Date sent: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 10:14:03 -0600 (CST) From: Jon Pace Subject: Re: [80] going without fender covers[chat] To: 80_series@sgiblab.sgi.com Send reply to: 80_series@sgiblab.sgi.com > > Yeah, you just described the vehicle I wanted to purchase (but you > left out the manual transmission). I had to settle for an 'merican > spec FJZ80. I wish Toyota would realize there is a market for > stripped down offroad vehicles that willl be used instead of just > driven to the mall... > I suspect Toyota's problem with bringing in the economy versions (read, cheaper) of the Land Cruiser are the American CAFE standards. One of the reasons the LC is priced so high is because of it's mpg rating. If they sold a lot of them (for less money), they could be subject to whatever fines/penalties automakers get hit with for having their fleet average duel economy too low. GM actually rebadged the Tahoe a 1999 model several months early to combat this problem (yes, it creates a problem in the next year, but there was going to be a redesign the next year) in 1998. I hate to say it, but they actually taught us how to design optimization programs that would maximize profits while meeting constraints such as production capacity and CAFE standards. It's one of the reasons the LC sells-out before hitting the store, but Toyota won't bring in any more. Juice From: "Yang, John" To: "'80_series@sgiblab.sgi.com'" <80_series@sgiblab.sgi.com> Subject: RE: [80] going without fender covers[chat] Date sent: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 09:03:41 -0800 Send reply to: 80_series@sgiblab.sgi.com > I suspect Toyota's problem with bringing in the economy versions > (read, cheaper) of the Land Cruiser are the American CAFE standards. > One of the reasons the LC is priced so high is because of it's mpg > rating. If they sold a lot of them (for less money), they could be > subject to whatever fines/penalties automakers get hit with for having > their fleet average duel economy too low. > > GM actually rebadged the Tahoe a 1999 model several months early to > combat this problem (yes, it creates a problem in the next year, but > there was going to be a redesign the next year) in 1998. I hate to > say it, but they actually taught us how to design optimization > programs that would maximize profits while meeting > constraints such as > production capacity and CAFE standards. It's one of the reasons the > LC sells-out before hitting the store, but Toyota won't bring in any > more. > > Juice Actually, Toyota can bring in the diesel LC and it would not affect their CAFE. To: <80scool@yahoogroups.com> From: Doug Miller Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 14:43:40 -0700 Subject: Re: [80] Re: [LCML] [80sCOOL] New LC sales doing very poorly in USA? Reply-To: 80scool@yahoogroups.com > At 12:30 PM 6/9/2003 -0700, Bill wrote: >> Below is an article from auto magazine.... what do you think will >> happen to LC value if it is discontinued in USA? I heard it was >> discontinued in Canada several years ago...as well as many other >> countries. If the car is so good, (which I think it is) why aren't >> people willing to pay the price for it? The Caddy Escalade and Lincoln >> Navigator are same price and not nearly as good, but they seem to be >> doing well? >> >> I priced and test drove both American 2003 models and the LC was >> nearly the same price, with similar options. I considered the LC a >> much better ride...with the biggest difference being 1) the LC offroad >> capabilities far exceed the American rigs, 2) the amazing center of >> gravity of the LC, it barely bends on turns vs. the American models, 3) >> brakes are slightly better in the LC. The only benefits I saw with the >> American models were, more power, less wind noise, and few more nice >> options, like back up sensors, user adjustable angled headlights, heads >> up display, etc. In addition, the LC has been proven to hold its value >> waaay better than the American models.... one would think with all these >> advantages, the LC would do well? >> >> Bill >> >> New Sales of big SUVs have been softening of late, and Land Cruiser has >> been one of the hardest hit: down a massive 51 percent year-to-year in >> 2001 and another 11 percent in '02. Even so, Land Cruiser will >> reportedly hang on for awhile, though with no major changes. Toyota >> apparently doesn't want to lose a vehicle with such high "brand equity," >> but no manufacturer, not even deep-pockets Toyota, can afford to >> bankroll a sales-loser indefinitely. Memo to product planners: drop the >> vehicle but transfer the name to a luxury version of the more popular >> Sequoia > > > > I have long concluded that Toyota USA thinks the Land Cruiser > is "too much" for the USA market. I talked with some veteran > Toyota salesmen, and they say that they noticed the profile of the > Land Cruiser buyer is one who already knows what a 'Cruiser is. > The potential buyers are interested in a 'Cruiser because they > know what it can do for them, and it's value, and the off-road > accessories they can get for the 'Cruiser. The said buyers come > and get the 'Cruiser not because of promos, or advertisements, > or sales discounts --because their is none. I think Toyota USA > is trying to kill the beast that helped it gain foothold in the USA > market in the first place (the Toyota Crown was a disaster, if I > remember my Toyota history correctly), but they find it difficult > to do so easily. > > Remember some wild rumors over a year ago, that said the LC > is to be phased out, as the Sequoia is to replace it? It doesn't > look like it has happened yet. But then again, if Toyota USA do > make the LC unavailable, it may only be good for us in the 3rd > world :-) as the Land Cruiser product managers will probably go > and re-focus on the 'Cruiser's off-road features. > > Drexx Laggui - TLCA #11841; PMC > San Jose, CA, USA > http://www.pbase.com/drexx (UZJ-100W; FZJ-80L; HDJ-80L) > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cruiser-stuff/files/cruiser_specs.html > Toyota would not make the decision to kill a product that makes them a ton of money (highest gross product in the line). What kills a product is market demand. Indeed, the Cruiser is "too much" for the US market from a product durability standpoint, since we rarely own our cars for more than 4 years before trading again. With the Sequioa out, Toyota can compete in the lucrative large SUV market against Chevy, Ford, et al. But this also makes the smaller and more expensive 100 redundant since we 'mericuns don't see the value as much - someone with a value placed on smaller, tougher and more expensive vehicles is rare. Toyota follows the market, not the other way around. Also, the comment about the Cruiser product manager focusing elsewhere if it's not available in the USA anymore is worth a comment. The USA is not the focus on Cruiser development and never has been. The US product managers have almost no say in its development and get to choose color and trim and a few options - that's it. The platform is clearly not aimed at the US, so input from other countries is paramount. DougM