Find Reviews by Make:
GM’s U.S. market share declined from 18.4% in February 2015 to 16.1% the following month as the automaker’s sales slid 2%, year-over-year, in a market which expanded marginally. GM earned 16.7% of the U.S. auto industry’s volume in March 2014.
Compared with February, Toyota, Ford, Hyundai-Kia, and the BMW Group all produced market share improvements worthy of mention. Honda’s share fell slightly from 8.4% to 8.2%; FCA was down from 13.1% in February to 12.8% in March.
The industry’s 1.55M new vehicle sales represented the best March since 2005.
Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures.
35 Comments on “Chart Of The Day: Auto Brand Market Share In America In March 2015...”
Read all comments
See now that’s where Chrysler FCA should be, unlike here in Canada where they’ve managed to surpass Ford as the sales leader with 18% market share. I tell myself it’s largely because of that blasted $19,900 ‘Canada Value Package’ Caravan they’ve been pushing out at that price since the 90’s.
http://www.dodge.ca/en/2015/grandcaravan/CAR_VAL
What do you have against the “Canada Value Package” van? I don’t need or want a van at this point, but if I did, these seem like reasonably decent vans and such good value it would be hard to justify anything else.
If they are able to sell a product that people want at a price they are willing to pay, I would suggest their market share here in Canada is justified.
PRNDLOL, they call it the American Value Package (AVP) (~$18K) in the US and it is wildly popular with young military families stationed at the four huge major military installations in my area.
The local Fiatsler dealer sells them as soon as they get them in, along with dirt-cheap financing.
It’s hard to beat for under $20K out the door with zero down.
I was really hoping to see something about hockey, lumberjacks, or Tim Horton’s incorporated into the Canada Value Package. They should at least apologize!
Mazda – stuck in neutral.
It’s fascinating to me that people don’t buy their cars. They win comparison tests, are generally the most fuel efficient cars in their category, come recommended by CR as reliable vehicles, and are appealingly styled as a general consensus. Even avoiding the “enthusiast’s choice” angle (which doesn’t sell in volume) I would think the rest would be enough to improve sales. Yet it stays the same, like they’re some sort of secret club no one knows about.
From other discussions about Mazda’s woes in Tim’s articles as well as others, it seems the major reasons for Mazda’s struggles are:
1) Dealer network – it’s small, and the few that are out there might make VW dealers look good
2) Marketing – it’s minimal, stale, and inconsistent with the reality of the product
3) Fear of rust – doesn’t matter if they have or haven’t fixed it, that’s the perception and perceptions about cars are very hard to change
Also, I’m not sure if this is a major problem for them, but their cars are loud (tire and wind noise, often a high cruising RPM combined with an engine that doesn’t sound great. Most buyers will give up the light weight in exchange for some sound deadening. I think Mazda even pushes the limits of what “enthusiasts” will tolerate for NVH.
The dealer network is small because the dealerships are unprofitable. The dealerships are unprofitable because of a lack of demand. The number of dealerships is a symptom, not the problem.
Mazda has built a niche around (a) rotary engines and (b) affordable performance. As it turns out, the rotary is obsolete, while most Americans are fairly indifferent to the affordable performance concept.
As the market matures, consumers tend to make safer choices. Toyota and Honda are much safer bets than Mazda. Hyundai and Kia have reinvented themselves by pitching themselves as bargain alternatives to Toyota, while Subaru carved out a niche with something that niche buyers actually care about (AWD.)
The fixation on the rotary and alternate engine technologies has a long history of dragging down Mazda. This mindset is a legacy cost that is hard for the company to shake; this addiction to technologies that don’t interest most people is part of its DNA, and not for the better.
I think the new Mazda 2 shows promise. If it can hitch younger buyers to the brand like GLC & tugboat there may be hope yet. What hurt with tugboat was the $1K fuel pump. The new 2 does suffer the Fiesta limited-rear-legrom.
Quite correct on all points.
Mazda needs to emulate Subaru and find a niche to fill.
Mazda did offer AWD versions of vehicles such as the two-generations-ago 6 Wagon elsewhere in the world. I would have considered one 12 years ago if they’d been offered in the U.S.; instead we went with a 5-speed Subaru Legacy wagon (replacing a 1990 Legacy AWD wagon, as it happened).
The rust fears are affecting longtime Mazda loyalists, such as my friend who’d bought a succession of new Mazdas starting with the original rear-drive 3-door GLC; after her last Protege sedan, she abandoned Mazda for a new (’12) Fit. I don’t think the kind of brand loyalty that Mazda needs and has lost can be redeveloped.
There’s not a better bargain than to be had these days than a Yaris, Corolla or Camry; unless it’s a Versa, Sentra or Altima.
Aside from the smaller dealer network and the American buyer generally not placing much importance on driving dynamics and on things like passenger room, Mazda’s problem has also to do with supply.
The Mazda3 and 6 are more popular in other markets (which have a great appreciation for handling) – Canada, Australia, Europe, etc.; and the 3 and 6 are up 14% and 28% YTD in the US.
Also, doesn’t help that Mazda only has 2 CUVs, with the CX-9 being really long in the tooth.
I agree 100% about the noise and harshness. I owned a 2011 Mazda 6 for three years and it was ridiculously loud to the point where you literally had to shout in order to be heard by your passengers if you were traveling on the highway. It was horrible. Additionally, the engine was very buzzy and have of a very annoying harmonic around 2200rpm. It could have been timetable if the steering was calculated properly, but I felt like I had to turn it for ages on order to get the car to go left or right. It had very little feedback through the wheel and I joked that the vehicle took steering inputs as mere suggestions. It was very disappointing, and I was glad when I got rid of it.
They win comparison tests with journalists who themselves would never buy one for one or other reason. Mazda did not win comparison test for me because it was not good enough effort by Mazda.
Mazda vehicles seem to appeal to the folks I know who purchase them as great cars for the first month or so. Once the “new car” euphoria wears off these same folks state that they should looked around more and perhaps purchased something else. Rather similar to “Is that all there is?” syndrome. Pretty much the same attitude I’ve heard from Mazda owners (with the exception of the B-Series/Ford Courier pickups) since the late ’70s.
Mazda has aggressive design language that promises performance but compromises ergonomics for rear seat passengers and cargo capacity in models where it really counts. With no performance engines to upgrade to what is the point? The old folks with the money don’t care for them and the younger crowd that used to love them are likely giving Mazda a pass.
I just sold my 2008 Speed3 which I bought new. It was an awesome vehicle and perfect for me. I wish it were more reliable (admittedly I was a punishing diver) but that’s cost of ownership.
As for other reasons why they don’t sell as well, I think the design language of the last generation really hurt them; glad to see them get back to a “Japanese VW” kind of look. Also, Mazda has focused a lot of profitability in the last several years as auto sales and increased. They could easily price their products more aggressively (and I think with additional capacity from Mexico they will).
I do kind of wonder why the Nissan Altima sells so well when the 6 does so poorly.
Tesla reported their Q1 deliveries. They managed to move 10,030 cars so far this year.
Tesla does not report US deliveries. It only reports total global deliveries.
According to Tesla: “We have decided to take this approach because inaccurate sources of information are sometimes used by others to project the number of vehicle deliveries,”
You’d think that if they really wanted to stop all of the estimates and speculation, they’d start reporting monthly with a break-down by country. Within 3 days of the end of the quarter is an improvement, but they need to go further. Otherwise, the estimates and guessing will continue.
Transparency backfires when the details are (a) unpleasant and/or (b) prone to misinterpretation. In Tesla’s case, it’s probably some of each.
Maybe this has been the case for a while and I just noticed now, but Hyundai-Kia has passed Honda?
Subprime works wonders.
This. Forget Hyundai, I am consistently flabbergasted how high Nissan’s share is. I would love to see the geographic breakdown on a zip/county level nationwide as to where Nissan/infiniti owners are.
I have a Hyundai, two Kias, and a Nissan. No subprime here.
I have a Kia, and I paid cash. I’ve heard that Mitsubishi and Nissan cater to “subprime” buyers, but I hadn’t heard that about Hyundai-Kia. Do you have stats to back that up? (On a side note, both of my parents own Nissans, and they pay cash too.)
I would submit that the success of Hyundai-Kia is that they offer compelling products for a reasonably good value (they’ve raised their prices as the brands have gone mainstream, though). Nissan, for its part, offers decent cars at a compelling price. Honda offers compelling products, but charges too much for them.
You are correct. Hyundai-Kia at one time were subprime, but once they got serious about improving the reputation and drive-ability of their cars (2000ish?), they’ve been on a march that has only recently cooled down.
If anything has hurt Mazda, its been H-K – well designed cars with a great warranty. Sure they’re not to Honda-Toyota levels yet at NVH…but they match Mazda and Nissan easily.
Mazda’s halo car only sells tens of thousands a year. They need to rethink a lot of their line up.
Nowadays, H/K have passed Toyota for NVH (the Soul gets better mark for that than the Corolla).
And aside from the misunderstanding about subprime (there are people with good incomes but poor credit scores), the whole subprime argument would have made more sense a few years ago, but even then the Elantra was selling, on average, $500 more than the Civic and $1,500 more than the Corolla.
And the Optima not only has a higher ATP than the Sonata (much less the Camry), but beat the Accord a no. of times last year on average transaction price; not to mention that Kia’s top sellers are the Optima and Sorento (in addition to the Soul which attracts a wide range of buyers) and not the Rio and Forte.
Actually, Honda and H/K both have the same problem – both have limited CUV lineups and no SUVs and no pick-ups (or in the case of Honda, no real pick-ups) in comparison to Toyota and Nissan which both have a larger offerings of CUVs, as well as trucks/SUVs.
In addition to the falling Yen (which has also helped Honda), Toyota and Nissan have been very aggressive on discounting on their cars since they are getting higher margins on their CUVs, SUVs and trucks.
Honda has increased discounting, but not nearly to the extent of Toyota and Nissan and then there’s fleet sales.
The uptick in Kia sales is pretty much attributed to the new Sedona which doesn’t come cheap.
As for Hyundai, there was probably an attractive deal on the Elantra last month and/or greater fleet sales as Hyundai is getting ready for the new model (Honda is offering pretty attractive deals on the Pilot as it is at the end of its life cycle).
GM: 16.2%. Wow. Think it was close to thirty around 1990 and near fifty percent by the late 70s. I’m sure half of that figure are truck sales (Ford’s is prob 2/3rds truck sales)
Sadly you’re right. GM, Ford and ChryCo have gifted away their passenger car markets in the past 20-30 years. Toyota and Honda have become the default choices for millions of people…and I don’t see that shifting back. Both of them make a decent car, and even several that are hella fun. But that market is small and matures quickly.
God forbid is there is a seismic shift in pickup truck loyalty. It hasn’t happened…yet. But if my FIL, a dyed-in-the-wool good ol’ boy frustrated with niggling reliability issues, can throw up his hands and switch his small fleet over to Toyotas as he did in 2005…anyone can.
I suspect they were simply chasing margin, volume, or both much to the detriment of their customers who largely defected to Toyonda as you point out. But in the case of Toyota and Honda owning the market allowed them to become complacent. Honda has introduced a number of flop models (Ridgeline, CRZ, Element, S2000, Crosstour off the top of my head) and then incurred the ire of its customers with a lackluster Civic in I think 2012 (which they fixed to their credit). Toyota ran the Corolla unchanged forever until recently and still runs the Camry and most of their other models off of a circa 2002 based platform.
Yeah GM’s market share is pretty bad. Maybe with a whole slew of new Chevys they will improve? I mean a new Malibu, Volt, Spark, and Cruze in about a year has to do something for their volume right?
GM should be helped a good bit by the new Malibu, Cruze, Spark, LaCrosse, etc. – esp. since the new models increase passenger room.
But GM has been too slow in redoing its CUVs.
Maybe. I suspect it won’t though, in order to gain volume you have to retain your base and attract new customers. The new models may help to retain the base, but as for adding new customers I don’t see it. The models being refreshed are just improved versions of what was already out there (in some cases correcting glaring issues with the current models). Only the magic of subprime is going to increase their volume, IMO.
world’s worst marketing led by the completely incompetent Gerosa protege’ Steve Hill. for years I have continuously claimed reduced share ahead as GM refuses to listen to their top salesman of all time. I predicted 15% NA share and by all indications, I will again be proven correct.