Shut Holden, Ford and Toyota

[vztrt]

...says Suzuki

http://theage.drive.com.au/motor-new...826-13t3n.html

Shut Holden, Ford and Toyota, says Suzuki
Steve Colquhoun
August 26, 2010 - 2:01PM

Japanese brand says local car makers are unviable and out of touch with consumers.

Holden, Ford and Toyota's car manufacturing operations in Australia are unviable and should be shut down, Suzuki Australia says.

Suzuki general manager Tony Devers, whose company imports a range of light and medium cars and compact SUVs from Japan, says it makes no sense for the federal government to continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars propping up local manufacturing operations.

"From the point of what the consumer wants, quite obviously they're not buying locally manufactured cars which represent around 14 per cent of total sales now," he says.

"Consumers prefer the imported cars, not just because they're imported, but because the other manufacturers have read the consumer trends and built cars for those trends.

"Management after management of the local factories haven't read those trends properly, and there's no accountability for that. Holden got a grant to bring in a small car from Korea, the Cruze. Is that fair? What about the previous management? Why didn't they understand that and build a (small) car?

"They keep pumping out big cars to rental companies and governments. There's no accountability for these managers that come over here and stay for two or three years, go back, and someone has to come over to try to fix it but they don't. The large car segment has been diminishing for 15 years. It's no secret, it hasn't happened overnight."

Mr Devers says the three local manufacturers would actually be more profitable by abandoning Australian-built cars and importing their entire range, and could even send iconic local cars such as the Commodore and Falcon to be built elsewhere.

"I'm all for a strong industry. I just don't believe we can afford to prop it up to the extent that we are. Look at what Nissan has done after they pulled out (of local manufacturing) in 1996, or thereabouts. Nissan has become stronger, they have a better model range. Mitsubishi will do the same thing," he says.

"I agree we've got to maintain jobs, but at what cost?

"In reality, perhaps the government should be spending money in supporting cars that are emissions-friendly, fuel efficient and safe. There's none of that. They have this green plan, but the cars are over-priced relative to the normal consumer.

"Where's the benefit to driving an (Hyundai) i20 or an (Suzuki) Alto? If they're fair dinkum about the environment and fuel efficiency, they'd be doing something to support those cars."

Mr Devers says the entire local industry needed an urgent review to justify the continued government subsidies that he believes unfairly advantage Holdern, Ford and Toyota.

"I don't know the figures for how many people are directly employed in automotive manfacturing, I'd guess about 10,000, and we don't know exactly how much the grants and kick-backs from the federal and state governments are, but if it's around one billion dollars a year, you just have to do the maths to come up with $100,000 per employee. Is that fair? Is that viable?

"I just think that somebody's got to look at the whole scheme and figure out what's best. Someone who is independent and apolitical.

"Both political parties are going to take the line we need a car industry because there's 10,000 jobs at risk. But what if someone comes in says that 3000 can be absorbed because the volume is not going to drop? Because of a better model range and access to other cars, then those 3000 people get absorbed. What happens to the rest? I don't know."

He says Australia could continue to provide research and development skills to the global automotive industry, such as recent projects where Holden employees designed and engineered the Chevrolet Camaro and Ford similarly contributed to the T6 global pick-up truck project.

"There is an over-riding idealism that we need an industry, but the facts indicate that we don't," he says.

"You can say that we need to develop engineering. Do that. Have an institute of automotive engineers that can do projects for the (importing) car companies that will still be here. If we can develop that professionalism and that edge, to do that you've got to be the most efficient and the best. And if you're the best, the BMWs, the Mercedes, the Mazdas, Hondas and Suzukis will use you.

"If we're good enough, we could be the centre point for research, development and engineering for the Asia/Oceania region."

Mr Devers says a shutdown of local manufacturing would need to be carefully planned and executed. "I'm not saying you close the gates tomorrow. Let's say, in five years' time, they get their product line-up planned and ready, and ADR's approved, so it's a seamless introduction of new cars," he says.

"I have a philosophy. You can do more of the same, which means you go backwards, you can do more and better, which means you're standing still, or you can do something different."

Federal Chamber of Automotive Industry chairman Andrew McKellar has, not surprisingly, taken issue with Devers' comments.

While he admits support for Devers' push for incentives for fuel efficient vehicles like the Alto, McKellar is a firm believer in the importance of local manufacturing.

"We've got to be careful not to confuse the different objectives here," McKellar says. "Reducing fuel consumption and CO2 emissions is everyone's objective... The industry has said it will support a reduced emissions standard."

He cites the introduction Toyota Camry Hybrid production, Holden's SIDI and FlexFuel technologies, Ford's work on EcoBoost and liquid gas injection (LPI) Falcon and diesel Territory and the plan for local Holden Cruze production as signs the local manufacturers are listening to market demands.

"I think there is a very valuable role and contribution that the local manufacturing industry plays in the overall industry," he says. "I think we'd be poorer as an industry and a nation without it."

[Kingsley]

Ironic since Suzuki hardly rates in the monthly sales. Maybe we need to stop importing them.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by kingy351

Ironic since Suzuki hardly rates in the monthly sales. Maybe we need to stop importing them.

Maybe they should go out on their own and try and survive instead of being in the safe arms of Toyota.

[LightningStrike]

"Where's the benefit to driving an (Hyundai) i20 or an (Suzuki) Alto?"


Where is the benefit indeed - - I couldn't agree with the original author more (just on this one bit!)

I am glad they made metion of EcoBoost and the options the other manufacturers are pursuing. I can understand the authors position - he needs to get some free ink for the Kisashi (sp) whcih isn't setting the Aussi market on fire like he thought it would. Not bagging Suzuki - they make some OK stuff.

[tranquilized]

As much as I hate to admit it, he's made some pretty good points. He's obviously more than a touch biased though...

[Mr Hardware]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

As much as I hate to admit it, he's made some pretty good points. He's obviously more than a touch biased though...

Quite so, and as much as I like suzuki's, try running a vitara or swift as a taxi, lol.

[Bucknaked]

Suzuki make great bikes. I wonder if their cars are as good.

This guy is just making some noise.

[bmorris]

Nice to Australian's supporting Australian companies these days... oh wait

Yer I guess its a better idea to send our money overseas instead. /sarcasm

[Kryton]

Didnt even read past the first sentence but all i see is a competitor saying it would be better for everyone (themselves) if the competition shut down.

Why such garbage is even printed in the first place............

[Ghiadude]

he seems to forget the downstream effects of subsidising local manufacturing. Its obvious he has an axe to grind.

[bobthebilda]

Originally Posted by Ghiadude

he seems to forget the downstream effects of subsidising local manufacturing. Its obvious he has an axe to grind.

Well i guess he, and the other 13,876,000 australian taxpayers are just not quite sure what the benefits are of subsidising 25,000 employees to the tune of $600 million dollars a year are. is it
1) we get to pay more for our imported cars that 86% of australians prefer to buy
2) We allocate vast resources in land, human "talent", natural resources and government time to distort the natural economy to the detriment of world competitive businesses.
3) We decry the patheticness of someone receiving $10,000 a year in unemployment benefits, but somehow praise those hard working intelligent car manufacturing employees who are subsidised to the tune of $25,000 in each year.

I assume that once australians start buying over 50% of the cars sold in australia each year, then Mr Devers comments may be a minority position. But at this point, he may just have the majority on his side.

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by bobthebilda

Well i guess he, and the other 13,876,000 australian taxpayers are just not quite sure what the benefits are of subsidising 25,000 employees to the tune of $600 million dollars a year are. is it
1) we get to pay more for our imported cars that 86% of australians prefer to buy
2) We allocate vast resources in land, human "talent", natural resources and government time to distort the natural economy to the detriment of world competitive businesses.
3) We decry the patheticness of someone receiving $10,000 a year in unemployment benefits, but somehow praise those hard working intelligent car manufacturing employees who are subsidised to the tune of $25,000 in each year.

I assume that once australians start buying over 50% of the cars sold in australia each year, then Mr Devers comments may be a minority position. But at this point, he may just have the majority on his side.

A) where gods names do you get 600 million EACH YEAR from?? Talk about an over rated amount!!
B) Thia is nil duty, so not all of that 86% of import cars has duty!!
C) Bigger picture..As a country we need to try & keep as many sectors & jobs as we can, otherwsie we'll be well & truelly stuffed in 10-20-30 years time!!
D) What do you purpose those 25,000 poeple do??? If you axe 25,000 jobs you need to create them somewhere else to stay vable!!

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by bobthebilda

Well i guess he, and the other 13,876,000 australian taxpayers are just not quite sure what the benefits are of subsidising 25,000 employees to the tune of $600 million dollars a year are. is it
1) we get to pay more for our imported cars that 86% of australians prefer to buy
2) We allocate vast resources in land, human "talent", natural resources and government time to distort the natural economy to the detriment of world competitive businesses.
3) We decry the patheticness of someone receiving $10,000 a year in unemployment benefits, but somehow praise those hard working intelligent car manufacturing employees who are subsidised to the tune of $25,000 in each year.

I assume that once australians start buying over 50% of the cars sold in australia each year, then Mr Devers comments may be a minority position. But at this point, he may just have the majority on his side.

That buys the local manufacturing industry about $8 billion/year worth of products for domestic and export.
On top of the tax that Ford, GM and Chrysler buy power and pay tax, their suppliers also pay tax and so do all their employees. The people who buy those vehicles pay GST on them and also have them serviced locally.

There are a lot of hidden benefits to a local car industry, the government knows this and is tipping in a few dollars to get a whole lot more back...

[chevypower]

I hope the Falcon EcoBoost picks up sales for Australian manufacturing. Who wants a shoebox, when you can have a large car with similar fuel economy, but with added performance? Yet, still at a reasonable price.

[bobthebilda]

Originally Posted by jpd80

That buys the local manufacturing industry about $8 billion/year worth of products for domestic and export.
On top of the tax that Ford, GM and Chrysler buy power and pay tax, their suppliers also pay tax and so do all their employees. The people who buy those vehicles pay GST on them and also have them serviced locally.

There are a lot of hidden benefits to a local car industry, the government knows this and is tipping in a few dollars to get a whole lot more back...

mmmmmm whilst I dont have the exact figures, I would be hard pressed to beleive an industry that only made 223,000 cars in 2009, and from all accounts include up to 70% imported components into the cars, would contribute $8 billion dollars to the economy. 8 billion / 223000 x 30%. To achieve that magical mark, the manufacturers would need to sell each car they are making for approx $115000. If you mean they sell $8 billion of product each year, you may be close, but its business 101 to try and sell things at a higher price than it costs to make. Not just acheive turnover. By your reasoning, we would be far better to increase the crime rate, as locking someone up cost taxpayers $100,000 per year, which is then added onto our GDP.

Nissan, Mitsubishi, Renault, Mazda, Suzuki (or whoever own the distribution rights in australia) also pay taxes. In fact wouldnt one asume that 86% (imported) of the cars bought in australia, contribute alot more in GST than the 14% of locally made cars (who are often bought by government agencies, which are excluded from paying GST).

If the government recieves more back from the local car manufacturing industry than it hands out, then wouldnt it be far better for the government to exempt these companies from paying taxes (or lower their taxes) , rather than taxing them and then giving money back by way of subsidies / rebates. The simple answer is lowering a tax on a company that runs at a deficit has no benefit. You then have to resort to sudsidies and rebates.

Doesnt really matter anyhow, if the coalition get in with the assistance of the three independant yokels, its bye bye subsidies and bye bye australian car industry. After all, you cant blame the yokels for wanting to support the 140,000 australian farmers, instead of the supporting a small number of people in the car indusrty.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by bobthebilda

mmmmmm whilst I dont have the exact figures, I would be hard pressed to beleive an industry that only made 223,000 cars in 2009, and from all accounts include up to 70% imported components into the cars, would contribute $8 billion dollars to the economy. 8 billion / 223000 x 30%. To achieve that magical mark, the manufacturers would need to sell each car they are making for approx $115000.

Including vehicles exported, there's over 300,000 vehicles produced in this country,
their combined value is close on $8 billion.

Originally Posted by bobthebilda

Doesnt really matter anyhow, if the coalition get in with the assistance of the three independant yokels, its bye bye subsidies and bye bye australian car industry. After all, you cant blame the yokels for wanting to support the 140,000 australian farmers, instead of the supporting a small number of people in the car indusrty.

I think you're very misinformed on the opposition's view of the local car industry,
Howard was in power for around 10 years and never considered dismantling or winding back assistance.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by bobthebilda

Well i guess he, and the other 13,876,000 australian taxpayers are just not quite sure what the benefits are of subsidising 25,000 employees to the tune of $600 million dollars a year are. is it
1) we get to pay more for our imported cars that 86% of australians prefer to buy
2) We allocate vast resources in land, human "talent", natural resources and government time to distort the natural economy to the detriment of world competitive businesses.
3) We decry the patheticness of someone receiving $10,000 a year in unemployment benefits, but somehow praise those hard working intelligent car manufacturing employees who are subsidised to the tune of $25,000 in each year.

I assume that once australians start buying over 50% of the cars sold in australia each year, then Mr Devers comments may be a minority position. But at this point, he may just have the majority on his side.

This has been discussed before in other threads so I wont bother going into detail - but I still dont understand where you get your numbers from. If you dont want to support local manufacturing thats fine, but you dont need to make numbers up to try and create an arguement. As discussed previously FAPM's webiste lists the number of people directly employeed (either by Ford, Holden or Toyota) or their suppliers as 45,000 (refer previous thread http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11292899) There are also a large number indirectly employeed (things such as cleaners, Accountants, IT support) who support either the manufacturers or component suppliers. Add to that all these people buy houses, food etc which in turn secures other forms of employment. To suggest that if the local car manufacturers left the country only 25,000 jobs would be affected is incorrect.

[irlewy86]

"I have a philosophy. You can do more of the same, which means you go backwards, you can do more and better, which means you're standing still, or you can do something different."

They've been selling the same model of Swift since Jesus was a chippy.

Guess he's just ****ed that the Kis-my-ashi is in the same price bracket as XR6's and Commo Internationals.

[bungarra]

Funny how Suzuki spokesman makes these comments, when Japan has Tarriffs on imported vehicles!! Foreign car dealers wanting land in Japan have to pay a 50% duty on land for a dealership as well as up to 5 times the cost of land to a Japanese Car seller and pay mor in annual taxes! Maybe a nice 100% duty on Japanese car yards and a 30% import duty would make them happy, keep things a bit more level.

[Fireblade]

The flow on effects of this could devestating to this country, not only jobs in the Auto industry but wider. Where do you stop in propping industry up in Australia. If you do it to the auto industry whats next, Steel industry? next thing you know in 20 years time we will be leaving Australia to find jobs. Manufacturing in this country would have to be one of its biggest employers, without it the taxpayer will be paying many many 1000's of people benefits because they cannot find any work. Australia's manufacturing industry has been under the pump for many years by imports from countries that pay next to nothing to their employees to do the work, it is fact we cannot do the same as the rising cost of living is crippling to most blue collar families as it is.

[Nikked]

Close ford, holden and toyota?

Is suzuki going to employ the 10 of thousands effected?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Close ford, holden and toyota?

Is suzuki going to employ the 10 of thousands effected?

Who employed all the people put out of work when guns were banned in 1996?

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by flappist

Who employed all the people put out of work when guns were banned in 1996?

Government?

[mik]

The Bloke Is A Goose.

[SteveJH]

Its not just about car's.

Car plants can build stuff other then car's in an emergency. Engine are not just used in car's.

Going back to WW2, Armoured Vehicles and Aircraft were both built on what were previously car production lines.

[csv8]

Check out Suzuki's Kizashi, and now the 4wd model is here, for $39.990+orc. THats gonna give Subaru a challenge. The Mondeo isn't advertised enough by Ford. How do they expect it too sell when, its the "sleeper car" in the market ????????????
Ask people about the Mondeo and you get a blank look. Ford needs to really push thier cars advertising.

[aussie muscle]

What's good for suzuki is good for australia...NOT.

I'll bet he'd hate to see australia in the 1950s when tarriffs where so high, cars HAD to be made here to be competitive. oh how things have changed.

[TUF_302]

Sounds like the the only thing that needs closing is that guys mouth

[kingyxr8]

misses owns a new suzuki swift sport... very good car and very cheap on fuel... also got some go in it aswell i was very susprised... suzuki are great !!!!

[fg_nitro]

Unless he starts selling a large sedan that is RWD and can pull a 2 ton trailer he can buzz off.

If he wants to sell to the cardigan management class then go for it.