Cars.com Survey: Fewer People Consider Domestics
Last week, we released our American-Made Index, which showed the Toyota Camry taking the top spot away from the vaunted Ford F-150. Part of the AMI’s equation has to do with sales, and, according to a Cars.com survey, the percentage of car shoppers who only consider domestic makes is slipping.
Only 23% of those surveyed said they only considered domestic makes, like Ford and Chevy, when shopping for a new car. That’s down from 27% last year. Most of those defectors said they instead considered cars on a variety of factors, rather than where it was built. The percentage answering that way rose from 64% to 67% this year. Those considering only import brands rose from 9% to 10% this year.
In some distressing news for Chrysler and GM, only 32% of those surveyed said they would consider buying a new car from either company due to their recent bankruptcy filings.
The survey was conducted online in June 2009 with a random sample of 1,088 men and women more than 18 years of age. The margin of error is +/- 3%.
Previous
Subscribe to our feed
Email us your tips!
only 30% of buyers choose a GM or Chrysler product so I'm not sure how 32% is a troubling figure. Besides, in a few months people wont even be talking about the bankruptcies any more. Whats interesting is that GM and Ford have been gaining share, not losing it this year.
I stopped buying domestic cars when they stopped producing station wagons.
American car companies showed me years ago that they weren't interested in my business. Let them fail.
By your logic then just about all car companies should fail except the European ones and Subaru.
Gus seems to have taken something personal.
Hey look its H and Shet teaming up again! Its good to see you "two" are at it again trying to debunk every cars.com post and anyone who doesn't like American cars.
32% would consider a car from GM or Chrysler, and that is good news? That means even less actually would buy a car from them - yet wonderful news.
In a few months people are going to just up and forget the third largest bankruptcy in US history? Sorry don't think so.
While Ford may have been gaining market share, here is a report from Forbes that paints a better picture on the future of GM's market share than all of those GM press releases you read Shet.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/0713/autos-general-motors-lutz-backseat-driver.html
And way to add something constructive Bill
Gus:
CTS wagon comes out next month. Maybe you will like that. The Japanese arent big on wagons either. Domestic automakers stopped making wagons because people lost interest in them.
Belly:
That article (as with everything Flint writes) is trash. Anyone who knows anything about Flint knows that EVERY article he writes about GM or the Domestic auto industry is negative. His position has been and will always be that Detroit will fail so he continues to write articles that predict what he hopes and belives will happen. His prediction that GMC and Buick will disappear and leave GM with 13% share is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. What is that based on? Also he based all his predictions on the premise that GM cannot and will not gain any share with their new models. He simply subtracts from today's share and says they will end up with 13% because he says so. What an idiot. He also says that GM's competitors are fielding strong vehicles just as GM is launching a horde of new vehicles. This is true at Ford but Toyota, NIssan and Honda don't have much new coming out in the short term. GM's two weakest segments are small car and entry SUV. The Equinox/Terrain will address the later and the Cruze will address the former in 2010. If you look at what GM has done in the large crossover segment in 2 years I would think success for the Equinox/Terrain is realistic.
When Jerry Flint can tell that the Lacrosse is a sedan and not a wagon maybe I will take him seriously.
BTW,
Belly marketshare figures dont come from press releases- they come from dividing vehicles sold by one company by total vehicles sold in the industry. GM cannot fabricate markershare numbers. Toyota and Honda have a combined share of about 28% which means that 82% of Americans chose not to buy Toyota or Honda. Pointing out that the majority of customers DONT want to buy from two auto companies is pointless, especially if figures arent provided for competing automakers.
Belly,
How about just read the comments and stop trying to instigate arguments for the sake of arguing. If someone won't consider a vehicle from an American car company or one that is going through bankruptcy then so be it. The only thing I'm trying to "debunk" is that American car companies are not the only ones who aren't interested in Gus' business and therefore should fail by his logic.
Shet, so you don't like Flint, how about Doug McIntyre...
http://247wallst.com/2009/05/07/gms-gm-losses-go-global-and-market-share-collapses/
Or how about Josh Duval:
http://rumors.automobilemag.com/6545603/news/toyotas-market-share-could-top-gms-by-2010/index.html
Belly,
How many of these posts are actually productive? At least mine's not filled with negativity, politics, and advertisements.
So, no, I'm not gonna add anything productive to this post, because all it'll lead to is mindless bitching, not intelligent discussion.
Bill, good cop-out. Don't start it if you can't bring it.
Belly:
I will say I've heard of Flint and Forbes. Never heard of the other authors or sites you are peddling today. I do find it interesting that you and the people you are quoting totally ignore Toyota's 40% decline in sales thus far in 2008 and GM's maitaining of share in spite of all that's going on. Why would I believe that GM's share is going to evaporae in the next 6 months if it hasn't during the slide into Chapter 11? use common sense.
As proven by the Caliber and Magnum. Wagons are niche vehicles. Now wagens or mini-vans disguised as CUV or SUV sell. All about styling and precepation.
Tom
Belly:
The Josh Duval blog was merely relaying information from GLobal Insight. He wasn't even presenting an opinion. Those predictions aren't looking good so far because Ford has surpassed Toyota in sales over the last few months and Toyota has continued to lose share. If you read the prediction its basically saying that GM will lose enough share to fall behind Toyota, not that Toyota is going to overtake GM. We shall see but I wouldn't put money on it.
Shet, you have got to be kidding. Because you haven't heard of the authors their no good?
Seriously, what do you do for a living?
And the only automakers to lose 40% or more of their sales so far in 2009 (2008 was last year right?) are GM and Chrysler. Here are some numbers to back it up
http://www.globalinsight.com/SDA/SDADetail17198.htm
Are you going to tell me you haven't heard of this site either?
I don't deal with government. If before only quality of the product would make me buy it or not buy my car... Today I know one thing - the government will not get me to buy their stuff. Because it is not what we need government for. I don't even buy my liquor in the PA state stores because I don't believe it is government's business to sell the liquor.
I think, we're facing much tougher question here then "should I buy GM or not?". The question is, "should we nationalize companies or not?".
I hope, you know the answers.
Belly,
You obviously don't see what I mean. It's right in front of you. Nearly every comment on this post is negative, condescending, unnecessary, and stupid. Everyone's arguing back and forth like their lives depend on it.
"Don't start it if you can't bring it"...won't even go there. I HOPE you can see that.
Bill, you insulted someone after they posted that they like wagons and won't buy American because they don't make wagons.
Don't try and act all high brow now. Almost all of these posts do come out in a negative tone, and its not like you did anything but help that.
Dave T is probably laughing his a$$ off.
You were right Belly, Toyota's sales were down 38% in 2009, not 40%. I was WAY off. Thanks for the link to clear it up.My point was Toyota is losing marketshare- see if you can find a link to disprove that notion. Good luck.
Tony:
The government doesnt make or sell cars. Never have, never will. Even during WW2 when car companies were forced to make tanks the actual designing and production was not done by the federal government. The government is the source of capital but they do not control the design or production processes. I hope you can see all that.
OS,
"The government is the source of capital but..."
No "but". This is it.
Government Motors. Government Enterprise. I don't care if the team of fashionable Italian designers work on those cars. Since the company is backed by the government, I will not buy their products. Firstly, because I am against the fact our tax money being thrown into enterprises, which government shouldn't touch.
I would consider a Ford but would probably never buy one given I can afford a Honda, Subaru or Toyota. I currently would not consider buying a GM or Chrysler vehicle unless I was buying solely on price and was not very astute about cars in general. Americans know Chrysler and GM invented the cash back rebate so in return you get what you pay for (generally poor interior quality, bland designs, and lousy resale values).
^^^Then why go test drive the new Equinox?
Wife and to a lessor extent curiosity.
Tony:
I'm about the cars, not the ideology. Suit yourself but spare me the speechifying about government involvement in private business. I suspect you weren't interested in GM products before the bailout so lets not act like you had a sudden change of heart. Don't buy Ford or Nissan either since they agreed to take government loans to retool factories.
Dave:
Everything you say is foolish. Why are Toyota and Honda offering record incentives? Why is Hyundai offering rebates that are as high as its Detroit counterparts? Why is Nissan offering $1500 cash back on the Altima? Didn't you just give a positive review of your Equinox test drive? Also, why would you encourage your wife to check out a terrible product from an inept car company? Why not just steer her towards the CR-V and save time?
Wuss:
https://www.alg.com/DepreciationRatings
Check out this link. Malibu gets a 4 star rating for depreciation which is same as Camry and numerous other Toyotas. In fact the C class and ES350 have the same rating.
I've never been a fan of American cars from the early 80s up to current with the exception of Ford and GM trucks, 5.0 Mustangs, and Buick Grand Nationals & T-Types. At heart I'm a Japanese and German car fan with the exception of Toyota. Don't get me wrong, Toyotas are great cars but I find their styling as exciting as a washing machine. However, with that being said, I'm really starting to dig what I'm seeing out of Detroit these days. Especially with Ford, Cadillac, and surprisingly Buick. Chrysler really needs to revamp their entire car lineup. The Charger and Challenger R/T & SRT8's are badass but what's down the line from these beasts? The 300 IMO is passe and only holds water with people who want to put gigantic "look at how insecure I am!" rims on them and paint jobs that make you wish you could temporarily go blind until it passes. The weekends in my neck of the woods look like a low budget rap video but that's beside the point.
At the moment I'm considering 2 vehicles to replace my '99 Altima with over 207k miles. The first is a VW Jetta TDI Sportwagon and the second is a Chevy Colorado with the 5.3L V8. Yes, I know these two are at COMPLETE opposite ends of the automotive spectrum but hey, that's who I am!
OS,
Stop labeling me. I've purchased GM and Chrysler before.
As Ford or Nissan... OS. For and Nissan will get some gov money but they wouldn't do things Gov tell them, unlike GM, which sold their soul.
My suggestion to you. Don't go that way. Deal with government and you will always lose.
Adrian,
I went through the same thing years ago with a Ridgeline and Prius so I know where you are coming from. Hands-down I would go with the TDI. The Colorado ranks at the bottom of it's segment in everything from value to reliability. If you hang onto whatever you choose for at least three years gas prices will certainly increase. You don't want to be stuck with a V8 GM vehicle w/ poor resale value as you'll end up taking a bath. With the TDI as gas prices increase the vehicle will retain value and as long as you take care of it you'll have no problem reselling it. I'm not a fan of VW's however just sit in the Jetta and you'll see what interior quality is all about. Trust me 3-5-7 years down the road having a high quality interior is never a bad thing.
If you are open to (used) alternatives I would recommend looking at: Audi A3, Nissan Frontier Crew Cab, Dodge Dakota Crew Cab w/ 318 V8, or Saab SportCombi wagon. Good luck!
Dave,
Thanks for your advice! I'm leaning more toward the TDI because I just can't cozy up to the looks (mainly the front end) of the Chevy plus my thoughts of where they could possibly be as a company 5-10 years down the road. It's funny you should mention the Frontier and the A3 considering they are both on my short list. I'm actually waiting for the diesel A3 to come out this fall before I make my final decision.
I like Saabs but I'm not quirky or neurotic enough to own one. Plus I don't own a pair of Birkenstocks or anything out of J Crew either. I've driven a Dakota with the 318 but the interior is even more low rent than the Chevy IMO!
Tony:
The board and CEO will run GM. The government has forced a lot of changes but at this point they just want the company to start making money so they can sell their shares. The government will not be running the company.
Shet, like usual, you don't really know what you are talking about.
If the government owns a majority of the shares they can vote in board members that they like. Therefore they can control how GM is run.
As for previous posts, why does it matter only that Toyota is losing market share? How long have they been losing?
You said GM is gaining market share, for what the last month or two months? They have been losing for the last 40 years overall.
And GM won't be gaining market share unless people want to buy their products. That is what the story is about, a survey that indicates very few people are willing to even consider buying a GM vehicle.
Belly:
You arent too bright but I will try and put this simply. The "majority" of people (about 80%) don't buy GM vehicles so its not surprising that a survey shows the "majority" of people polled do not plan to buy a GM vehicle. The majority of auto buyers chose not to buy Ford, Nissan, Toyota or Honda. Got it now?
I know who can elect the board members, the fact is the government is not involved in the day to day decision making and will not be designing, building or selling ANY cars. Period. When you say the government is "running" a company you are suggesting they actually will be making product decisions. The government is going to elect board members that seem capable of leading the company to profitability- which is what board members should be doing anyway.
OS,
don't be a fool. You need to imagine what power does to people.
WSJ asked acclaimed Prof Dr. George Day of the Wharton School, "Dr. Day who will emerge as the benefactor of the new GM?" Day: "The cumulative industry experience of the automotive task force assembled is no greater than the cashier at your local convenience store. I'm confident Mr Ito, Mr Toyoda, and Mr Mulally will capitalize on this historical event. After (GM) dissipating $100 million in shareholder value there's no telling what they're capable of."
Fritz confirmed to the NY Times that any funding allocation exceeding $100,000 has to receive approval from the "Auto Task" force before being implemented. They are now forced to do MONTHLY budget allocation reviews.
Yeah the Government isn't running the company. As Mr T would say, "Put down the Kool Aid and educate yourself Fool!"