Cost per Car of Ads...

Page 1 of 2  
I was watching CBS news last Friday. One segment was talking about the increase in car sales in April. They said the yearly rate would be something like 12 million cars assuming the sales increase is
maintained. Later they were talking about car ads and the amount of money spent on ads. The segement claimed that in 2010 somewhere between 14 to 16 Billion dollars would be spent on car ads. They weren't clear on whether that included local dealership ads, but even if it does, it seems like a lot of money. It is over $1,100 per new car. I suppose you might spread it over used cars also, but still it seems like a lot of money per car in ads.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
C. E. White wrote:

That's about right. That includes both automakers and dealers. I don't know if it includes what the automakers and sometimes dealers use to attend auto shows like the NY Auto & Detroit auto showsand, but I suspect it does.
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2008/09/02/098375.1-lg.jpg -> This is through 2008, but you get the picture.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 05:02 AM, C. E. White wrote:

back in the office ed? you know all about marketing costs, don't you.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 05/04/2010 6:02 AM, C. E. White wrote:

And think, much of it is taxpayers money from GM & Chrysler.
Be interesting to see the actual per vehicle cost per model. Good cars sell themselves an say 16 billion over 12 million cars, knocking $1333 off the price might go further would be average. But I suspect they advertise slow movers more.
--
Liberal-statism is an addiction to other peoples money.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Another way to look at this - Car ads are paying for some of my favorite TV programs. I think Toyota alone paid enough to cover the cost of braodcasting the NCAA Final Four Basketball Games last Saturday. Seemed like every other commercial was from Toyota, with Ford covering at least another third. Throw in a few from GM and Subaru and there was no time left for deodarant commercials.
It seems like Beer and Car Ads are paying for most of my "free"TV.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 08:20 AM, C. E. White wrote:

like the taxpayer is paying for your client to ship their jobs overseas?
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 05/04/2010 9:30 AM, jim beam wrote:

It is inevitable autos are imported like PCs, TVs, iPods, furnature, toys, kitchen anything...etc...
Two huge reasons. First is net household incomes are down big time. Less money for autos. More taxes coming too. No pricing elasticity for any NA auto maker.
Even GM will import most autos if they get away from being Government Motors. DC will sell GM as DC is starting to feel the debts curse.
I know I will not buy UAW/CAW after they sold out fellow tax paying workers with the bailout gouge.
Kia did real good in March sales too as people are discovering they are good cars and more afordable than many a big names.
--
Liberal-statism is an addiction to other peoples money.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 10:04 AM, Canuck57 wrote:

so how is it that toyota can manufacture vehicles in n.a., using locally sourced n.a. componentry, and make a profit, but g.m. can't?
how is it that g.m. can manufacture in europe at a profit using european sourced componentry, significantly higher labor costs and higher infrastructure costs, but they can't in n.a.?
wtf do our politicians think they're doing bailing out a dinosaur that can't manage their way out of a wet paper bag and who then turn around and outsource their jobs and component supply to a communist dictatorship that ignores human rights, slaughters political dissidents, and steals our intellectual property?

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I believe that if you include only "direct" costs, GM does manufacture vehicles at a profit. They just don't make enough per vehicle to cover all the overhead costs (pensions, benefits, interest, etc.).
Not all Toyota are produced in the US and even the ones that are don't use 100% US sourced componets. The highest domestic content Toyota is the Sienna, which is about 85% doemstic content. The non-hybrid Camrys are about 75% domestic content. Depsite all youer hyperbolic claims with regards to out sourcing, GM still has the highest average domestic content for US sold vehicles of any of the major auto manufacturers. It is irrational for you to praise Toyota for the domestic content of its US vehicle and then turn around a trash GM for building vehicles with a higher average level of domestic content. It is clear you have an axe to grind with GM. It is also clear that you don't care about the truth.
In the US, Toyota has lower labor costs and is not saddled with the pension costs for retired UAW workers. Toyota was not as dependent on the revenues from SUVs and Trucks as was the case for GM. Neither is Toyota as dependent on US revenue as is GM. When the SUV/Truck market in particular, and the auto market in general, crashed, Toyota was not as badly hit as GM, although like GM, they went to their home (Japan) government for financial assistance. And like GM, Toyota benefited immensely from various US and Local Government auto subsidies (cash for clunkers, hybrid rebates, tax breaks for plants, etc).
Loaning money to GM was not a great idea. But even worse was the way the US Government eventually nationalized GM and gave it to the UAW. Maybe it will work out, but I can't see how it was legal. The Government should have let GM go into bankruptcy. But they didn't.

GM has been losing money in Eurpoe for at least the last 2 years . Unfortunately it is hard to find the GM annual reports for 2009 and 2008 on line. They seem to be lost between the new "GM" and the old "GM" (now Motors Liquidation Corp).

How is GM any different than Toyota? Toyota and it subsiduaries have set up numerous plants in China. Why is it OK for Toyota to operate in China and not for GM to do the same? Have you checked the labels on many things you buy lately? Do you trash any manufactuer who uses Chinese made parts in the items they sell? If so, the list of comapnies you are attacking must be very long indeed.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't have a client, so this statment is ridiculous.
How many US companies aren't importing at least some items from China? Do you attack any company doing buisness in China? I'll bet significant portions of the very computer you are using to post to usenet were made in China. Maybe you should stop supporting the Chinese by smashing your computer now...

Robbing is bit strong. Are you for or against free trade? Should the US Government erect trade barrier to prevent the importation of foreign auto components?
On the one hand you attack GM for bad management and taking US Government loans. On the other hand you don't want them to source components form the low cost suppleirs. Do you think GM buys parts in China becasue they like the Chinese?
I'd prefer to buy US made items and do so when possible. Unfortunately it is very difficult to do in many cases (clothes, electronics).
I still don't see how you can attack GM and then praise Toyota, when Toyota is repsonible for moving far more jobs offshore than GM is.

I am not in favor of this. However, as I keep pointing out Toyota has also benefited from US government subsidies.

And you know this how? I see you finally found your caps shift key. Printing something in all caps doesn't make it true. But even if true, it is a difference without a distinction. Both companies are operating in China. Both companies are supporting all the horrors you associate with China. Whether some of the parts Toyota is making in China are shipped to the US or not is irrelevant (but I think it is very unlikely that Toyota is not importing parts from China). Toyota's operations in China are supporting the same country you trash GM for supporting. Your position on this (ie. Toyota's actions compared to GM's) is both hypocritical and irrational. .

And GM has? I am pretty sure that for most of the last 20 yers GM has paid significant US income taxes. GM dealers have paid more. Income and SS Taxes on GM workers have been significant. Sales taxes on GM vehciles are significant, etc., etc., etc. I suspect if you add up all the government revenue associated with GM produced vehicles it exceeds the recent loans to GM. I can't prove it, but I know you cannot prove the opposite.
And Toyota has been getting significant tax breaks for at least the last 14 years if you include all the incentives from various states to Toyota to induce Toyota to locate plants in their jurisdictions. The recentl hybrid tax credits were essentially a subsidy to Toyota. The cash for clunkers program was a nother subsidy that benefited Toyota greatly.

I should know better than to respond to you comments, but I just can't stand to sit by and watch you spew your vennon without commenting.. I know you'll never admit your comments are inspired by some sort of insane and itrrational hatered of GM, but at least others might understand you are spiteful, irrational (at least with regards to GM) and narrow minded.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 12:38 PM, C. E. White wrote:

you don't shill for g.m. ed? don't they pay you for all that hard work you do in office hours?

how many are doing it at the taxpayer expense ed?

actually, i buy american wherever i reasonably can. and i let vendors know why.

ed, on this you have a point. but i'll ask you - where is the strategic sense in allowing all our "domestic" manufacturers to use cheap exploited labor in china? not only does it prop up a despotic regime that threatens our allies, it's also not exactly smart to have every p.c. the department of trade and defense departments using hardware that comes rootkitted from factory. motorola proved that. boeing are doing their best to follow.

no it's not. if i'm paying someone to take my job away, "rob" is not only apt, it's probably somewhat of an understatement.

i'm absolutely against having foreign auto components imported from a despotic regime at taxpayer expense and at the cost of american jobs. abso-freakin'lutely.

yes i do. and because they, like you ed, have zero moral integrity. if toyota can make cars in the u.s. from u.s. components, and do so profitably, then so can g.m. just like they do in high-cost locations like europe. end of story.
that they lack the will or political incentive is a matter for our elected representatives to be made aware of in no uncertain terms.

then you need to shop around ed. i do.

eh? so when toyota set up factories in kentucky [etc], that's moving american jobs "offshore"??? that's pretzel logic, ed. pretzel logic.

to the tune of $30+ billion??? and still export their component sourcing to china? i don't think so ed.

utter bullshit. for the n-th time, china won't let you sell in their market unless you manufacture there. it's so they can steal our designs and processes. and that doesn't mean you have to manufacture for your u.s. markets there like g.m. does.
btw, the japanese, partly because of their history with china, and partly because they seem to be a good deal smarter than the u.s., don't manufacture anything "competitive" there, only the cheap crap they don't mind having stolen.

bullshit.
1. see above.
2. toyota is not exporting american jobs to china at american taxpayer expense. g.m. is.

then you're conveniently ignorant of the facts ed!

eh? don't you ever read your client's public accounts? g.m. have done nothing but whine for subsidy, concession and favor for decades. it's disgusting.

and g.m. doesn't??? that's bullshit.

cash for clunkers was engineered by your client - g.m. the fact that g.m. had nothing but crap to sell and flopped miserably is not toyota's fault.

astroturfing is "commenting"??? in a strictly first amendment sense of the word, i suppose it is, but on a moral level, to shill for the company that is driving the chinese trojan horse deep into the heart of american society at taxpayer expense is utterly disgusting. you should be ashamed.

yeah, i'm "irrational" and narrow minded - i want my tax dollars to work for americans, not chinese despots that are selling missiles to our enemies, stealing our jobs, stealing our technology and intellectual property, hacking our government networks and those of american businesses like microsoft and google, and are threatening our allies. i'm old-fashioned like that.

goddamned shill.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You have no idea what my office hour are. And who's dime are you posting your triades on? You post more often and more regularly than I do. And you seem to have a no track message anti-GM, protect Toyota agenda. My guess is that you are some low level grunt stuck in the back room of a failing company and you are striking out at GM becasue they dumped your company as a supplier. aybe Toyota is still buying form you for now...but when Toyota figures out you are dependent on their buisness, look out...

Probably all of them, since the US isn't getting tax revenue from the producers and workers making the Chinese, Japanese, Phillipine, Thai, Brazilian, etc. componets.

Actually I agree with you. Fix it. When it comes to sending jobs to China, GM doesn't hold a candle to electroincs and computer companies, textile producers, etc.

So you are goign to lanch a hate filled attack on Toyota for importing complete vehicles that include no doemstic content at all? How many American jobs were lost when my Mother,Sisters,and SO bought Japanese built vehicles (three RAV4's and 1 Highlander) instead of Escapes and Edeges?

This is the sort of ridiculous statement that makes you look like an idiot.

As I have pointedout numerous times, GM has not made money in Eurpoe since around 2007. And Toyota only uses some US components. The average Toyota is only about 70% "domestic" these days (it has actually gone down for the last couple of years). Many Toyota models have little or no domestic content. The most "domestic" Toyota is the Sienna, and it is only has about 85% domestic content.

OK, but you need to start with the worst offenders. And GM isn't even close compared to almost any company in the computer or electroics industry. Heck, even the building supply companies are worse than GM...I hope you don't have any of that Chinese made drywall. And when you get the anti-free tradeball rolling, don't be surprised if Toyota is a target.

And yet you buy Hondas....
I do to, but I am often shocked how hard it is to find non-chinese items. I needed bearing for my grain drill last year. I had two choices, "chinese" bearings and supposedly US made bearings. The US made bearings turned out to be Japanese...go figure. The only disc opener blades available came from Brazil, and it took be 6 months to get those.

A higher percentage f Toyota componets come from offshore than is the case for GM. If you care about maintaining US jobs, you should purchase cars with the highest possible domestic content, which is GM on average.

You have no basis for this claim. What is the number one selling brand name in China...I think it is Buick. GM is doing exactly the same sorts of things in China as Toyota is.

And exactly what sort of high technology stuff is GM manufacturing in China?
Meanwhile Toyota and its subsiduaries have factories manufacturing, amng other items:
complete engines automotive fuel injection componets automotive processors diesel injection systems batteies for hybrid vehicles complete vehicles filters
If you want to confrm this visit the Toyota and Denso corporate web sites and learn the facts.

Not bullshit. You are irrational and hypocritical.

You have zero basis for this claim.

No, I am not. You clearly hope I am, since you depend on the ignorance of others to spread your hateful message. In 2005 GM paid 215 million in US (state and federal) income taxes. In 2004 157 million. In 2003 731 million. In 2002 $644 million. etc, etc., etc. Millions (billions) ore were paid in property taxes, social security taxes, sales taxes, etc. Millions more were paid in overseas income taxes each year.

Any references? Has GM asked for anything that other companies haven't "for decades"?

Not to the extent that Toyota has benefited from plant location incentives. For sure, GM, like most companies, extorts as much money from local governments as possible. But I was not claiming that GM didn't benefit from such programs, I was just pointing out that Toyota has also benefited from Government give away programs.

Toyota was a supporter of the program as well. In fact I think every car company and car dealer in America was behind the program. I suppose Obama was behind similar programs in Europe and Japan as well.

I'd like to know what sort of warped world you live in. No compnay would waste a dime on arguing with a putz like you. And I really should stop. If you were merely an ignorant fool, then maybe I could show you the light, but you are a spiteful narrow minded ignorant fool with an axe to grind.

I think you should be ashamed because of your ridiculous hypocrisy. You are perfectly willing to excuse Toyota's invvolvement with the Chinese by making irrational excuses, while attacking GM for nothing more than buying components from the lowest cost suppliers.

No you are a hypocritical fool. No matter what you claim, the fact is, GM cars on average contain a hgher percentage of domestically produced components than do the average Toyota cars. And while the Japanese may be our allies today, that wasn't true 75 years ago, and might not be true five years from now.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 07:00 PM, C. E. White wrote:

i know that you're pretty damned reliable posting here 9-5 m-f. complete with your diligently interned stats and "research".

my own ed.

not in office hours ed.

weasel words ed - i'm actually not "pro" toyota. but i sure am anti g.m. exporting american jobs at taxpayer expense.

no ed, you're the one that needs to look out - you'll get burned alive in your own trojan horse.

ah yes, the list of american companies living on ±$30bn american taxpayer bailouts and exporting their jobs to japan, the philippines, thailand and brazil is long and illustrious. oh, wait, it's not. and none of those countries are despotic regimes that sell missiles to our enemies or steal our intellectual property. unlike g.m. exporting jobs to china at taxpayer expense.

if we want to throw money about, we should use it to fund automation investment, keep all production stateside, and keep all our technology/industrial muscle at home. if you have a shred of integrity left, go see your beltway buddies and make it happen ed.
the end.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 05/04/2010 11:40 AM, jim beam wrote:

Good question. Better management, less union, better design, better reputation making for better pricing.

Lack of NA management and no UAW/CAW. More automation. Better local business practices with suppliers. Stricter (although still inadaquate) pension and benefits maangement.

Don't ask me. I only have a theory and it goes like this. Lots of the heads of these are Harvard boys.
Barack Obama - US President, head of the biggest debtor of them all. Michael Ignatieff - LPC Leader, wants more debt and taxes, pro bailout. Rick Wagoner - Former GM CEO, bankrupt. Robert Nardelli - Chrysler CEO, bankrupt. Stephen Feinberg - Cerberus/Chrysler and GMAC, bankrupt.
I call them the Harvard Bailout Boyz. All were very much all for bailouts. But to know why I believe there is a link is Carlyle's client list. Remember Carlyle also got Lehmann assets at firesale prices which had a GM component to it. What is with Carlyle?
Bush Sr. and Dan Quayle come to mind for starters. But there are others but the names escape me. But one important one is Osama Bin Laden's brother in Saudi Arabia. Ever wonder why Osama, sorry, Obama bowed so perfectly when in Saudi Arabia? Or perhaps why Bush never could get Osama Bin Laden? Maybe why Obama doesn't go after Osama?
Unions, they were just pawns, used like pawns too. They get a lot of heat, but willing they were to sellout fellow taxpayers for the perception of jobs. Sure helped the Canadian third string NDP (socialist/union) party try to bribe the Bloc party for their votes in parliament for a NDP/Lib/Bloc coupe d'etat. Fortuantely that failed as Harpo Conservative caved in and added to GM's & Chrysler's bailout. Also wrote off $500M of Chryslers tax debt, pretty heavly load of corruption for the Canadian tax base.
I do believe there are influences going on revolving around money. Ask yourself why some banks got bailouts and others didn't? Who were their clients? Heck, if I have a billion on deposit with a bankrupt bank you can bet your boots I would be calling senators, congress people and the president. I am sure if my last name was Buffet, Gates, Rockerfeller, Walton and a list of others I would get the presidents ear for 5 minutes. And what is $2 million to "contribute" around to assure your uninsured bank account does not discipate in DC red ink.
Bush Jr started this (remember his dad's ties with Carlyle and needing a job post election), Obama was swiftly brought in as Mr Fast Track to the top and carried the bailout torch well... can't let honest Palin see the book, OMG... What would happen if internal DC bad doings went public?
Then there is the masonic thing, but will leave it up to you.
Just a theory, would make a good fiction suspense movie though.

--
Liberal-statism is an addiction to other peoples money.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And as mentioned earlier, MUCH lower pension and health care costs for retired workers.
--
TJH

tjhiggin.at.hiwaay.dot.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/06/2010 07:01 AM, T.J. Higgins wrote:

that doesn't explain it. g.m. have been making profits on their well managed and well run european operations, and european pension/health care costs [along with virtually every other cost too] are /way/ higher than here.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Costs have little affect on profitability. Selling price does. You have to know both to do a comparison between US and Europe
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

So a car that costs $100,000 to build will be real profitable at $25,000? Both costs and selling price are part of profitability. In fact, profit = selling price - costs.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

No, I didn't say that, you are just using a dumb analogy. A car that costs $100,000 to build is profitable at $100,001 though.

But if you can get the right selling price, it does not matter what the cost is. If the marketplace in Europe allows for a higher selling price, GM can make a profit even with higher cost.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Yet, GM is not making a ton of money in Europe, either. IIRC, around 2006, they were making a bit of a profit in Europe to help offset their losses in the US, but not any more.
In Europe, there is plenty of competition, including from Asian brands. And more to come.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.