If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
In article >, Nicholas Anthony wrote:
> four per dealership. I bet if they had increased production there would be > much fewer BMW's or Corvettes sold. Of course. It's going to come down to availablity for a lot of people. The chevy dealer a few blocks away from me has no trouble keeping Corvettes in stock and quite clearly sells them in volume, not as sacred relics. I doubt a BMW dealer is going to give a buyer any problems over a 335i either. Meanwhile Ford dealers are going to play games over their only model in this market segment. > I just left a local Ford dealership and > asked about the Shelby GT that comes out in January. They said they were > also going to cost $20k over sticker, sigh... Ford needs to change this > mentality people do remember and when the Camaro and Charger come out will > throw it back in their face if they could. I am tempted to wait until they come out just for that. Odds are the GT500 will be canceled for low sales before that happens. Low sales with all this interest because the dealer network upped the price far out of wack with what the car is and the buyers went elsewhere. > IMO that is the only reason why > they are getting away with this, no competition. Personally I would buy a > Corvette over a Shelby GT costing $55k more car for the money and a weight a > sports car should be. The vette isn't exactly a lightweight, but for the prices dealers are asking for the GT500, one can get a top of the line vette or close to it or an M3 or various other cars that are simply more bang for the buck. > Greed is what is killing this company. A great example of this is buying a > bunch of the European luxury makers and forgetting what Henry Ford believed > in the first place, a car for the common man. There really isn't a problem with them having said makes. The big problem is that most of the Ford line is boring crap. The 500, a warmed over volvo if I remember right, isn't doing it. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
In article >, Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> In the end no one is holding a gun to a buyers head and forcing him to > pay a given price. You know who really sets the price? It's the buyer. > If no one is willing to pay the dealer's asking price then they will > eventually lower the it until the car sells. It's a real simple concept. Absence of a gun to your head is not the definition of a free market. > The reason the prices are silly right now is there are a few people > willing to pay what I consider and outrageous price for the few > available cars. Didn't I just finish writing that? > Once the dealers wade through these buyers and the cars > aren't moving at the current prices they will have to lower the price to > get off the inventory. Maybe. >>> You are absolutely right, the buyers set the price, not the >>> dealers. If any one of us had a vintage GT500 we would sell it for the >>> highest price we could get and not a penny lower. >> New in production cars are not collector items. There are no more vintage >> GT500s being made. There X surviors and that's it. There are Y people >> that want them. Apples and oranges. > And there will ultimately be a limited number of GT500s. There will ultimately be a limited number of Foci, just as there are a limited number of Tempos and Pintos. > A vintage > GT500 falls under the same supply and demand forces as a 2007 GT500. No it doesn't by the very fact the 2007 GT500 is in production. There will never be another '67 GT500, only less. > If > Ford made GT500s like they make Fusions what do you think the price > would be? MSRP or less just like every practically other production new vehicle on the market. > You and I are no different from Ford. We all will take the > highest price for whatever item we are selling. I would weigh permantly ****ing off customers and getting customers to look at vehicles from other manufacturers into the equation. I would consider those long term losses to be more important than the short term gain. But hey, I am not chairman of Ford as it loses billions every quarter. The short term thinking seems to be working out well for them don't you think? > I don't fault the > dealer for getting the highest price they can command. It is the way > capitalism works. Yes, capitalism in practice is rarely free market. It's about manipulating markets and creating monopolies really. > I will be ****ed off at Ford if they don't produce > the number of units they have stated. Which is exactly what will happen as people end up buying something else because Ford dealers wanted an extra 20 grand. > If they don't there is a good > chance I will not be a Ford only buyer anymore. That is how I will make > my statement on the matter. Then we are in agreement. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
In article >, Mark Henry wrote:
> When he says that's not the real price, that it's actually $70k then > tell him you'll be back in with the local investigative news program to > ask him why he's running a bait-and-switch. Be reasonable, but be a > little loud about it and watch what happens. The sticker isn't advertising. The sticker is just what the manufacturer MSRP is and nothing more. It was to let buyers know what the MSRP is. The dealer is apparently playing by the letter of the law. If the dealer removed the window sticker and replaced it with their own at $70K that would be a story for the news people. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
Brent P wrote:
> In article >, Michael Johnson, PE wrote: > >> In the end no one is holding a gun to a buyers head and forcing him to >> pay a given price. You know who really sets the price? It's the buyer. >> If no one is willing to pay the dealer's asking price then they will >> eventually lower the it until the car sells. It's a real simple concept. > > Absence of a gun to your head is not the definition of a free market. You're free NOT to pay the asking price. >> The reason the prices are silly right now is there are a few people >> willing to pay what I consider and outrageous price for the few >> available cars. > > Didn't I just finish writing that?\ So, why blame the dealer for high prices? It is just as much the fault of the buyer. >> Once the dealers wade through these buyers and the cars >> aren't moving at the current prices they will have to lower the price to >> get off the inventory. > > Maybe. If Ford makes enough GT500s this will happen. >>>> You are absolutely right, the buyers set the price, not the >>>> dealers. If any one of us had a vintage GT500 we would sell it for the >>>> highest price we could get and not a penny lower. > >>> New in production cars are not collector items. There are no more vintage >>> GT500s being made. There X surviors and that's it. There are Y people >>> that want them. Apples and oranges. > >> And there will ultimately be a limited number of GT500s. > > There will ultimately be a limited number of Foci, just as there are a > limited number of Tempos and Pintos. You seem to think their is a difference in selling a vintage GT500 verses a 2007 model. Market forces are the same for both cars. If you have a problem with a 2007 GT500 selling for $60k then you should have a problem with a vintage one selling for $100k. >> A vintage >> GT500 falls under the same supply and demand forces as a 2007 GT500. > > No it doesn't by the very fact the 2007 GT500 is in production. There > will never be another '67 GT500, only less. They both fall under the same principle of supply and demand. In a few months there will never be another 2007 GT500, only less. >> If >> Ford made GT500s like they make Fusions what do you think the price >> would be? > > MSRP or less just like every practically other production new vehicle on the > market. > >> You and I are no different from Ford. We all will take the >> highest price for whatever item we are selling. > > I would weigh permantly ****ing off customers and getting customers to > look at vehicles from other manufacturers into the equation. I would > consider those long term losses to be more important than the short term > gain. But hey, I am not chairman of Ford as it loses billions every > quarter. The short term thinking seems to be working out well for them > don't you think? EVERY dealer does what Ford is doing when they have a super hot limited production vehicle. It is what every business does when they have a chance to maximize profits. I do it every chance I get. Every time you accept a raise you do it too. Ford loosing money right now isn't a result of overcharging for their vehicles. They need desirable products, IMO. Most people (in fact, nearly all of them) in this country could care less what Ford gets for a GT500. They only care about what Ford gets from THEM. >> I don't fault the >> dealer for getting the highest price they can command. It is the way >> capitalism works. > > Yes, capitalism in practice is rarely free market. It's about > manipulating markets and creating monopolies really. It's about beating your competition and making your products desirable. >> I will be ****ed off at Ford if they don't produce >> the number of units they have stated. > > Which is exactly what will happen as people end up buying something else > because Ford dealers wanted an extra 20 grand. They won't want an extra $20k if the cars are backing up on their lots unsold. IMO, this will happen if Ford makes the number of GT500s they have stated. >> If they don't there is a good >> chance I will not be a Ford only buyer anymore. That is how I will make >> my statement on the matter. > > Then we are in agreement. Finally! |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
I've read all the posts and most are correct. I bought my first Ford (05
GT, 5 Spd, sonic blue) due to the Camaro being cancelled in 'early 05 and then they saw the error of thier ways. Ford did the same thing with the GT (GT40 remake). The list was $140K and the dealers were selling for $250+. The GT40, GT500 and Shelby are niche cars. Most will be purchased, then stored and shown on rare occaisions. You can buy a Mustang GT for about $29K full loaded and then if you reallly want, put on the supercharger for about $5K to get to the 500HP range. At a local meeting I saw/heard the first Shelby sold in San Antonio. Wasn't impressed by the interior finish or the engine, I expected more for $70K. I did like the hood (although the hood scoops are non-functional) and I REALLY do like the front end, very much more agressive than the standard Mustang GT. Is Ford short changing the loyal customer base, IMHO, YES. Look at their sales numbers and quarterly loss statements. Ford recently (posted in this NG) told any Mustang related item, they either had to pay a licensing fee or be sued. Possibly Ford should pay a royalty fee to the breeders that named the Mustang in the first place as that's where Ford got the name for the "Pony" car??? For $70K, I'll purchase a BMW or Porsche, while I like my Mustang GT, no Ford (short of the classics) are worth $70K. "Henry" > wrote in message ... > > Last year I put my name on a waiting list for a GT500 > with an out of town dealer. I was number nine on the list. > I figured if I could get a brand new reliable Mustang with > 500 hp for around 45K I might go for it. After several inquiries > and many months, I finally received an email stating that the > price is $65,000. I replied that I wasn't interested. > So yesterday, I stop in at the local Ford dealer - not > the one with the waiting list - to pick up an e brake cable > for my Ranger. Holy ****, there's a GT500 on the showroom > floor! I didn't think they were going to get any, so I never > asked. I looked it over closely, and there are only two > things I don't like - the white color and the stripes. But > I do like the fact that the only price displayed on the car > is the MSRP of $43K in the window. This dealer is known for > its fair pricing, so when the sales guy walked over I asked > him if they are selling the car for the price on the window > sticker. He smiles and says "no". "How much is it", I ask. > He disappears for a minute, comes back, and says "seventy > thousand". I laughed and told him I'd wait for the price > to reach a sane number. No way is it worth that. Ford > should at least have used an aluminum block to keep some > weight off the nose. Are people actually paying that much for > them? Any guesses on what they'll sell for next year? > > > -- > > > http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.htm > http://911research.wtc7.net > http://www.st911.org |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
can't afford it? clone it
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
In article >, ZombyWoof wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:58:14 -0500, > (Brent P) wrote something wonderfully witty: > >>In article >, ZombyWoof wrote: >> >>> That is the textbook definition of supply & demand. >> >>The textbook doesn't have supply being manipulated. > Supply in a demand economy is always manipulated by the supplier. Not in a free market. In a free market other suppliers step in. > Only in a command economy are their external forces (government > oversight or quotas) placed on the supplier. It is only one of many > ways that the supplier has to ensure that they price for their > products stay at a price point. Supply & demand also dictates that > when there is not enough supply to meet demand another supplier is > free to enter the marketplace. Yet, other ford dealers can't enter the marketplace and undercut those adding 20 grand to price because of ford's allotment set up. Not a free market. >>So you're fine with market manipulations. You must enjoy $3.20/gallon >>gasoline then. After all, there are just so many companies with gasoline >>and they decide how to sell it, how to distribute it, how much to make, >>wether to maintain their pipelines or not. We don't need gasoline either, >>we can use other forms of transporation that aren't as enjoyable just we >>could use a beat up '92 Tempo instead of a '07 GT500. > No one is manipulating the market for pony cars. I didn't say anyone was. Any more than you're saying spacemen are telling you what to post. > Your to wrapped > around the axle about a specific product from a specific manufacturer > in a demand economy. Not at all. > You miss the point of we don't need gasoline as in we could use > alternative fuels. I already posted nobody needs gasoline. > A person who doesn't want to pony > up the going price for a GT500 could go with a different comparable > vehicle from a different manufacturer. Its the idiots who just have > to have that first `07 GT500 who will pay for it regardless of the > price. It's quite clear what I am saying is beyond your grasp. >>Ford can keep playing these games they are free to do so, but as we see >>here, it's turning off it's most loyal customer base. Part of the reason >>they are ****ter no doubt. > Nah you are talking about one spaciality vehicle. The reason they are > in the ****ter is because they are bringing out an entire line of > vehicles across all price points that are creating the same level of > interest as just this one is within a specific group of people. My > Pops could care less about an `07 GT500. Their general practices across the board. Each year they lose more of what would be repeat buyers and they aren't bringing in new ones. >>Don't try to justify this pricing with free market reasoning when it is >>anything but a free market situation. > Actually a true free market has to do about tariffs and such so the > whole discussion is hogwash. Free market is not the neo-con definition where everything comes to the US from china and mexico tariff free. >>> The market always has a choice to reject any non life essential >>> product that is placed into it. What makes a market free is its >>> ability to demand or reject products placed into it. No one is forced >>> to buy GT500's at any price. >>And as we see, people are rejecting it and rejecting Ford (at least for >>the short term) as a result. But don't give me and any of the others who >>find this practice objectionable a line of crap that it's the free market >>and we have to love it. It's not free market, it's marketing. > Of course it is part of marketing. Well sir you can't afford this top > of the line drool over model, but perhaps I could interest you in this > look a like base Mustang model. You can't drive the GT500 at its top > performance levels anyhow so why worry about the fact that your not > rich or famous enough. Are you trying to make a lame example of a car salesman or being insulting? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
In article >, Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>> Absence of a gun to your head is not the definition of a free market. > You're free NOT to pay the asking price. That price isn't being set by free market conditions. >>> The reason the prices are silly right now is there are a few people >>> willing to pay what I consider and outrageous price for the few >>> available cars. >> Didn't I just finish writing that? > So, why blame the dealer for high prices? It is just as much the fault > of the buyer. That's why I called the buyers who paid it morons and idiots. Try to pay attention. >>> Once the dealers wade through these buyers and the cars >>> aren't moving at the current prices they will have to lower the price to >>> get off the inventory. >> Maybe. > If Ford makes enough GT500s this will happen. Doesn't look like they are going to. >>> And there will ultimately be a limited number of GT500s. >> There will ultimately be a limited number of Foci, just as there are a >> limited number of Tempos and Pintos. > You seem to think their is a difference in selling a vintage GT500 > verses a 2007 model. Market forces are the same for both cars. If you > have a problem with a 2007 GT500 selling for $60k then you should have a > problem with a vintage one selling for $100k. Market forces are entirely different for a product that is in production vs. one declared collectable. Any auction house should be able to explain the difference. And yes, I don't think the vintage ones are worth a 100K. And once the baby boomers start dying off they won't be any more. >>> A vintage >>> GT500 falls under the same supply and demand forces as a 2007 GT500. >> No it doesn't by the very fact the 2007 GT500 is in production. There >> will never be another '67 GT500, only less. > They both fall under the same principle of supply and demand. In a few > months there will never be another 2007 GT500, only less. In a year's time you can say that. But there is a free market of vintage cars because they trade hands privately and nobody is controlling supply. Let's say Bob and Frank have identical '67 GT500s. Bob needs money bad, Frank doesn't. Frank is asking a $110K, Bob needs the money sooner and undercuts Frank, you buy Bob's car for $102K. That doesn't happen in the new car game when a dealer just has one or two of a car that has any kind of demand for it and won't get any more. They, like Frank, can just sit and wait until someone will pay what they ask. They don't have to move the cars, they can just let them sit and wait for the payoff. >>> You and I are no different from Ford. We all will take the >>> highest price for whatever item we are selling. >> I would weigh permantly ****ing off customers and getting customers to >> look at vehicles from other manufacturers into the equation. I would >> consider those long term losses to be more important than the short term >> gain. But hey, I am not chairman of Ford as it loses billions every >> quarter. The short term thinking seems to be working out well for them >> don't you think? > EVERY dealer does what Ford is doing when they have a super hot limited > production vehicle. It is what every business does when they have a > chance to maximize profits. I do it every chance I get. So you screw over every ignorant customer that walks in your door? Where do you draw the line on maximizing profits? Where's the line? Or is there even a line? > Every time you > accept a raise you do it too. Ford loosing money right now isn't a > result of overcharging for their vehicles. They need desirable > products, IMO. Most people (in fact, nearly all of them) in this > country could care less what Ford gets for a GT500. They only care > about what Ford gets from THEM. My father had a bad chevy once. He didn't get treated well by the chevy dealer either. That was in 1981. He will never buy a GM car again. Since 1981 no matter what GM makes it doesn't matter, won't even walk into the dealership. That's what I am getting at. If you are always seeking to maximize profits now you are going to need a constant supply of new customers to make up for the ones who later learned better or felt you were trying to screw them and walked out the door and bought from someone else. Maximizing profits in the short term carries a great deal of risk for the long term. Unlike you apparently, I would consider that. >>> I don't fault the >>> dealer for getting the highest price they can command. It is the way >>> capitalism works. >> Yes, capitalism in practice is rarely free market. It's about >> manipulating markets and creating monopolies really. > It's about beating your competition and making your products desirable. The beating your competition part is part I was refering to. For example, microsoft's practices. >>> I will be ****ed off at Ford if they don't produce >>> the number of units they have stated. >> Which is exactly what will happen as people end up buying something else >> because Ford dealers wanted an extra 20 grand. > They won't want an extra $20k if the cars are backing up on their lots > unsold. IMO, this will happen if Ford makes the number of GT500s they > have stated. If they don't cancel it for it lack of orders. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Greedy *******s.....
At $70K for a Mustang, I'll take an E Saleen...its only 60K and has
550HP....looks better too! Mark "Henry" > wrote in message ... > > Last year I put my name on a waiting list for a GT500 > with an out of town dealer. I was number nine on the list. > I figured if I could get a brand new reliable Mustang with > 500 hp for around 45K I might go for it. After several inquiries > and many months, I finally received an email stating that the > price is $65,000. I replied that I wasn't interested. > So yesterday, I stop in at the local Ford dealer - not > the one with the waiting list - to pick up an e brake cable > for my Ranger. Holy ****, there's a GT500 on the showroom > floor! I didn't think they were going to get any, so I never > asked. I looked it over closely, and there are only two > things I don't like - the white color and the stripes. But > I do like the fact that the only price displayed on the car > is the MSRP of $43K in the window. This dealer is known for > its fair pricing, so when the sales guy walked over I asked > him if they are selling the car for the price on the window > sticker. He smiles and says "no". "How much is it", I ask. > He disappears for a minute, comes back, and says "seventy > thousand". I laughed and told him I'd wait for the price > to reach a sane number. No way is it worth that. Ford > should at least have used an aluminum block to keep some > weight off the nose. Are people actually paying that much for > them? Any guesses on what they'll sell for next year? > > > -- > > > http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.htm > http://911research.wtc7.net > http://www.st911.org |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|