place a system similar to what the EU uses. That is using weight as a determining factor (above 8 500lbs).
The more stringent CAFE regulations affecting cars has made the production of large cars in the US more prohibitive.
There is much information regarding the impact of all trade globally, not just the US.
@OldWingGuy – Ram, Chevy and GMC combine all their fullsize pickups (classes) into one sales figure too. GM having 2 brands of trucks may hurt their total pickup tally, but they have more opportunities to sell you a truck. BTW, it’s been proven Sierra pickup owners don’t always regard Silverados as the same or similar trucks, nor would some ever own one.
But you are correct, it’s not the Chicken tax that helps or “protects” tremendous pickup sales, or we’d never see some trucks, domestically built and sold, struggling or fail. Huge gains or failures here, are obviously independent of the Chicken tax.
The bottom line is sales figures. If they don’t sell well, then it doesn’t matter how cheaply or costly it is to get them to the showroom. If a Chinese built pickup costs pennies on the dollar to build and reach US showrooms, when they don’t sell in sizable quantities, the OEM will no doubt still take a loss.
Of course BAFO can only see things one way, from his perch, far far away. Much is written about the Chicken tax, from non experts in passing, mostly to write an interesting article or paper about a tax with a funny name, that the general populace is hearing for the 1st time.
Without a doubt, you have to do your own research to have a truly informed opinion, especially when lots of pundits express such emotionally and politically charged opinions. BAFO has a hard on for anything he feels casts a negative light on US politics or the Americana in general.