Five Reasons Ford Should Bring Ranger Back to U.S.

[Hugh]

You mean this one?

 

[T-bird]

This statement from same article says a lot:

 

Conquest sales

So far, sales of the midsize trucks have dispelled doubts over where the buyers would come from. GM says 43 percent of buyers are new to GM. The top trade-ins include the Ford F-150, Toyota Tacoma and the phased-out Dodge Dakota, GM says.

[92merc]

 

This statement from same article says a lot:

 

Conquest sales

So far, sales of the midsize trucks have dispelled doubts over where the buyers would come from. GM says 43 percent of buyers are new to GM. The top trade-ins include the Ford F-150, Toyota Tacoma and the phased-out Dodge Dakota, GM says.

 

One could also say that 57% of buyers are NOT new to GM. Which means it's still canibalizing their own sales more so than making a dent in other makers.

 

Dakota owners were probably holding out for a replacment from RAM that isn't happening. So they had a choice of buying Japanese or American.

 

The Taco owners that switched probably weren't has happy with their trucks since it hasn't been updated much in a long time.

 

F150 owners would likely be looking to downsize and keep American.

[akirby]

It's doing far better than I thought it would, but it still remains to be seen if it can keep up the sales momentum without significantly impacting Silvererra.

[RichardJensen]

Let's not forget that GM canceled their half-ton van in order to build this, and that there is considerable differentiation from the global model here.

 

Point being: GM had to sacrifice a product to build this product, and they are not taking advantage of global economies of scale. To calculate the positive impact of this product you have to not only subtract out amortization of a decidedly unique vehicle, you also have to subtract out the profits from the full size van.

 

It's a net gain for GM to be building these vehicles, as is obvious by the tight build scheduling, but I don't think that it's as big of a gain as some here believe.

Edited May 25, 2015 by RichardJensen

[MKII]

One could also say that 57% of buyers are NOT new to GM. Which means it's still canibalizing their own sales more so than making a dent in other makers.

 

 

At least those 57% purchased a GM product again. That is a +

[Sevensecondsuv]

Let's not forget that GM canceled their half-ton van in order to build this, and that there is considerable differentiation from the global model here.

 

Point being: GM had to sacrifice a product to build this product, and they are not taking advantage of global economies of scale. To calculate the positive impact of this product you have to not only subtract out amortization of a decidedly unique vehicle, you also have to subtract out the profits from the full size van.

 

It's a net gain for GM to be building these vehicles, as is obvious by the tight build scheduling, but I don't think that it's as big of a gain as some here believe.

Yeah and Ford sacrificed the NA Ranger to build Transits. That doesn't mean Ford (and GM) can't eventually build both. The 07-08 market crash forced both companies to quit making some of their less important models. It will take time to get depth back into the lineup.

 

It's still early in the Colorado experiment, but the small(er) pickup segment is definitely showing signs of life to the point where it's getting hard for Ford and FCA to continue ignoring it.

Edited May 25, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv

[RichardJensen]

Yeah and Ford sacrificed the NA Ranger to build Transits

 

Which Ford plant that was building Rangers was converted to building Transits?

[Edstock]

Yeah and Ford sacrificed the NA Ranger to build Transits.

 

You know this how? Please supply specifics, otherwise this is just a brain-fart.

[Sevensecondsuv]

 

Which Ford plant that was building Rangers was converted to building Transits?

I meant design/development resources. That and TCAP was getting closed either way. To continue building NA Ranger would have taken assembly line space elsewhere. Basically Ford made the decision to spend their limited resources on the Transit rather than redesigning the NA Ranger and moving production elsewhere.

 

The above is not a new idea on this forum by any means. Scroll up a few pages and I'm sure you'll find at least one of our esteemed moderators making the same point.

Edited May 25, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv

[Sevensecondsuv]

It's doing far better than I thought it would, but it still remains to be seen if it can keep up the sales momentum without significantly impacting Silvererra.

At what point would you personally declare it a success? At what point would you say that Ford is missing out on a key market segment?

 

Just curious....

[RichardJensen]

I meant design/development resources

 

There are *always* opportunity costs associated with pursuing one course of action over another.

 

What is going on with the Canyonado is more than simple opportunity cost. GM didn't pick between two possible products for vacant plant capacity. They canceled one product in favor of another.

 

Any honest accounting of profitability must take that action into consideration.

[akirby]

At what point would you personally declare it a success? At what point would you say that Ford is missing out on a key market segment?

 

Just curious....

 

If they're still selling 100K+ this time next year with no drop off in Silvererra sales and with similar or better overall profits.

 

Just because they're selling a bunch of them doesn't necessarily mean they're making money, given the high overhead of completely changing the existing model and putting not one but 2 different tophats on it. And replacing production of other products as Richard has mentioned.

 

Throw in 50%+ cannibalization of other GM products and it's not difficult to question whether this is a smart business move.

[Sevensecondsuv]

Since 4wd crew cabs are the bulk of what they've made so far (see several reports about how they only started making other versions a few months ago), I'd venture to guess that profit margins have been pretty healthy. If the bulk of sales volume had been 2wd stripper fleet trucks, I too would question the business case. But the higher end of Colorado hits $40k. That leaves plenty of room for profit.

Edited May 25, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv

[Anthony]

Throw in 50%+ cannibalization of other GM products and it's not difficult to question whether this is a smart business move.

We've had this conversation before. A 47% conquest rate does not equal a 53% cannibalization rate.

 

Examples:

 

- Previous Canyonorado owners.

- GM owners who were not considering another GM product.

- GM owners who were not planning on buying a vehicle at the current time.

- GM owners who added one as an extra vehicle.

- GM owners who were going to buy a less expensive GM product.

 

The Flex has close to a 50% conquest rate. That does not mean the other 50% is cannibalizing other more expensive Ford sales.

[Bob Rosadini]

For what its worth, I don't think these new GMs are available in a conventional cab-just super and crew. Seems like that takes a good potential market out of the mix-like the stripper Rangers that were sold to the pest treatment cos., utility cos etc.

[Biker16]

Let's not forget that GM canceled their half-ton van in order to build this, and that there is considerable differentiation from the global model here.

 

Point being: GM had to sacrifice a product to build this product, and they are not taking advantage of global economies of scale. To calculate the positive impact of this product you have to not only subtract out amortization of a decidedly unique vehicle, you also have to subtract out the profits from the full size van.

 

It's a net gain for GM to be building these vehicles, as is obvious by the tight build scheduling, but I don't think that it's as big of a gain as some here believe.

The article explains what happened to the 1500, and why GM will not bring back a less than 8500lbs GVWR Van, the EPA.

 

The savana and express will continue to be produced as 2500 and higher models, the pickups make up for the volume that would have need Los anyway.

[twintornados]

For what its worth, I don't think these new GMs are available in a conventional cab-just super and crew. Seems like that takes a good potential market out of the mix-like the stripper Rangers that were sold to the pest treatment cos., utility cos etc.

 

Bob, after seeing my buddies 2014 F150 XL regular cab / short box....I realize that Orkin etc etc would do well to get that instead...

 

 

[RichardJensen]

The article explains what happened to the 1500, and why GM will not bring back a less than 8500lbs GVWR Van, the EPA.

 

The savana and express will continue to be produced as 2500 and higher models, the pickups make up for the volume that would have need Los anyway.

 

Right. And as we all know, Ford stopped making a half ton van for exactly the same reasons.

[probowler]

 

Bob, after seeing my buddies 2014 F150 XL regular cab / short box....I realize that Orkin etc etc would do well to get that instead...

 

 

 

If they made this truck in Flare Side....

 

[jpd80]

Yeah and Ford sacrificed the NA Ranger to build Transits. That doesn't mean Ford (and GM) can't eventually build both. The 07-08 market crash forced both companies to quit making some of their less important models. It will take time to get depth back into the lineup.

 

It's still early in the Colorado experiment, but the small(er) pickup segment is definitely showing signs of life to the point where it's getting hard for Ford and FCA to continue ignoring it.

It's simply Ford playing to its strength by continuing its dominance in the van market via the new Transit and the retention of larger E Series CA

 

GM has been comparatively tentative with Colorado/Canyon production, allowing buyer feedback to giude product mix showing what a leap of faith

a mid szed truck was. The difference here is the cost of commitment, Ford and GM are now locked intoTransit and Colorado/Canyon for at least

one or two product cycles, so the proof will be their respective effectiveness after the honeymoon period when sales stabilize and we see the real

base load of market demand.

 

While the success of Transit won't change GM's perspective of the 150 van market, strong sales of Colorado/Canyon may give Ford the optimism

to bring T6 Ranger to North America, imagine a second line in Mexico next to Fiesta...wouldn't hurt.

Edited May 26, 2015 by jpd80

[Bob Rosadini]

 

Bob, after seeing my buddies 2014 F150 XL regular cab / short box....I realize that Orkin etc etc would do well to get that instead...

 

 

I hear you. However I think the issue with a lot of the buyers in this class is size and first cost. I believe Orkin took delivery of the last Ranger off the TC line and shortly thereafter announced a big order for Tacomas.. Also as an aside, when the thought of the Transit Connect comes up, I believe this is not an option for the likes of Orkin as they don't want the products they carry in the driver compartment. I wonder what least costly short bed 150 goes for?

 

Now as for the auto part store class of trade, seems like a Transit Connect would make a lot of sense with the load under cover but at least around here, they all seemed to have stocked up on Rangers and the old generation GM's

[Sevensecondsuv]

I'm seeing a lot of Tacomas and now a few new Colorados at the auto parts stores. Actually the first 2wd new Colorado I saw was at an Advance Auto Parts store. It's amazing how much smaller the 2wd version looks compared to the 4wd crew cabs I'm getting used to seeing on th roads. I've also seen a few subcompact cars of various makes as parts runners but never a minivan like the Transit Connect.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv

[Biker16]

Right. And as we all know, Ford stopped making a half ton van for exactly the same reasons.

So the article is wrong?

 

While the success of Transit won't change GM's perspective of the 150 van market, strong sales of Colorado/Canyon may give Ford the optimism

to bring T6 Ranger to North America, imagine a second line in Mexico next to Fiesta...wouldn't hurt.

I'd be easier to build the courier pickup alongside the the fiesta and Ecosport than to build the T6 there.

 

the Courier/ Strada, provides more space between the pickup segments.

 

Edited May 26, 2015 by Biker16

[RichardJensen]

 

So the article is wrong?

 

 

That AN article says nothing about why the half-tons were canceled.

 

But it is exceptionally disingenuous for GM to say that they're cancelling their Class 1 vans because of emissions when they have no intention of cancelling their Class 1 trucks because of emissions. An emissions compliant powertrain in the Silverado would need little--if any--adjustment to be emissions compliant in the Express.