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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
Hi All,
I've been recently looking for tires (size 205-70-15) and I am finding among the retailers that for the mileage I'm looking for (80K) and the UTQGS ratings (treadwear 700, traction A, Temp B) that the prices are virtually identical. The biggest difference is pricing for the road hazard warranties and for balancing, etc. from the tire dealers. What I really don't understand is why this is the case. For example, Goodyear tires are manufactured in the US, by an American-owned company. Michelin, and Bridgestone/Firestone tires are manufactured in China by an American-owned company. Lastly, Toyo/Tourevo tires are an Asian-owned firm and are manufactured in Asia. I understand reading from the trade rags that US companies have outsourced manufacturing to Asia to save money. I also understand from the trade rags that CEO's of Asian companies don't take the gigantic pay amounts that US CEO's do. So, in principle, the Goodyears should be the most expensive, followed by the Firestone, then the Toyo stuff should be the cheapest. Yet, this is not the case. Pricing differers very little, in fact the Toyo stuff is a bit more expensive. Of course, if I compare a house brand (like Walmart's Goodyear Viva) that has a much lower UTQGS treadwear rating against the others, I see big differences. But, I would expect this to be so. Now, maybe the tire dealers are making up the differences on the mounting and balancing costs - but I kind of doubt it. The equipment they use is all expensive and they are paying a lot of employee salaries, I can't imagine they do anything more than break even on those costs. Anyway, the point is that there seems to be a wide difference in what the wholesale cost of the tire ought to be due to structural differences - the dealers I've looked at seem to have widely different purchasing power ( Comparing Walmart against say Firestone dealers) and the tire manufacturers have widely different corporate structures and the manufacturing is also different. I cannot believe all these dealers are paying the same money for tires. But, they all seem to be selling them for the same money. What happened to competition? Seems to me there ought to be a big case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire manufacturers. Anyone have any ideas? Ted |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
"Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message ... > Hi All, > > I've been recently looking for tires (size 205-70-15) and I am finding > among the retailers that for the mileage I'm looking for (80K) and > the UTQGS ratings (treadwear 700, traction A, Temp B) that the > prices are virtually identical. The biggest difference is pricing for the > road hazard warranties and for balancing, etc. from the tire dealers. > > What I really don't understand is why this is the case. For example, > Goodyear tires are manufactured in the US, by an American-owned company. > Michelin, and Bridgestone/Firestone tires are manufactured in China by an > American-owned company. Lastly, Toyo/Tourevo tires are an Asian-owned > firm and are manufactured in Asia. > I believe that Michelin is a French company. According to their world web site, they produce tires in 19 countries, including the U.S. Bridgestone, which owns Firestone, is a Japanese company with 58 plants in 25 countries, including the U.S. Toyo Tire and Rubber Company is a Japanese company with plants in Asia and the U.S. > I understand reading from the trade rags that US companies have > outsourced manufacturing to Asia to save money. I also understand from > the trade rags that CEO's of Asian companies don't take the gigantic > pay amounts that US CEO's do. > > So, in principle, the Goodyears should be the most expensive, followed > by the Firestone, then the Toyo stuff should be the cheapest. > > Yet, this is not the case. Pricing differers very little, in fact the > Toyo > stuff is a bit more expensive. > > Of course, if I compare a house brand (like Walmart's Goodyear Viva) > that has a much lower UTQGS treadwear rating against the others, I see > big differences. But, I would expect this to be so. > > Now, maybe the tire dealers are making up the differences on the mounting > and balancing costs - but I kind of doubt it. The equipment they use is > all expensive and they are paying a lot of employee salaries, I can't > imagine > they do anything more than break even on those costs. > > Anyway, the point is that there seems to be a wide difference in what the > wholesale cost of the tire ought to be due to structural differences - the > dealers I've looked at seem to have widely different purchasing power ( > Comparing Walmart against say Firestone dealers) and the tire > manufacturers > have widely different corporate structures and the manufacturing is also > different. I cannot believe all these dealers are paying the same money > for > tires. But, they all seem to be selling them for the same money. > > What happened to competition? Seems to me there ought to be a big > case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire > manufacturers. > Anyone have any ideas? > > Ted > It is possible that all of the tires you shopped were made in the U.S., which would reduce the disparity in manufacturing cost. Tires are a competitive business and a company whose products are priced higher will have a tough time competing without a product attribute that a consumer is willing to pay for, especially in the most common sizes like 205/70-15. -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message ... > > > > > What happened to competition? Seems to me there ought to be a big > > case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire > > manufacturers. > > Anyone have any ideas? > > > > Ted > > > > It is possible that all of the tires you shopped were made in the U.S., > which would reduce the disparity in manufacturing cost. > That might be true, and it is true that there are not a lot of other tire manufacturers that make that size AND that mileage and UTQGS rating I looked at. But, if I went to a treadwear and UTQGS rating of about 1/2 of what I surveyed, then there's an order of magnitude larger number of tire manufacturers making that size. But, they are ALL the same tire price ALSO (or within very small amounts of each other) for that treadwear and UTQGS rating. I'd find it hard to believe they all make tires in the US. After surveying I found NOT a lot of price coorelation between tire mileage warranty and price, but I found a LOT of price coorelation between different tires of the same UTQGS rating. I found a LOT of tires with DIFFERENT mileage rating but the same UTQGS specs. So I tend to discount the stated mileage as marketing fiction. What matters is UTQGS. And another telling indicator of the importance of UTQGS is that some manufacturers hide it. Goodyear, for example, doesen't post that on their website - they tell you you have to get it from the tire brochure at the tire dealership. However, it's pointless. The cheapest tire I could find in that size is a 40K tire and it's only 1/3 cheaper for 1/2 the treadlife. For only 1/3 again more of the price you get double the tire life. Plus the mounting costs are all the same cost as well as the road hazard warranty. In other words I can buy a road hazard warranty for 40K miles or a road hazard warranty for 80K miles - but they both cost the same. If the road hazard warranty was 1/2 the cost for the lower-mileage tire it might be worth it - but the way it's priced at the tire dealerships, it's cheaper-per-mile for the more expensive higher mileage tire. Not to mention with a 40K mile warranty you have to replace the tires twice as often so your doubling your installation costs. > Tires are a competitive business and a company whose products are priced > higher will have a tough time competing without a product attribute that a > consumer is willing to pay for, especially in the most common sizes like > 205/70-15. That I understand well. But that isn't how competition is carried out these days. In most commodity markets there are maybe a maximum of 2-4 manufacturers who are dominant players plus dozens of small fry. For example, in computer software it's Microsoft and Linux distributions. In computer hardware it's Dell, HP & IBM. In hard disk drives it's Seagate and Western Digital. In soft drinks it's Coke and Pepsi. In cars it's GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda & maybe Chrysler. In US crude oil it's Exxon, Texaco and a few others. And so on and so on and so on. All these commodity markets got this way because these dominant players gobbled up competitors until they ran up against the anti-trust regulators of the world's governments who prohibited further market acquisitions. Manufacturing economies of scale in today's markets dictate that the larger you are the cheaper you can make things. In most markets, consolidation sets in and continues until the governmental regulators put a stop to it, or declare a monopoly market and start regulating the dominant monopoly. Naturally, in these markets the few dominant competitors have the same product price since the margins are so thin - these companies make money on volume. It's only in niche markets (ie: specialty foods, etc.) that there's still a large number of companies, or in commodity markets (like milk) where the product cost is so low that freight charges make global distribution uneconomical, and you cannot reduce the product bulk (ie: freeze dry it) to reduce shipping But tires are very expensive and they are also very complex and take a lot of technology to manufacture. As you say, tires are competitive. And since there are so many many cars out there, there's huge amounts of tires sold. And since tires are complex and not easy to manufacture in the barnyard, the product lends itself to a commodity manufacturing model of single-source manufacture with wide distribution. But the reality is that the market does not appear to work this way. It seems to me that in reality, tires are far more expensive than they should be, because the tire companies have spent so much money on making hundreds if not hundreds of thousands of slightly different but almost the same model of tire. So you have a situation where there's a lot of small manufacturers all making small production runs, instead of a few large manufacturers making a few giant production runs. The situation seems really ripe for a well-heeled tire manufacturer to start acquiring other ones and killing off product lines right and left, and substituting a few much cheaper product lines, then making their profit on bulk. That is the pattern that has happened in the past in most other commodity industries with this kind of product, and the only reason I can come up with that it hasn't happened in the tire industry is that all of the tire manufacturers have gotten together and formed a secret cartel of some kind to fix prices. Is this it? Or is there something I'm missing about the tire market that lends itself to this incessant brand fracturing. Ted |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
"Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message > > What I really don't understand is why this is the case. For example, > Goodyear tires are manufactured in the US, by an American-owned company. > Michelin, and Bridgestone/Firestone tires are manufactured in China by an > American-owned company. Lastly, Toyo/Tourevo tires are an Asian-owned > firm and are manufactured in Asia. > So, in principle, the Goodyears should be the most expensive, followed > by the Firestone, then the Toyo stuff should be the cheapest. Principles has nothing to do with it. Cost of goods sold has nothing to do with selling price. First, understand the concept of the free market place and the ability of the seller to set the price, based on what he wants, not actual costs. > > What happened to competition? Seems to me there ought to be a big > case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire > manufacturers. > Anyone have any ideas? Yes. Stop using logic. This is not a Communist country and dealers will sell for whatever the traffic will bear. Just because I can make something at lower cost than Brand X, there is no reason for me to sell it cheaper and not take advantage of the additional profit. Why should I bust my ass to make 100 widgets when I can make the same money making only 80 widgets? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> Hi All, > > I've been recently looking for tires (size 205-70-15) and I am finding > among the retailers that for the mileage I'm looking for (80K) and > the UTQGS ratings (treadwear 700, traction A, Temp B) that the > prices are virtually identical. The biggest difference is pricing for the > road hazard warranties and for balancing, etc. from the tire dealers. > > What I really don't understand is why this is the case. For example, > Goodyear tires are manufactured in the US, by an American-owned company. > Michelin, and Bridgestone/Firestone tires are manufactured in China by an > American-owned company. Lastly, Toyo/Tourevo tires are an Asian-owned > firm and are manufactured in Asia. > > I understand reading from the trade rags that US companies have > outsourced manufacturing to Asia to save money. I also understand from > the trade rags that CEO's of Asian companies don't take the gigantic > pay amounts that US CEO's do. > > So, in principle, the Goodyears should be the most expensive, followed > by the Firestone, then the Toyo stuff should be the cheapest. > > Yet, this is not the case. Pricing differers very little, in fact the > Toyo > stuff is a bit more expensive. > > Of course, if I compare a house brand (like Walmart's Goodyear Viva) > that has a much lower UTQGS treadwear rating against the others, I see > big differences. But, I would expect this to be so. > > Now, maybe the tire dealers are making up the differences on the mounting > and balancing costs - but I kind of doubt it. The equipment they use is > all expensive and they are paying a lot of employee salaries, I can't > imagine > they do anything more than break even on those costs. > > Anyway, the point is that there seems to be a wide difference in what the > wholesale cost of the tire ought to be due to structural differences - the > dealers I've looked at seem to have widely different purchasing power ( > Comparing Walmart against say Firestone dealers) and the tire manufacturers > have widely different corporate structures and the manufacturing is also > different. I cannot believe all these dealers are paying the same money for > tires. But, they all seem to be selling them for the same money. > > What happened to competition? This is competition. If you have a tire similar to the one that the Walmart down the street is selling, you're not going to make much money if you sell the tire for a lot more than the Walmart. It's kind of like gasoline. It might cost ExxonMobil $1.50 to suck a gallon's worth of oil out of the ground and refine it, while it costs Shell $1.75. But guess, what? The cost at the pump is the same. You'll find some people will pay a little more for one brand or another. And some people will go to the neighborhood gas station where they pump it for you and check your oil. > Seems to me there ought to be a big > case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire > manufacturers. Well, different manufacturers compare their product to the products made by their competitors. That's Dell and other computer makers keep making faster computers for less. If they made faster computers for more, no one would buy them. > Anyone have any ideas? Yeah, there is no lawsuit because the prices are similar because of competition. Jeff > Ted > > |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
How can you say that tires are expensive? Have you examined the profit
margins of the tire manufacturers? You will find it is a crappy business to be in. Tires may all be the same price but you haven't proven that the price is high. "Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message ... > > "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message > ... >> >> > >> > What happened to competition? Seems to me there ought to be a big >> > case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire >> > manufacturers. >> > Anyone have any ideas? >> > >> > Ted >> > >> >> It is possible that all of the tires you shopped were made in the U.S., >> which would reduce the disparity in manufacturing cost. >> > > That might be true, and it is true that there are not a lot of other tire > manufacturers > that make that size AND that mileage and UTQGS rating I looked at. > > But, if I went to a treadwear and UTQGS rating of about 1/2 of what I > surveyed, > then there's an order of magnitude larger number of tire manufacturers > making that > size. But, they are ALL the same tire price ALSO (or within very small > amounts > of each other) for that treadwear and UTQGS rating. I'd find it hard to > believe > they all make tires in the US. > > After surveying I found NOT a lot of price coorelation between tire > mileage > warranty and price, but I found a LOT of price coorelation between > different > tires of the same UTQGS rating. I found a LOT of tires with DIFFERENT > mileage rating but the same UTQGS specs. So I tend to discount the stated > mileage as marketing fiction. What matters is UTQGS. And another telling > indicator of the importance of UTQGS is that some manufacturers hide it. > Goodyear, for example, doesen't post that on their website - they tell you > you have to get it from the tire brochure at the tire dealership. > > However, it's pointless. The cheapest tire I could find in that size is a > 40K tire and it's only 1/3 cheaper for 1/2 the treadlife. For > only 1/3 again more of the price you get double the tire life. Plus the > mounting > costs are all the same cost as well as the road hazard warranty. In other > words > I can buy a road hazard warranty for 40K miles or a road hazard warranty > for > 80K miles - but they both cost the same. If the road hazard warranty was > 1/2 the cost for the lower-mileage tire it might be worth it - but the way > it's > priced at the tire dealerships, it's cheaper-per-mile for the more > expensive > higher mileage tire. Not to mention with a 40K mile warranty you have to > replace the > tires twice as often so your doubling your installation costs. > >> Tires are a competitive business and a company whose products are priced >> higher will have a tough time competing without a product attribute that >> a >> consumer is willing to pay for, especially in the most common sizes like >> 205/70-15. > > That I understand well. But that isn't how competition is carried out > these > days. In most commodity markets there are maybe a maximum of 2-4 > manufacturers who are > dominant players plus dozens of small fry. For example, in computer > software > it's Microsoft > and Linux distributions. In computer hardware it's Dell, HP & IBM. In > hard > disk > drives it's Seagate and Western Digital. In soft drinks > it's Coke and Pepsi. In cars it's GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda & maybe > Chrysler. > In US crude oil it's Exxon, Texaco and a few others. And so on and so on > and so on. > > All these commodity markets got this way because these dominant players > gobbled > up competitors until they ran up against the anti-trust regulators of the > world's > governments who prohibited further market acquisitions. Manufacturing > economies of scale in today's markets dictate that the larger you are the > cheaper you can make things. In most markets, consolidation sets in > and continues until the governmental regulators put a stop to it, or > declare > a monopoly market and start regulating the dominant monopoly. > > Naturally, in these markets the few dominant competitors have the same > product price since the margins are so thin - these companies make money > on volume. > > It's only in niche markets (ie: specialty foods, etc.) that there's still > a > large > number of companies, or in commodity markets (like milk) where the > product cost is so low that freight charges make global distribution > uneconomical, and you cannot reduce the product bulk (ie: freeze > dry it) to reduce shipping But tires are very expensive and they are also > very complex and take a lot of technology to manufacture. > > As you say, tires are competitive. And since there are so many many cars > out > there, there's huge amounts of tires sold. And since tires are complex > and > not > easy to manufacture in the barnyard, the product lends itself to a > commodity > manufacturing model of single-source manufacture with wide distribution. > But > the reality is that the market does not appear to work this way. It seems > to me > that in reality, tires are far more expensive than they should be, because > the > tire companies have spent so much money on making hundreds if not hundreds > of > thousands of slightly different but almost the same model of tire. So you > have > a situation where there's a lot of small manufacturers all making small > production runs, > instead of a few large manufacturers making a few giant production runs. > > The situation seems really ripe for a well-heeled tire manufacturer to > start > acquiring > other ones and killing off product lines right and left, and substituting > a > few > much cheaper product lines, then making their profit on bulk. That is the > pattern that has happened in the past in most other commodity industries > with > this kind of product, and the only reason I can come up with that it > hasn't > happened in the tire industry is that all of the tire manufacturers have > gotten > together and formed a secret cartel of some kind to fix prices. > > Is this it? Or is there something I'm missing about the tire market that > lends > itself to this incessant brand fracturing. > > Ted > > |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote:
> ..... What I really don't understand is why this is the case. For > example, > Goodyear tires are manufactured in the US, by an American-owned company. > Michelin, and Bridgestone/Firestone tires are manufactured in China by an > American-owned company. Lastly, Toyo/Tourevo tires are an Asian-owned > firm and are manufactured in Asia. > > I understand reading from the trade rags that US companies have > outsourced manufacturing to Asia to save money. I also understand from > the trade rags that CEO's of Asian companies don't take the gigantic > pay amounts that US CEO's do. > > So, in principle, the Goodyears should be the most expensive, followed > by the Firestone, then the Toyo stuff should be the cheapest. Actually, Goodyear tires are also made in Indonesia, Chile, Taiwan, and elsewhere. In fact, Goodyear got into trouble by stamping "Made in the USA" on their tires while they were actually made in Chile (link: http://tinyurl.com/38nmra). You want expensive tires? Try motorcycle tires that cost $200 for one and lasts maybe 4000 miles. Sticky rubber costs far more than auto tires. <damhik!> B~ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message >> What I really don't understand is why this is the case. For example, >> Goodyear tires are manufactured in the US, by an American-owned company. >> Michelin, and Bridgestone/Firestone tires are manufactured in China by an >> American-owned company. Lastly, Toyo/Tourevo tires are an Asian-owned >> firm and are manufactured in Asia. > >> So, in principle, the Goodyears should be the most expensive, followed >> by the Firestone, then the Toyo stuff should be the cheapest. > > > Principles has nothing to do with it. Cost of goods sold has nothing to do > with selling price. First, understand the concept of the free market place > and the ability of the seller to set the price, based on what he wants, not > actual costs. > > >> What happened to competition? Seems to me there ought to be a big >> case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire >> manufacturers. >> Anyone have any ideas? > > Yes. Stop using logic. This is not a Communist country and dealers will > sell for whatever the traffic will bear. Just because I can make something > at lower cost than Brand X, there is no reason for me to sell it cheaper and > not take advantage of the additional profit. Why should I bust my ass to > make 100 widgets when I can make the same money making only 80 widgets? > > Exactly. Ted - What you're saying makes sense if you would be willing to do the following: Take your car to the first shop you came to (after all, competition means that all shops are equal), and tell them that you will pay them $X for a tire with 'Y' UTQG ratings - you don't care what brand, what model, as long as it has those ratings - after all, competition means that all tires with the exact same UTQG ratings are exactly equal. Heck - might as well mix and match different brands on different corners of the vehicle since they all have the same UTQG ratings and will all be the same as far as handling and such. Same with computers: Next time you need a computer, call up some vendor, tell him what the going price you're willing to pay for one with so much memory, so much processor speed, drives, burners, etc. - you don't care the brand of the computer or its components, as long as the basic number specs. are the same. Some of how you say the market should work is true. Some is way over-simplification. All sorts of things go into buying decisions (which of course drive pricing to some extent) - some things that are valid, some that are maybe not (i.e., swallowing marketing hype that may have no basis in fact, personal prejudices - " I had a real bad experience with a Ford car in 1968, so I refuse to ever buy one of their products!"). Heck - look at all the people paying 1-1/2 to 3 times more for certain tires because they're "high performance tires", when those so-called high performance tires get maybe 1/2 the tread life of the "cheaper" tire, and that's only if those "better" tires don't become so noisy after 1/3 of their tread is gone that the owner replaces them prematurely, further losing what little value he paid for. MBA's are going to ensure that the manufacturer gets what the market will bear and lower direct and overhead costs as much as possible, and maybe cheat on specs. if they can get away with it. A smaller manufacturer may be in a very low cost of living area paying very low wages and providing crappy benefits, whereas a larger manufacturer may be paying better and paying stockholders, but offset by their savings in economy of scale making the consumer price and product performance and quality levels (and to some degree, profit margins) come out about the same as the little guy's product. If either one is out of line with the other too much, then one's product will be a big money loser due to low sales. If prices are being manipulated and the consumer blindly buys on UTQG ratings, yet one product is actually better than the other, whose fault is it when the better product is taken off the market (or the company goes out of business) when the consumer kept buying an inferior product through ignorance. Looking at it another way, if the consumer is educated on the product assortment and makes wise decisions, then that should drive divergent products closer together with the overall trend to better and cheaper. If one tire with the same ratings was selling a bunch more, I'd wonder why they continued marketing it - there must be something that makes it better and causes enough people to keep buying it. But the trend *should* be a tighter price variation for like products. Price differences should truly reflect quality and/or performance in a good open market. If it bothers you that the prices of the products are too similar, then use the power of your wallet and buy the better product that's selling for the same price as the inferior product - even though the UTQG ratings are the same or similar. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
"Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message ... > Hi All, > > I've been recently looking for tires (size 205-70-15) and I am finding > among the retailers that for the mileage I'm looking for (80K) and > the UTQGS ratings (treadwear 700, traction A, Temp B) that the > prices are virtually identical. The biggest difference is pricing for the > road hazard warranties and for balancing, etc. from the tire dealers. Did you go to Tirerack.com and take a look at the choices they list for that size? They have 40 tires listed in that size and there is a large price range. The tire in their catalog with the highest UTQG is a Michelin HydroEdge with a UTQG of 800 (the tire is warranted for 90,000 miles). They cost $107 each. The next highest is a Pirelli P4 Four Seasons with a UTQG of 760 and a cost of $66 per tire (the tire is warranted for 85,000 miles). The next highest is a Goodyear Assurance Triple Tred with a UTQG of 740 and a cost of $92 each (the tire is warranted for 80,000 miles). This is a range of prices for tires with similar tread life. Clearly, if you do a little shopping you will find a wide variety of prices. > What I really don't understand is why this is the case. For example, > Goodyear tires are manufactured in the US, by an American-owned company. > Michelin, and Bridgestone/Firestone tires are manufactured in China by an > American-owned company. Lastly, Toyo/Tourevo tires are an Asian-owned > firm and are manufactured in Asia. All these companies manufacturer tires around the world. Both Goodyear and Bridgestone have tire plants in my home state of North Carolina (as well as other states). Michelin has plants in South Carolina, Alabama, and other states (Michelin owns Uniroyal and BF Goodrich tires). ContientalGeneral has plants in NC and other states. Toyo builds tires in Georgia. For popular size tires (i.e., high volume tires), the tires are likely to be manufactured locally (in the US in your case) for most brands. > I understand reading from the trade rags that US companies have > outsourced manufacturing to Asia to save money. I also understand from > the trade rags that CEO's of Asian companies don't take the gigantic > pay amounts that US CEO's do. > > So, in principle, the Goodyears should be the most expensive, followed > by the Firestone, then the Toyo stuff should be the cheapest. Faulty logic here. For one thing, Japanese manufacturing costs are not lower than US manufacturing costs. Another problem is shipping - tires are bulky and not cheap to ship. The impact of CEO salaries on individual tire prices is tiny. Goodyear's CEO is wildly over compensated (nearly $7 million last year), but that is only about $0.03 per tire (3 CENTS per tire - Goodyear sold over 226 million tires worldwide last year). > Yet, this is not the case. Pricing differers very little, in fact the > Toyo > stuff is a bit more expensive. > > Of course, if I compare a house brand (like Walmart's Goodyear Viva) > that has a much lower UTQGS treadwear rating against the others, I see > big differences. But, I would expect this to be so. > > Now, maybe the tire dealers are making up the differences on the mounting > and balancing costs - but I kind of doubt it. The equipment they use is > all expensive and they are paying a lot of employee salaries, I can't > imagine > they do anything more than break even on those costs. > > Anyway, the point is that there seems to be a wide difference in what the > wholesale cost of the tire ought to be due to structural differences - the > dealers I've looked at seem to have widely different purchasing power ( > Comparing Walmart against say Firestone dealers) and the tire > manufacturers > have widely different corporate structures and the manufacturing is also > different. I cannot believe all these dealers are paying the same money > for > tires. But, they all seem to be selling them for the same money. > > What happened to competition? Seems to me there ought to be a big > case here for an anti-trust price fixing lawsuit against the tire > manufacturers. > Anyone have any ideas? Clearly you are working off faulty data. In fact, there are large differences in prices for tires with similar predicted tread life. Given that tire manufacturing is a mature industry and all companies make tires essentially the same way with similar costs for raw materials, I am surprised there is as much difference in prices as there is. I think most of the difference in prices is based on marketing ability more than differences in manufacturing costs. Ed |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Price fixing among tire manufacturers
Bill Putney wrote:
Oops - hit send too quickly. > ...A smaller > manufacturer may be in a very low cost of living area paying very low > wages and providing crappy benefits, whereas a larger manufacturer may > be paying better and paying stockholders, but offset by their savings in > economy of scale making the consumer price and product performance and > quality levels (and to some degree, profit margins) come out about the > same as the little guy's product... Should have said: "A smaller manufacturer may be in a very low cost of living area paying very low wages and providing crappy benefits, whereas a larger manufacturer may be paying better and paying stockholders, but offset by their savings in economy of scale (and to some degree, profit margins) making the consumer price and product performance and quality levels come out about the same as the little guy's product." > ...If one tire with the same ratings was selling a bunch more, I'd wonder > why they continued marketing it... That should have said: "If one tire with the same ratings was selling for a bunch more, I'd wonder why they continued marketing it..." Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Price fixing among tire manufacturers | Ted Mittelstaedt | Chrysler | 138 | January 15th 08 11:02 AM |
Molding manufacturers | Mark C. | Ford Mustang | 0 | December 10th 07 09:28 PM |
Car manufacturers top R&D list | 223rem | Driving | 0 | May 12th 06 05:30 PM |
So many Chinese Automobile manufacturers | Ash | General | 0 | April 9th 06 04:39 AM |
Exhaust System Manufacturers | George Patterson | Antique cars | 0 | June 1st 05 03:36 AM |