So is it the end of the Holden??

[jpd80]

The numbers are deliberately a bit off....but most of you get the picture....

Anyways,
this thread is about Holden and their predicament, I thought they were going gangbusters making huge profits
now that Cruze is punching along at 4,000 units a month and Commodore at 6,000 units a month.

How come they need money again after spending over $500 million introducing Cruze to save production?

Oh, that right......

They should get what Ford got, $34 million from feds and $19 million from state Govt.

[P6LTD351]

Jpd80, I used to be sceptical of your posts. Over the last few days you have turned me round. Keep it going.

[Joe5619]

Yes yes stop picking on JPd80 or he might go away.. Pick on the other clowns that just cause trouble!!!

[stevz]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The numbers are deliberately a bit off....but most of you get the picture....

Anyways,
this thread is about Holden and their predicament, I thought they were going gangbusters making huge profits
now that Cruze is punching along at 4,000 units a month and Commodore at 6,000 units a month.

How come they need money again after spending over $500 million introducing Cruze to save production?

Oh, that right......

They should get what Ford got, $34 million from feds and $19 million from state Govt.

Well the way I read it, the money Ford received is only to secure its short term future - to prop up the existing model lineup until 2016, whereas Holden is seeking funds to secure its long term future, ie. 2018+.
So what will Ford do after 2016? They will need a lot more than a paltry $34 million if they want to keep manufacturing here.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by stevz

....... They (Ford) will need a lot more than a paltry $34 million if they want to keep manufacturing here.

Will they? That's interesting. How much do they require to remain sustainable over the next 4 years?

[jpd80]

Personally, I hope Holden get their funding and provided Ford get the same assurance for +2016, I'm good.

FGII is fresh and just launched, SZ territory is just 6 months old, both of those will survive for two years
but we will be looking for another Falcon upgrade in 2014, maybe Territory gets some cash around then too.

As Ford has said, it depends how sales hold up long term, I'm thinking that 2012 will see an easing of pressure
as sales volume lifts slightly but also Falcon and Territory sales prices stay strong as well.

One good thing about only 18,000 Falcon sales, a lot less flooding the 2nd hand market in two years time,
that means residual prices may be improving and Falcon may become a better car in terms of leasing and resale..

[stevz]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

How much do they require to remain sustainable over the next 4 years?

Well they just got a grant to cover that didn't they?

More importantly, how much do they require to remain sustainable after 2016....that's the big question.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by stevz

Well the way I read it, the money Ford received is only to secure its short term future - to prop up the existing model lineup until 2016, whereas Holden is seeking funds to secure its long term future, ie. 2018+.
So what will Ford do after 2016? They will need a lot more than a paltry $34 million if they want to keep manufacturing here.

You are deliberately painful / uninformed. You criticise and do almost no research. In my experience. A typical GMH lover / apologist really.

Well with one-eye you could do some research and find out the federal government shelled out $149m to secure Cruze. Which sold about 33,000 in 2011. The 2nd gen Cruze is due 2015/2016.

The federal government shelled out a 'paltry' as you put it $34m to secure Territory, Falcon and Ute until 2016. Collectively they sold 39-40,000 units in 2011 and 2012 is looking much better.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by stevz

More importantly, how much do they require to remain sustainable after 2016....that's the big question.

That will be the $64.00 question ...... and entirely depends on how well 4cyl Falcon and other developments on the way to 2016 are accepted by the buying public ...

But more importantly, as it is the basis really of what this thread is about, where will GMH be .......... and how much is required to prop up their sustainability?

Well they just got a grant to cover that didn't they?

Really .... in the scheme of things .... it is a piddley amount and if it was a matter of $34,000,000 to survive over 4 years I would be extremely concerned about Ford surviving another 6 months!!!

I do see it as a show of faith from govco which helps ensure another 4 years of manufacturing for Ford in Aus. That is a good thing

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by stevz

Well they just got a grant to cover that didn't they?

More importantly, how much do they require to remain sustainable after 2016....that's the big question.

C'mon Stevz do some research. Some maths. Put some theories out there. How much do GMHolden need? Or, how much do you think they can squeeze from the Federal, SA and VIC governments? They can ask ALL three!

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by stevz

Well the way I read it, the money Ford received is only to secure its short term future - to prop up the existing model lineup until 2016, whereas Holden is seeking funds to secure its long term future, ie. 2018+.
So what will Ford do after 2016? They will need a lot more than a paltry $34 million if they want to keep manufacturing here.

You pose an interesting question.
Why is Holden seeking such long term assurances on funding for a post 2018 car?
And will they need cash for updates for Commodore and Cruze in between now and then?

Now, If they are looking at a whole new platform, lighter more efficient, new engines and tech ect,
they will need (huge guess) $800 million and a lot of support withing GM divisions.
This would mean $600M tip in from Holden and $200M from the government on 3:1 spending.

One good thing about that Steve is that if Holden gets that assurance this far out then surely,
Ford can tap them (govt) on the shoulder for the same for +2016 car..

And we still haven't discussed cash for Cruze update due in another 2 years, there's more cash...

The same for Territory too I suppose....and the cycle repeats..

PS, I bet Carr isn't just talking to cabinet about Holden, Ford must have surely intimated something about +2016 car
maybe the government does both funds at the same time so that each can have
seed cash at the start of platform design, giving government positive feed back...

'nite all..

[stevz]

Originally Posted by phillyc

You are deliberately painful / uninformed. You criticise and do almost no research. In my experience. A typical GMH lover / apologist really.

Well with one-eye you could do some research and find out the federal government shelled out $149m to secure Cruze. Which sold about 33,000 in 2011. The 2nd gen Cruze is due 2015/2016.

The federal government shelled out a 'paltry' as you put it $34m to secure Territory, Falcon and Ute until 2016. Collectively they sold 39-40,000 units in 2011 and 2012 is looking much better.

LOL, pot calling kettle black here re. one eyed - I couldn't think of a bigger one than yourself.
I would've preferred not to resort to personal attacks, but seeing as you instigated it...

I'm not sure what your point is here - of course Cruze investment was going to be higher -a new line which required an expensive plant upgrade to facilitate production, whereas Ford has received funding to secure existing models on an existing production line.
The big question is, what is Ford doing post 2016 and how much will it cost to keep them here?

[Brazen]

Why is Ford needing 50million bucks for a facelift that wont even see it past 2016 - which was the end date all along anyway...?

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Why is Ford needing 50million bucks for a facelift that wont even see it past 2016 - which was the end date all along anyway...?

Unlike Holden which thinks it can keep the same shape for 6+ years, Ford are smarter enough to know refreshing the same model is required every few years.. You know, like every other single car on the market!!


No brainer really.. FGII just come out.. refresh in 2014 & all new Falcon in 2016!! Keeps the model freshed up every 2 years.. Good business modelling if you ask me..

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Why is Ford needing 50million bucks for a facelift that wont even see it past 2016 - which was the end date all along anyway...?

Exactly, this is basically funding that was in the works anyway but hadn't been approved,
IIRC, JPFS1 posted a government hansard from Howard in 2007 that $20 million was
earmarked for E8 in 2011, so it looks like the feds increased that by $14 m and Vic tipped in $19M too.

Normally Ford wouldn't announce a 2014 MCE just as the 2012 FG II is hitting the show rooms...

No, something else is afoot Watson, I think Kim Carr is working on funding for next product cycles
for both Falcon and Commodore, I don't think anything will be announced for just a while,
maybe electioneering in a month or so, bang for bucks to help Julia?

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by jpd80

What amazes me is that people still think Holden is much safer than Ford because they run two shifts,
everytime you look in the press, it's always production numbers, it's always the most sales.

I get it that Holden now builds a very popular small car in Australia but filling your plant with vehicles
that retail at around thwo thirds the cost of your large cars is a dual edge sword, the money Holden
wants to make from Commodore sales is now being replaced by Cruze production.


I have no idea of the difference in internal costs to build a Cruze versus a Commodore but since
Cruze was needed to keep Commodore and Elizabeth plant viable, everything must be OK...

Maybe this is just Ford, Holden bleating about funding cuts after Toyota got funds for new Camry.....

Time will tell..

im only half way thru this thread and im starting to really notice your the smart school teacher who has too continually drum and smack pure obvious facts into trolls and uneducated fools who just dont see the comadores for all the cruzes haha.....but seriously...if people cant work that out....esspescially the JOURNOS no wonder we have problems. And i also find your posts factual incitefull and grat reading

[FGX-351]

Originally Posted by aualright

To back this up, here is an article from the SMH today regarding the alternative govt's view on this:

http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/c...111-1pviw.html

THE federal opposition is rethinking its plan to cut $500 million from car industry assistance as a new political consensus emerges about the need for taxpayer subsidies to protect Australian manufacturing jobs.

The opposition's industry spokeswoman, Sophie Mirabella, and resources spokesman, Ian Macfarlane, finalised a review of manufacturing policy for the Coalition leader, Tony Abbott, late last year.

The Herald understands it recommends that the Coalition review its plan to cut $500 million from the Automotive Transformation Scheme, saying continued subsidies should require long-term investments from the carmakers for models with export potential.
Advertisement: Story continues below

Economists have challenged the efficiency of car industry subsidies. Before the 2010 election the Coalition raised similar concerns about ''industry welfare'', promising to reduce car subsidies by 2015. But more recently Mr Abbott has said car-making was absolutely essential to Australia's status as a ''First World economy''.

The report has yet to be considered by the shadow cabinet, and a decision to reverse the $500 million cut would add to the Coalition's already difficult job of finding billions of dollars in savings to pay for its policies without the government's carbon or mining taxes.

The shift in the Coalition's position comes as the future of Holden's Australian manufacturing operations rests in the hands of federal cabinet, state cabinets and General Motors' international board.

On his way home from meeting auto industry bosses in Detroit, the Minister for Industry, Kim Carr, told the Herald the government wanted to finalise the negotiation ''urgently''.

It has already announced $34 million in funding for Ford Australia to secure a $103 million investment and a promise it will continue operations until 2016.

The Holden co-investment package - which could be sourced from remaining money in the green car fund, research and development programs or new industry programs funded from the carbon tax - must now be agreed by federal cabinet and at a meeting of the GM board. The Victorian and South Australian governments also need to finalise their financial contributions.

It is understood the government wants to secure 900 jobs at Holden's plant at Fishermen's Bend in Victoria as well as more than 3000 manufacturing jobs in Victoria and South Australia.

The acting industry spokesman, Eric Abetz, said yesterday the Coalition supported car manufacturing and accepted the need for co-investment, but the government needed a ''more coherent approach''. Before the last election, Senator Abetz said Australians were suffering from ''auto fatigue'' and were asking ''how long do we have to keep subsidising this industry?''

Coalition sources yesterday said the only alternative to reversing the funding cut was ending all subsidies and ''letting the industry go'', which was unlikely given Mr Abbott's bid to win over Labor's blue-collar heartland.

Labor has attacked the Coalition over its promised funding cut, with the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, saying yesterday, ''what disturbs me is when we've got work to do to keep making sure that the car industry is in the country, that on the other side of politics Mr Abbott's plan is to rip half a billion dollars out of industry support.''

Your post leaves out the part where the $500 million cut was to help fund flood relief, and obviously as priorities change so has the policy...
Just an observation but your posts seem exactly like political point scoring, especially considering the Coalition are yet to announce there ammended policy....

[FGX-351]

Originally Posted by TC200six

Did anyone here listen to an interview on 4BC radio in Brisbane just earlier?

They interviewed some "expert" and he went on a rant saying the government should stop funding Ford and Holden and let them just die off because Australians don't support them. Do any of us agree that the government is only trying to keep alive an industry that we as Australians do not even want and according to him will only last another 10 years?

The interview hasn't appeared on their website yet, but if it does I'll post the link.

Was the "expert" Bob Brown? lol

[FGX-351]

Double post

[FGX-351]

Double post

[FGX-351]

Originally Posted by stevz

LOL, pot calling kettle black here re. one eyed - I couldn't think of a bigger one than yourself.
I would've preferred not to resort to personal attacks, but seeing as you instigated it...

I'm not sure what your point is here - of course Cruze investment was going to be higher -a new line which required an expensive plant upgrade to facilitate production, whereas Ford has received funding to secure existing models on an existing production line.
The big question is, what is Ford doing post 2016 and how much will it cost to keep them here?

I disagree with your pot/kettle reference on the basis that 99.8% of your posts are generally some form of Holden propaganda.

As revealed earlier in the thread the Cruze investment was a means for survival as the existing Commodore line was not viable stand alone.

Without my crystal ball handy post 2016 is to hard to predict but my guess is that sales will level off and with the new engine combos and Territory range, sales and profit will rise and going by jpd80s numbers of being 50% of FoA's profits i'm quite confident we will still be manufacturing locally.

[jpd80]

Before Marin Burela left FoA he thought it is highly possible that Australia's annual vehicle sales
could grow to around 1.2 million in about five years time. The jist was that those 80,000 odd
large car sales today could grow to 96,000 by the time the next gen Falcon and Commodores
start arriving. The only problem I have with that is whether large car sales have bottomed and
if so will they shadow that proposed growth or will improved fuel economy be more important?

If however, we combine the mid sized with the large segment, we get a much more viable 15-16%,
it is my belief that Ford and Holden need to make more use of vehicles that bridge these two
segments rather than designing their big car to accommodate a Fairlane or Caprice.

No wonder Ford and Holden's plans are up in the air, building fuel efficient cars is one thing,
but getting people to buy them is another. Interesting times ahead....

[aualright]

Originally Posted by The-ShowStoPPa

Your post leaves out the part where the $500 million cut was to help fund flood relief, and obviously as priorities change so has the policy...
Just an observation but your posts seem exactly like political point scoring, especially considering the Coalition are yet to announce there ammended policy....

No. My point was all govt's in Australia since car manufacturing began have given assistance. To write posts insinuating only one side does it (or is suddenly at fault from recent funding) was wrong and political point scoring on your part.

The next time the coalition wins office, it will be business as usual in regards to assisting car manufacturing, even if the effects of natural disasters also require funding during their tenure.

****

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by The-ShowStoPPa

Your post leaves out the part where the $500 million cut was to help fund flood relief, and obviously as priorities change so has the policy....

except he was only reposting what was on SMH (and even provided the link to it) so of course it was politically charged, it sells papers.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by stevz

I'm not sure what your point is here - of course Cruze investment was going to be higher -a new line which required an expensive plant upgrade to facilitate production, whereas Ford has received funding to secure existing models on an existing production line.
The big question is, what is Ford doing post 2016 and how much will it cost to keep them here?

Thats actually a fair point to be honest.

Lets not forget the new Aussie built Cruze comes in carrying a huge stigma associated with the outgoing import model which from all accounts was a yellow citrus fruit.
The new Cruze hit the floor with 3 new engine varients, inc. a diesal version and petro turbo which has helped heal the wounds, but at what must be a reasonable expense.
To get 33,000 units out the door in its first year is not a bad thing.

to compare it to a Territory is unfair as Terri was a whole new design which came in during the SUV boom.
A great decision by Ford to snatch a share of another market for the local industry, but how do you think it would have fared if they had just moved the US Explorer production over here and tried to change public perception.

Much worse.

The good thing about Cruze and Commodore are that they keep lots of people employed, the more people reliant on GM for bread on the table the more likely the powers that be are to shell out the cash.

As i've said before, we may not like the oppositions products, but the people behind the scenes are educated people, i think they should be able to make decisions worthy of their pay cheques.

[Gobes32]

Maybe Ford only need the Falcon to surbive to 2016 because after that they will produce the Fusion/Mondeo in Broadmeadows?

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

Unlike Holden which thinks it can keep the same shape for 6+ years, Ford are smarter enough to know refreshing the same model is required every few years.. You know, like every other single car on the market!!


No brainer really.. FGII just come out.. refresh in 2014 & all new Falcon in 2016!! Keeps the model freshed up every 2 years.. Good business modelling if you ask me..

You do realise Ford made the B series streatch over 6 years dont you...

Personally i dont see a problem keeping the same design if it sells, which it has, the current downturn in Commy sales is as a result of economic pressures, not a dislike of its design.

FG2 is merely a facelift with a few extras under the skin, hardly a new product.
Ford may have new engine tech waiting to come mainstream, but VE has seen a number of mechanical additions made during its cycle.

[TC200six]

Originally Posted by The-ShowStoPPa

Was the "expert" Bob Brown? lol

Yeah it does sound like something he would say but it wasn't him lol. Whoever he was, I never heard of this guy before and I don't know what made qualify to be interviewed on the subject of Australian manufacturing but the moral of his rant was why waste money on the industry if it's about to die anyway. He kept claiming Australian made cars are a dying trend like film photography that no one wants anymore and shouldn't be subsidised.

It's a pity the radio station didn't upload the interview onto their website because the drive time show must still be on off season. I would have liked to have posted the link here to see what some people here would have had to say about some of his claims.

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Exactly, this is basically funding that was in the works anyway but hadn't been approved,
IIRC, JPFS1 posted a government hansard from Howard in 2007 that $20 million was
earmarked for E8 in 2011, so it looks like the feds increased that by $14 m and Vic tipped in $19M too.

Normally Ford wouldn't announce a 2014 MCE just as the 2012 FG II is hitting the show rooms...

No, something else is afoot Watson, I think Kim Carr is working on funding for next product cycles
for both Falcon and Commodore, I don't think anything will be announced for just a while,
maybe electioneering in a month or so, bang for bucks to help Julia?

The decision was supposed to be made in 2011... but it never was. T'was then to be replaced in 2014 with Terri to 2016. Now Falcon will get a refresh to make it last till 2016. Before then.... a decision should have been made. Most likely before this year is out.

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by TC200six

Yeah it does sound like something he would say but it wasn't him lol. Whoever he was, I never heard of this guy before and I don't know what made qualify to be interviewed on the subject of Australian manufacturing but the moral of his rant was why waste money on the industry if it's about to die anyway. He kept claiming Australian made cars are a dying trend like film photography that no one wants anymore and shouldn't be subsidised.

It's a pity the radio station didn't upload the interview onto their website because the drive time show must still be on off season. I would have liked to have posted the link here to see what some people here would have had to say about some of his claims.

I'm pretty sure you're talking about Joe Hockey.

http://theage.drive.com.au/motor-new...0120-ml9r.html