2009 Chrystler 300 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Suppliers love Toyota and Honda: Why that matters to you

You might think that a survey of automotive suppliers and their relationship with OEMs is the automotive equivalent of nerd prom. In some ways that's what the North American Automotive OEM-Supplier Working Relations Index (WRI) is. The study, the 17th annual conducted by Planning Perspectives Inc., is based on input from 652 salespeople from 108 Tier One suppliers, or, PPI points out, 40 of the top 50 automotive suppliers in North America. Suppliers to General Motors, Ford, FCA, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. But the results have consequences in terms of tens of millions of dollars for OEMs - and in the quality, technology, and cost of the next vehicle you buy. There are a couple of ways to look at the results of the WRI. One is, "So what else is new?" And the other is, "Damn! How did that happen?" The study looks at five relationship areas — OEM Supplier Relationship; OEM Communication; OEM Help; OEM Hindrance; Supplier Profit Opportunity — within six purchasing areas — Body-in-White; Chassis; Electrical/Electronics; Exterior; Interior; Powertrain. In the overall rankings, Toyota is on top for the 15 th time in 17 years, with a score of 328. Honda, the only company to best Toyota (in 2009 and 2010), comes in second, at 319. Those two companies, explains John Henke, president of PPI, have collaborative working arrangements with colleagues and suppliers alike built into the very fabric of their cultures. This, however, is not a situation where one can readily conclude it is about "Japanese companies," because the third company with headquarters on the island of Honshu, Nissan, came in dead last. This is the "How did that happen?" portion. The Nissan score of 203 puts it 125 points behind Toyota. There hasn't been a number that low since the then-Chrysler Corp. scored 187 in 2010, when the company was clawing its way out of the recession. Clearly, the suppliers don't feel particularly engaged by the buyers at Nissan. Henke explains that whether a company does well or not on the WRI is rather simple. All people do things based on what they're measured on. "If you're measured on taking 10% out of your annual buy, you immediately know how to do it. But if you're also measured on improving relations, suddenly there is a new dynamic as to what you can do to achieve both.

FCA profits surge in second quarter

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles gave the cash register a beating in the second quarter, improving its net profit to 333 million euros ($364M US), which is a 263-percent jump over its reported Q1 profit of 92 million euros ($108M US). At the same time, FCA improved its global profit margin to 7.7 percent. Compared year-over-year, in Q2 2014 FCA reported net profit of 197 million euros making this year's Q2 a 69-percent increase, and profit margins a year ago were 4.9 percent. The two big factors for this increase are strong NAFTA sales and Jeep. In the US alone, Jeep sold 222,940 units in Q2 this year, a jump of almost 20 percent over the same period last year. Revenue in the NAFTA region totaled $18.8 billion, adjusted earnings before interest and taxes were $1.45 billion, both of those numbers more than doubling compared to 2014. The vastly better numbers come on marginally more global sales, 1,181,000 units sold in Q2 2014, 1,193,000 units sold in the same span this year. In the US, FCA began charging dealers one-percent more for vehicles to up the margins, a move that helped boost its US margin from 4.1 percent a year ago to 5.8 percent the first half of this year. The company is holding steady on its guidance of global deliveries at 4.8 million and its net profit guidance at $1.1 to $1.3 billion. It has increased its adjusted outlook for the year to $120.5 billion in revenue, and EBIT to "over $4.93 billion." News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: AP Photo/Carlos Osorio Earnings/Financials Chrysler Fiat Jeep FCA

GM, Chrysler bailouts saved 2.6 million jobs

The Center for Automotive Research (CAR) has been studying the effects of the General Motors and Chrysler bailouts in 2009. Now that the US Treasury has officially sold off the rest of its stake in GM (and Chrysler has already paid back its loan), CAR has released its study on the effects of the bailout with this concluding note: "CAR is confident that in the years ahead, this peacetime intervention in the private sector by the US government will be seen as one of the most successful in US economic history."
Big words, for sure, but there's plenty of evidence to back up the claim. Bailing out GM alone saved 1.2-million jobs. If both GM and Chrysler hadn't been bailed out, US employment would have been reduced by 2.631-million jobs in 2009 and another 1.519-million jobs in 2010, according to the study. If both automakers were allowed to fail, personal income in the US would have decreased by $173.5 billion in 2009 and $110.9 billion in 2010. Instead, the study found that $284.4 billion of personal income was saved by the bailouts.