Interesting story from the AP

I'm not a GM fan, so I don't have a dog in the hunt, but I think that truck buyers, at least speaking for myself, approach buying a truck the same way I buy a trailer. I'm willing to spend so much and how they break it down for their internal accounting is their business. I look at the bottom line drive-out price and if I don't like it I walk to another seller or I simply don't buy.
I could be mistaken, but when you take a product that is in low demand and lacking in sales and you say you are going to make it more expensive, that just doesn't seem like a real good business model to me. It's the same as the Postal No-Service raising the price of stamps to try to meet expenses because fewer people are mailing letters.

720Deere wrote:
Why do you keep insisting on talking about the F150? Guys are talking about 2500/3500 SRW and dually trucks all throughout the thread and you can only hang your hat on the F150.

This discussion is about the 2014 GM 1500 trucks. GM raised prices on the 2014 1500 trucks. Therefore, the discussion is about half-ton trucks.

Where it is true that Ford extended the model year so that they could continue selling 2013s instead of 2014s to compete with the 2014 GM half-ton.

So, now that you heard from a GM drum, you are trying to change the song!

Enjoy you Blue coolaid this morning.

Why do you keep insisting on talking about the F150? Guys are talking about 2500/3500 SRW and dually trucks all throughout the thread and you can only hang your hat on the F150.

720Deere wrote:

Dadoffourgirls wrote:


Maybe the GM drum beaters should start questioning why Ford does not have a 2014? Maybe they should question the huge rebates that Ford is giving?

Rather than asking invalid questions, maybe the GM drum beaters should do some research and see that the 2014 Fords are on the lots and on the road.

Please provide evidence that 2014 Ford F150 is on the lots and on the road! Additionally, please demonstrate that they are available for public retail. I think that your drum is broken.

Since when are specific questions that directly relate to Ford continuing to sell 2013 trucks at heavy discount invalid?

Until you present answers that are contrary, you are the individual who is stating nonsense.

I could show you 2015 2500HDs that are on the road.

spoon059 wrote:

GM has outrageous legacy costs to cover thanks to over generous union benefits over the years. This is the reason that they can't make a profit selling a comparable vehicle for a comparable price. At one point I read an article that stated that GM was LOSING MONEY on each vehicle it sold because the cost to procure parts, pay employees and cover the pension and healthcare costs of its retiree's was more than the free market was willing to pay for a GM product. This isn't to say that GM doesn't make a good product, its just that the average consumer isn't willing to pay for all the associated overhead costs that GM is contractually obligated to pay. Hence why I think they should have gone bankrupt... so they could permanently settle and restructure those obligations.

UAW negotiators proposed those contracts many years ago and GM AGREED to the terms and SIGNED the contracts. I've been a union member here in Florida for over 30 years. We don't have such generous contracts because our company's management would never sign such a agreement. As far as prices for vehicles, my union built F250 was $3k less than a comparably equipped Ram 2500HD made and built in Mexico. Clinton lied. The savings of cheep labor are not passed on to the consumer. Market determines price. Nothing else. GM will price their vehicles to maximize profits like anyone else.

720Deere wrote:
Using the logic, 50% of what we pay for a truck should be profit for the manufacturer. If that was the case, why did the government have to bail them out? Obviously there is a waste in business, but it is pretty tough to go belly up with a 50% profit margin!

If you think the sticker vs. selling price on these trucks is ridiculous, try looking at furniture! If you pay more than 20% of the "list price" on furniture, you are getting ripped off bad.

GM has outrageous legacy costs to cover thanks to over generous union benefits over the years. This is the reason that they can't make a profit selling a comparable vehicle for a comparable price. At one point I read an article that stated that GM was LOSING MONEY on each vehicle it sold because the cost to procure parts, pay employees and cover the pension and healthcare costs of its retiree's was more than the free market was willing to pay for a GM product. This isn't to say that GM doesn't make a good product, its just that the average consumer isn't willing to pay for all the associated overhead costs that GM is contractually obligated to pay. Hence why I think they should have gone bankrupt... so they could permanently settle and restructure those obligations.

Nobody seems to understand that transporting those heavy trucks back from 2014 to 2013 is very expensive. Seems like false advertising to me to label something 2014 when it came off the line in mid 2013. That's just as shady as increasing the price to give a larger rebate. By the way, sales tax may be calculated on the out the door price, but your insurance rate is determined by the sticker price. Of course, since your truck's resale value is calculated from the average out the door price, your insurance company will never have to pay that sticker price. Now there's a real racket: Base fees on sticker price but only pay claims on depreciated value calculated from out the door price.

720Deere wrote:
Rather than asking invalid questions, maybe the GM drum beaters should do some research and see that the 2014 Fords are on the lots and on the road.

Huh, that is funny...considering SoP of the 2014 trucks isn't until the end of this month, I think the only 2014's on the road would be in Dearborn and near KCAP. I have other sources, but here is the 10 seconds of research I did on the internet:

F150 Job 1

I think GM is trying to shake the cage after seeing the sales figures. It's evident the new RAM is taking a bigger piece of the pie.

Using the logic, 50% of what we pay for a truck should be profit for the manufacturer. If that was the case, why did the government have to bail them out? Obviously there is a waste in business, but it is pretty tough to go belly up with a 50% profit margin!

If you think the sticker vs. selling price on these trucks is ridiculous, try looking at furniture! If you pay more than 20% of the "list price" on furniture, you are getting ripped off bad.