Toyota's Chairman: "Raise Japanese car prices to help American Manufacturers"

[DallasTitan]

Wow, I guess he knows something nobody else does:


Toyota's chairman urges Japanese Car Cos. to Raise Prices to Help Ailing U.S. Rivals.

TOKYO April 26, 2005; Yuri Kageyama writing for the AP reported that Toyota's chairman is urging Japanese automakers to raise prices or find other ways to even the playing field with ailing U.S. rivals General Motors and Ford in hopes of heading off a possible protectionist backlash in the crucial North American market.

Toyota Motor Corp. Chairman Hiroshi Okuda was quoted by Japanese media on Tuesday as saying the plight of General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. could result in problems for Toyota and other foreign carmakers.

Okuda told reporters Monday that Japan's auto industry must consider a response, such as raising car prices in the United States and cooperating in technology.

"We need to give some time for American companies to take a breath," Okuda was quoted as saying by the Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Japan's biggest business daily.

"I'm concerned about the current situation surrounding GM. Although a trade conflict, like ones (that) happened in the past, may be avoided, there may be some impact (on Japan's car industry) because the car industry is symbolic in the U.S. economy," Okuda was quoted as saying by the Japanese daily Asahi Shimbun.

A Toyota spokeswoman on Tuesday confirmed the quotes from the two newspapers, but added that the company has no plans to raise prices on its U.S. models.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the spokeswoman also noted that Okuda was speaking in his capacity as the head of the key Japanese business lobby Keidanren.

Toyota and other Japanese automakers were the target of U.S. workers' outrage in the 1980s. The Japanese were accused of robbing jobs from American workers and market share from U.S. automakers.

[HavockWK]

This contradicts the info posted in an article a couple weeks ago where Toyota & Honda said "no" to the US about raising their prices to help the US companies. This is freakin rediculous.

[bestatchess]

This sounds like a conspiracy to fix prices in restraint of trade.

[TriKKy]

Yeah I had posted it from CNN....dunno...maybe he rethought. I can kind of see what they are worried about....the gov't stepping in and putting higher tarrifs on imports. The irony here is that the "imports" are mostly made by GM and Ford....but they are "American Companies"

Bottom line is that they really are bad companies, who have lost any and all advantages that they used to have. It is no longer enough to be "American" you have to build a quality product and they are LACKING. This is just insane, maybe they should take the time to improve their cars instead of whining about things like employee healthercare. Last time I checked, the "foreign" companies are opening plants and paying American workers with american wages and benefits and are just doing fine.

Bottom line, GM and Ford have inferior products and the solution should be making those products better.

[HavockWK]

BTW... I don't recall seeing it mentioned recently, but since Chrysler is no longer an American company, Ford & GM are the last bastions of American car companies. Just remember that the next time a moron with a Dodge says anything to you about not buying from an American company.

[rcflier_97]

Shows that maybe GM and Ford need to rethink how they do business. Since I'm not a union guy and never plan to be, I personally think that the union's are dinosaurs that are feeding themselves off the general public. I blame a lot of GM and Ford's current problems on the UAW. IMHO

[rvandam]

Why is everyone getting so worked up about whether your truck is 'from'/'built in' the USA?

We live in a global economy, a direct effect (and a positive one in my opinion) of the US spreading capitalism and democracy around the globe. We don't mind using foreign VCR's, cellphones, etc, but somehow cars/trucks are different? I buy whatever is the best value. If two products are equal in bang for the buck, and one is from the US, I'll buy the one from the US. If not, I'll buy whichever is best. If my Titan was 100% foreign-made, I'd still buy it.

I don't see why I should keep financing the UAW welfare system at GM if nobody blinks an eye when my type of job (software development) is 'outsourced'. It sucks, but at the same time it forces us to do better.

Now, if our children will be able to do that with our current education system, that's a whole other can of worms...

BTW, little statistic from Michigan, the home of the big three:
<<Only one in four believes a good education is essential for getting ahead in life>> the words 'rude awakening' come to mind...

here's the link

[Canada0937]

I can see into the future.....US to tax foreign automakers 110% charging that the respective countries are subsidizing their cars to keep prices low....you seen that happen with the softwood lumber dispute with Canada. Even though the global trade community has recognized that the US was/is wrong in this instance, they keep taxing Canadian softwood lumber exhorbitant amounts and have basically crippled the Canadian lumber mills.

[TriKKy]

Originally Posted by Canada0937

I can see into the future.....US to tax foreign automakers 110% charging that the respective countries are subsidizing their cars to keep prices low....you seen that happen with the softwood lumber dispute with Canada. Even though the global trade community has recognized that the US was/is wrong in this instance, they keep taxing Canadian softwood lumber exhorbitant amounts and have basically crippled the Canadian lumber mills.

This is what Japanese automakers would be trying to avoid by increasing their prices.

[dawgs77]

Originally Posted by rcflier_97

Shows that maybe GM and Ford need to rethink how they do business. Since I'm not a union guy and never plan to be, I personally think that the union's are dinosaurs that are feeding themselves off the general public. I blame a lot of GM and Ford's current problems on the UAW. IMHO

WHOA!!! I'm a Union man and I think your comments are very Ill informed. Dinosaurs...feeding off the general public...... The Teamsters negotiates CBA's that include wages and benefits that well surpass that of non-union companies. Wal-Mart type companies are the ones that feeds themselves off the public killing private ownerships in the process. I can continue for pages....

[Still thinkin]

Originally Posted by Canada0937

I can see into the future.....US to tax foreign automakers 110% charging that the respective countries are subsidizing their cars to keep prices low....you seen that happen with the softwood lumber dispute with Canada. Even though the global trade community has recognized that the US was/is wrong in this instance, they keep taxing Canadian softwood lumber exhorbitant amounts and have basically crippled the Canadian lumber mills.

AMEN to that

[rcflier_97]

dawgs - I knew that someone would come up on line about my comments. I'm curious, (and maybe misinformed), but is the UAW present at the Nissan and Toyota plants or or these non-union? Maybe someone else knows the answer. I'm just curious how the UAW benfits the average consumer in today economy. Maybe I just have heartburn over an organizations that holds so much power over companies that whenever the union thinks that something is not benefiting it, it encourges strikes. Like I said, maybe I'm totally in left-field - please enlighten me.

[GO_VOLS!]

Originally Posted by dawgs77

WHOA!!! I'm a Union man and I think your comments are very Ill informed. Dinosaurs...feeding off the general public...... The Teamsters negotiates CBA's that include wages and benefits that well surpass that of non-union companies. Wal-Mart type companies are the ones that feeds themselves off the public killing private ownerships in the process. I can continue for pages....

Unions served their purpose back in the mid 1900s and ever through the 70s, when workers' rights were nonexistent. Since companies realized that they worked more efficiently when their employees WANTED to come to work and enjoyed their job, unions didn't have to fight for working condition improvements. Instead they turned to ever-increasing hourly rates and outrageous benefits and vacation times. Why? The union exists for itself, NOT the company. To be keep in office, union leaders have to constantly feed their baby. If they don't do a good job, someone else will try to get an easy-street union leadership job by promising even better wages and benefits.

I liken this scenerio to a tapeworm. A tapeworm establishes itself in the digestive system of its victim; feeding off the victims meals, or $ if you would. As the months and years go by, the tapeworm gets larger as grows like a cancer as its victim grows skinny and weak. Finally, the victim is too weak to keep up with its peers and falls prey to another beast looking for an easy meal.

Chrysler was gobbled-up by benz, but GM and eventually Ford will probably just die. Until the unions learn to live in harmony with their host, their fate is marked as such.

[92TripleBlack]

I think its a question of Tarriffs more than anything. Toyota is afraid they will be raised to bail out yet again our automakers. It may also be a way for Toyota to raise prices but look like the good guy doing it.

GM and Ford got themselves into this with huge incentives with low rates of financing and huge price cuts. Now as interest rates are predictably rising, they are screwed. They need to cut the 0% crap and go back to realistic 3.5% etc. rates. They also need to stop making BS cars. GM is coming out with gimmicky crap like the Avalanche and Envoy with the retracable roof. If they had put that money into a new upgraded Silverado, Tahoe, or Camaro, they would have done much better. Ford laid an egg with their 500. Crappy motor from a Taurus, blah styling, and a wierd stance are not what you bet the company on. How can these makers improve?
GM: start eliminating so many models. Why have a cavalier with a Cobalt? What the heck is that Malibu Maxx thing? Anyone other than Hertz buy one? Why have a Blazer with an equinox? Add in that you have Pontiac, Buick, and Saturn and you have way too many choices. Increase the quality of the choice, not the quantity. Better interiors, better quality drivetrains, etc. would go a long way.
Ford: Start getting some adrenaline shots. Sure the GT40 is nice. So is the new Stang GT. But that's it. The entire truckline except for the superdutys is underpowered and the only one left with a 4 speed transmission.

As for regular cars, I've rented them all through hertz, etc. Taurus, Crown Vic, Impala, Malibu, etc are all junk. Compare them to an Accord or Altima and you'd run away. They have poor road feel, steering wheels are thin plasic affairs, loud, missing basic seat adjustments, have cheap materials, and loose handling over 70 mph. I felt slightly out of control in all the above over 70MPH, which is below the speed limit in many states, vs. my G35 that feels no different at 125 mph than it does at 55 mph.

Quick fixes for GM: Drop Buick. Its redundant as was Olds. Most people don't know Chevy was the basic, then Olds, then Buick, then Caddy with Pontiac being the performance renegade division. They now think Chevy standard, Caddy top of the line, Pontiac quirky sporty thing.

Drop Cavalier. Make a new Camaro. Give it a retro 60s look like the stang. Fire the interior team. Sit in a Japanese or European car and tell the new team: make this. Spend a couple hundred bucks more per car and the interior will improve dramatically. Since this is where you are all the time when you are driving the car, it is critical for customer satisfaction to have a nice comfortable interior. Change the GTO and put it into a Grand Prix style body. The original GTO was the wide track, midsize car with a monster motor. Rehire the Add guys from the 60s. One said on TV they should make an add with the GTO nose facing head on to a BMW 3 series in the photo and the caption "How do you get the attention of a BMW owner? Beat him!" on the add. Then list the acceleration, braking and handling stats. Put back in the 60s styling cues: Over under headlights, Cat eye tail lamps, hood scoops, dual exhuast. That would sell.

For Ford, fire the Ford stylists and hire ore like the Lincoln ones. What they don't understand is "The US does not want more boring cars!" Mercury Marauder was on the right track, but it was left without any real balls. If it had firmer suspension, better brakes, and was lowered, it would have done better. The F150 stylers and stang stylers did it right. Get some power options in those drivetrains. Offer some v8s in the 500s and taurus. Sure they won't sell as shown by the Taurus SHO and Marauder, but they will attract the buyers for the other drivetrains as they do in the Mustangs. Add a 5 speed trans to the F150. Increase HP in the motor and get the lightning back already.

Then there's Chrysler. Keep the Germans away from the Jeeps. Every model since the merger has been junk. Get a full size SUV option. Durango is not full size. Make one based on the Ram 1500 with the 6.0 hemi and watch the sales ring. 300, magnum, good job. Put the PT cruiser out of its misery. Make a new caravan that is again the best of the field, not 3rd or 4th. And last, keep improving quality. Chrysler has come a long way, but still lags here and should focus on this the most.

I've owned both Ford and GM. I still have my vette and have had several mustangs. GM does it right on the vette. It is a seperate team effort and has its own plant. GM needs to limit its lineup more get more focused. Killing the camaro but keepig the cavalier around when cobolt was coming out was the dumbest decision i've heard in years. Ford needs to look at what Caddie and Chrylser did to kill its oldman's car image and follow suit.

Toyota is the winner because: They have quality interiors, bulletproof drivetrains, good fuel economy, and decent styling. They don't have speed, huge amounts of choices, power, etc. Nissan wins because it offers power, speed, and reliability. Styling is a little more agressive which some like, some don't. Interiors are better than US quality. Again, they don't have huge amounts of choices, they just win on the quality of what they have.

All done. Just hope we have some sleeper researchers from the big 3 reading this.

[92TripleBlack]

As for uniions, this is just legalized extortion of big business. They are socialist in nature designed to take money from those that have and give it to those that don't. Personally, I think they should be outlawed in most cases. Automakers and construction in particular. Like government, they are wasteful in nature and very inefficient. Ex. A union worker at a car plant near my home when I was growing up had the job of carrying a 2x4 back and forth across the plant. He'd been there for so long he couldn't be fired or the union would freak. However, his job had been eliminated so this was what he was paid to do. In NYC, you couldn't plug in a light with a 3 prong standard plug at Jacob Javits convention center. A certified uniion electrician had to do it. We had to wait 4 hours for a guy to come by and plug in our light for us.

If they were eliminated, wages, jobs etc. would drop immediately. GOvernment should offer free education for workers who are loosing out and want to go somewhere else. Then, people would move on to other professions that need workers. Also, standards should be put in place that require specific training and licenses to do specific jobs such as we have for doctors, financial pros, etc. This would make sure you don't have a yokel wiring your house and give them a reason to charge a higher rate, make a demand for their skills, and allow them to earn a good wage. With regulation instead of uniions, you would increase productivity and efficiency, redistribute labor from where there is too much to where it is needed, and lower the cost of products and services for all, effectively lowering the cost of living for all. Cynics will say the corporations will keep the added revenues. They won't. They are greedy. But the more greedy thing to do would be to increase the size of the company, adding jobs and more output.

Sorry, unions were good things before there were child labor, workmans protection, etc. laws. They were good back in the early part of the 1900s when there was no regulation or control over companies. But like many prograns put in place back then, they no longer apply. The only reason they exist now is because everyone screams bloody murder, crys like a little girl, and predicts doom whenever they are threatened, as well as to enable organized crime, dirty executives, and dirty politicians to line their pockets. And yes I've worked for several uniions over the years in construction and retail sales.