Latest Mis-Leading Tundra Commercial
in [Toyota Trucks]
|
From: john on 27 Oct 2009 00:08 Actually you had it exactly the opposite. The F-150 is a solid workhorse, and Chevy has a strong product as well. Tundra's flimsy engineering is no where near them. The 2009 Tundra sales so far is as weak as in 2006, before it's current generation's launch. So even Dodge Ram from the bankrupt Chrysler is doing better this year. And in "every month of 2009, one or more of the domestic light-duty pickups has sold at a higher price than the Toyota product. This past September, average transaction prices for the Ram 1500 ($35,503) and F-150 ($34,824) were 7% and 5%, respectively, above that of the Tundra ($33,278)." I'm surprised people actually pay $33K for a Tundra. Must be weekenders. Read: http://www.freep.com/article/20091016/BUSINESS01/91015059/1331/business01/After-strong-start--Tundra-stumbles- On Oct 23, 9:41 am, SMS <scharf.ste...(a)geemail.com> wrote: > The Tundra is a very popular truck for contractors. It's expensive, but > it's much tougher than the trucks from Ford like the F150, and they last > for a very long time. The F150 is more for the weekend warrior that > needs to occasionally tow a boat, or pick up a load of stuff from Home > Depot. They were popular car replacements for a long time, but they > really can't be considered "work trucks."
From: john on 27 Oct 2009 00:10 Tundra is for weekend parenting. On Oct 26, 8:25 am, Big Endian <5...(a)hex.com.invalid> wrote: > the tundra is for urban cowboys. F-series is for real work.
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 27 Oct 2009 10:13 "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message news:hc6u39$uho$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... That sure was a lot of data in your last message. But there's still some important data missing. You still can't show data which indicates how many people buy trucks "just to have", vs those who buy them because of their work. That data would also need to be broken down by brand. You've made claims which require this data in order to be believable, but you've never shown the data. That's probably because such data doesn't exist.
From: SMS on 27 Oct 2009 10:51 JoeSpareBedroom wrote: > "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message > news:hc6u39$uho$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > > That sure was a lot of data in your last message. But there's still some > important data missing. You still can't show data which indicates how many > people buy trucks "just to have", vs those who buy them because of their > work. That data would also need to be broken down by brand. You've made > claims which require this data in order to be believable, but you've never > shown the data. That's probably because such data doesn't exist. You have to look at the big picture. Consider that people shopping for a vehicle at a Ford dealer will often purchase the F150 rather than one of Ford's rather poor sedans, coupes, or SUVs. That's how you end up with the F150 often being the "best selling vehicle in the U.S." No one thinks that all those buyers are contractors; those F150s are the daily commute vehicle for most of the buyers. People shopping for a vehicle at a Toyota dealer have a selection of excellent cars, trucks, and SUVs. Few Toyota buyers are going to choose a large pickup truck, with its rather poor MPG, as a passenger vehicle for daily use. That's why Tundra buyers tend to be people that are using their trucks for real work, not weekend warriors hauling bags of potting soil home from Lowe's or Home Depot. The market for personal vehicles is much larger than the market for real work trucks, that's why the F150 sells well.
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 27 Oct 2009 10:57
"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message news:4ae708da$0$1648$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... > JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message >> news:hc6u39$uho$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> >> That sure was a lot of data in your last message. But there's still some >> important data missing. You still can't show data which indicates how >> many people buy trucks "just to have", vs those who buy them because of >> their work. That data would also need to be broken down by brand. You've >> made claims which require this data in order to be believable, but you've >> never shown the data. That's probably because such data doesn't exist. > > You have to look at the big picture. > > Consider that people shopping for a vehicle at a Ford dealer will often > purchase the F150 rather than one of Ford's rather poor sedans, coupes, or > SUVs. That's how you end up with the F150 often being the "best selling > vehicle in the U.S." No one thinks that all those buyers are contractors; > those F150s are the daily commute vehicle for most of the buyers. > > People shopping for a vehicle at a Toyota dealer have a selection of > excellent cars, trucks, and SUVs. Few Toyota buyers are going to choose a > large pickup truck, with its rather poor MPG, as a passenger vehicle for > daily use. That's why Tundra buyers tend to be people that are using their > trucks for real work, not weekend warriors hauling bags of potting soil > home from Lowe's or Home Depot. > > The market for personal vehicles is much larger than the market for real > work trucks, that's why the F150 sells well. Maybe, but without data (which doesn't exist), your theories do nothing but invite yet another detour in the discussion. Hunter should come along shortly, sputtering & drooling with another of his drunken, misspelled opinions. But still, there will be no data. There may be a few dealerships where real sales training is done, and the salespeople proactively ask buyers how they plan on using their trucks. But we'll never know because nobody polls car salesmen on this subject. I wish somebody would prove me wrong, though. It would mean that there was more sales professionalism in the car business than previously thought. That would be a win-win situation in so many ways. |