NSX sales
- Thread starter wctsao
- Start date
2002=234 as of yesterday!longbeach blue
another reason sales are off for dec.,no lux tax 01/01/03.
Well, we know sales for the year were up 51 cars. Let's see when those changes occurred:
Jan +23
Feb + 2
Mar + 1
Apr - 2
May - 3
Jun + 2
Jul - 3
Aug +11
Sep +20
Oct +10
Nov - 1
Dec - 9
So we see two surges - one in January, when Acura was offering big incentives on the 2001 cars, and one in late summer early fall, when there were big incentives on the 2002 cars. No surge at all in spring, when the new model first went on sale.
No, the sales figures reported here are by calendar year, not by model year. So yours counts in 2003 sales statistics, Randall.
I think you hit the nail on the head. That's the only thing different about December, and December is the only month that saw a drop of more than three cars.
It may also be that people that did not like the new look decided to buy one of the 2001 still available in December fearing the impossibility to do this later.
It is Honda that is sick and the NSX saga is only a reflection of that. At a time when performance and looks sell, Honda/Acura are too busy with hybrids and minivans. Check these stats: 2002 Nissan UP +19%, Infiniti +35%, Toyota +3%, Lexus +9%, Mits +13%, BMW +24%, Mercedes +7%. Honda DOWN 6% (even Accord and Civic are down), Acura DOWN 13%, (of course,they're both in good company, Ford, Chrysler and GM). It's the Product silly, ask Nissan.
I don't know where you get your numbers, bboxer, but they're just WRONG. You really ought to check your facts before you post; this is the second time you've said things that are untrue in this topic alone.
As you can see from this press release, the fact is, overall American Honda vehicle sales for 2002 increased 3.3 percent for an all-time sales record, with Honda sales for 2002 up 4.3 percent, and Acura sales down 2.9 percent. Honda sold over 52,000 Pilots in 2002 (newly introduced this year) and sales of the Odyssey and CRV are way up. Yes, Accord and Civic sales are down slightly, but they still sell tons more of those models than Nissan does the Altima or Sentra. Last year Honda sold 45 percent more Accords and Civics alone than Nissan and Infiniti together sold cars (all car models excluding trucks/SUV).
I've checked them with this news story, and they're wrong, too - every one of them. Here are the true percentages for 2002 vehicle sales: Nissan (including Infiniti) +5% (and Nissan was down 2 percent in December when Honda was up 10 percent), Toyota (including Lexus) +1%, Mitsubishi +4%, Mazda -4%, Subaru -3%, VW -5%, BMW +20%, Volvo -12%, Mercedes +3%.
Not according to those sales statistics. And not according to this article from Forbes in November, which states:
"In the auto world, there is only one way to make a lot of money: Keep your factories humming and sell everything you make, something at which Honda excels. According to the most recent Harbour Report on automotive manufacturing, Honda's North American plants ran at 100% of capacity last year, the highest in the industry. Toyota was second, at 96%, and Nissan was third, at 89%. Not surprisingly, Honda made more money per car than any other automaker, $1,661. That's nearly $400 more per car than Nissan Motor and $500 more than Toyota. GM was the only domestic producer to make money: just $337 per car. Ford Motor? It lost $1,913.
Last year was Honda's eighth consecutive record sales year. The Accord dethroned the Toyota Camry as the best-selling car in the U.S., and U.S. sales surged by 40,000 cars in an overall down year for the industry, sending its market share to an all-time high of 7%. In Japan, Honda surpassed Nissan as the number-two automaker and was the only major automaker to increase sales. Its subcompact Fit is on track to be the best-selling car in Japan this year. Honda's bottom line was appropriately fat: It earned $2.8 billion last year, more than four times the $601 million GM managed to turn out with three times Honda's sales.
Even after revising downward its sales and profit figures for this year in late October, Honda still expects to post another record at the end of its fiscal year in March. Profit is expected to grow 13% on the back of five new vehicles."
[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 14 January 2003).]
http://world.honda.com/investors/annualreport/2002/14.html
"Net Income
Consolidated fiscal 2002 net income totaled ¥362.7 billion, an increase of 56.2% and a record high. The effective tax rate was 41.9%, 4.5 percentage points lower than for the previous period. Basic net income per common share amounted to ¥372.23, compared with ¥238.34 in fiscal 2001."
"total unit sales in the automobiles segment advanced 3.3%, to 2,666,000. Growth in unit sales and positive currency translation effects pushed segment revenue up 13.4%, to ¥5,929.7 billion. Operating income shot up 62.6%, to ¥520.5 billion."
It's not rocket science and this certainly isn't hidden info. It's usually worth it to check facts before basing sweeping opinions on them...
"Net Income
Consolidated fiscal 2002 net income totaled ¥362.7 billion, an increase of 56.2% and a record high. The effective tax rate was 41.9%, 4.5 percentage points lower than for the previous period. Basic net income per common share amounted to ¥372.23, compared with ¥238.34 in fiscal 2001."
"total unit sales in the automobiles segment advanced 3.3%, to 2,666,000. Growth in unit sales and positive currency translation effects pushed segment revenue up 13.4%, to ¥5,929.7 billion. Operating income shot up 62.6%, to ¥520.5 billion."
It's not rocket science and this certainly isn't hidden info. It's usually worth it to check facts before basing sweeping opinions on them...
spookyp,
You make an excellent point. Just keep in mind that the figures you are quoting are for Honda's 2002 fiscal year, which ended in March 2002. As noted in the Forbes article cited above, both sales and profits are expected to be significantly higher for the 2003 fiscal year which ends two months from now.
The auto industry, including the press release and news story in the links in my previous quote, generally reports U.S. sales figures based on a calendar year.
[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 10 January 2003).]
You make an excellent point. Just keep in mind that the figures you are quoting are for Honda's 2002 fiscal year, which ended in March 2002. As noted in the Forbes article cited above, both sales and profits are expected to be significantly higher for the 2003 fiscal year which ends two months from now.
The auto industry, including the press release and news story in the links in my previous quote, generally reports U.S. sales figures based on a calendar year.
[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 10 January 2003).]
Spookyp,
Your figures are for Honda (Japan). My figures are for AH and from the industry's monthly data as reported every month by Crain Communicaitions (Detroit) and also printed in their weekly newsletter Automotive News. The figures I mentioned were all available on their subscription website and printed in last Monday's issue of Automotive News. Each manufacturer's model and its origin are counted for the month of December 02 and for the 12 months ending 12/31/02. Right next to them are the figures for Dec 01 and the 12 months ending 12/31/01 for comparison.
Your figures are for Honda (Japan). My figures are for AH and from the industry's monthly data as reported every month by Crain Communicaitions (Detroit) and also printed in their weekly newsletter Automotive News. The figures I mentioned were all available on their subscription website and printed in last Monday's issue of Automotive News. Each manufacturer's model and its origin are counted for the month of December 02 and for the 12 months ending 12/31/02. Right next to them are the figures for Dec 01 and the 12 months ending 12/31/01 for comparison.
It's possible that the difference is that the Automotive News figures cited may refer only to cars rather than total vehicles (cars and light trucks such as SUVs and minivans), but in a day and age when the "family car" is just as likely to be an SUV or a minivan, the vehicle total is a better indicator of a company's industry leadership and financial health than ignoring the sales of half the vehicles being sold. The figures above for the Yahoo! news story and the press release from Honda (and consistent with press releases from other companies) are for all vehicles, cars as well as light trucks such as SUVs, minivans, and small pickup trucks.
[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 11 January 2003).]
[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 11 January 2003).]
If you want to read all about "the product, silly", check out the new Car and Driver. There's a comparison of ten family sedans. All were the base model four-cylinder version, except for Nissan's 245-hp Altima. And the Altima still came in tied for fifth, way behind the first-place 160-hp Accord.
The new Road & Track also has a comparison of five family sedans, this time all the six-cylinder versions. The Altima came in tied for third, with the V6 Accord coming in first.
Somebody better tell those engineers over at Nissan that "It's the product, silly!"
The new Road & Track also has a comparison of five family sedans, this time all the six-cylinder versions. The Altima came in tied for third, with the V6 Accord coming in first.
Somebody better tell those engineers over at Nissan that "It's the product, silly!"
I loved Winfield's first line when describing the Altima:
"This is where the guys who move their lips while they read our charts write in to tell us we have the wrong rankings"
Classic
"This is where the guys who move their lips while they read our charts write in to tell us we have the wrong rankings"
Classic
