GM Gives Up on the Minivan Market

No so. Chrysler is the American division of DC, as such it is subject to federal corporate income tax laws on the profits earned in the US. The Japanese companies operating within the US are just that, wholly owned sales companies and not subject to US tax laws. Japanese companies operating in the US do not pay federal corporate income taxes on the millions in profits, earned in the US on the cars sold or assembled in the US. Japanese corporations do not have that tax advantage in Europe. That is one reason Japanese cars do not sell as well in Europe.

mike

You have it backwards. GM, Ford and Chrysler developed new vehicles to expand their market then the Japanese follow suit. Most of the expansion of the market for Japanese vehicles, over the past ten years, has not been in cars but rather in markets developed by the domestics, minivan, light trucks, SUVs, crossovers etc. and they did it by copying what the domestics have developed. Most of the vehicle the Japanese sell around the world are far different than what sells best for them in the US.

Whether you like it or not both GM and Ford outsell any Japanese manufacture in the US because more American prefer the vehicles they have to offer ;)

mike hunt

You are living in the past it seems. Minivan are like film cameras and video tape equipment, one can still buy that stuff but the market is going digital. LOL

mike

I would disagree with you on this. Station wagons are making a comeback since they are so practical. They were dumped for their image for minivans. Minivans are slowing down for their image and sport-utes arose. Sport-utes are fading in favor of cross-overs. Just cycles. Their is still money to be made selling minivans. They are here to stay.

My current car desire is for a Sebring sized station wagon. Since the Big 2.5 don't produce one, "imports" such as the Subaru have to be on my short list.

FOLLOWING is the word Mike. Subaru is having a chuckle I'm sure.

Ah yes, you are thinking clearly.

So the Japanese recognize the market and sell to it. Good for them. However they haven't followed everything the Big 2.5 have tried to push on us, such as the Chryslers 300s that are now filling up dealers lots.

Then we have the Big 2.5 not keeping up with significant engine developments such as VVT and Hybrids. They are many years behind the Japanese there and are now having to buy these technologies from the Japanese companies.

Buyers once bought hatchback models, as well ;)

mike

Ford sells more of them in a Month the Suby sells in a year ;)

mike

Buyers didn't stop wanting hatchbacks. ( a useful configuration )

Detroit stopped selling them !

An artilce in the Hartford Courant this morning says according to Edmunds Magazine the Honda Oddesy and Kia Sedona rank better than the Chrysler.

Duh. So did most everyone else. Do you think it was because they were not selling? ;)

Mike

Well that is one opinion. However the most important opinion, of what most buyers believe, are the sales numbers. Chrysler sell more in few months than they sell in a year. Obviously that is the most accurate 'opinion,' of which is ranked better. ;)

mike

I've had quite a few minivans, albeit mostly Dodge Caravans. They get good gas mileage, have good power -- and I could stack 4' X 8' sheets of plywood between the wheelwells and get the rear hatch door shut -- while my Dakota pickup (longbox) didn't have 4' between ITS wheelwells, nor the length required! Also, as other posters said, excellent for camping, firewood, equipment, etc. From a practical standpoint, my Caravan c/v (cargo) was probably one of my favorite vehicles I've ever had.

I disagree. they're great haulers for home projects. I get 26-27MPG on trips carrying a lot of gear! and average over 20MPG driving "around town". Crossovers are too small to carry a sheet of plywood or drywall. You need a larger SUV to do that...then you're in the 16MPG gas mileage range. No thanks!

I thought that once. Then we bought a minivan and got 15mpg around town, had to remove seats and store them somewhere to haul anything. Visiting my parents in the mountains of WV would eat up our brakes so I ended up needing to replace brake pads and rotors once a year. Being front wheel drive based it required regular alignments to keep from ruining tires. I bought a full size extended cab 4x4 truck and get better gas milage and don't have to do any maintenance but change the oil and can still carry the same amount of people but don't have to remove any seats to carry cargo.

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re:GM Gives Up on the Minivan Market From: Eugene To: Date: Saturday, November 25, 2006 8:39:23 PM

Something was wrong with the mini-van you drove. I've been driving them for over 20 years now. Brakes last me on average 40K-45K miles, I've done maybe 2-3 alignments over those 20 years with tires lasting 60K miles or better (I had one set of Michelin's last over 80K miles). My current 97 Grand Caravan with the 3.3 V6 has _averaged_ 21MPG mixed driving over the past 3 years (I log mileage from every fill-up) with the *worst* tank at just over 17MPG and the best tank at slightly over

28MPG. Some of the miles were spent in western Maryland and Pennsylvania (mountainous). The only ting I share experience with you is the issue with removing the seats. However, some of the new models have solved that issue with under-the-floor seat storage. I did own a truck in there as well. It was nice with plenty of utility, but *much* more expensive to operate and maintain and far less comfortable on trips.