ddeliber

Is it really?

If "stomps" is an accurate representation of the numbers presented what would be an appropriate term to use for last month?

Not that it is related to this thread but the CLA numbers that they focus on so desperately are in comparison to last year. In other words, in comparison to the first full month of availability of a brand new model which happens to be the most inexpensive MB in the US, and probably ever (in today's dollars). It still sold more than last month and outsold its nearest competitor, the A3 by more than it did last month. Hardly indicative of the catastrophic failure that they allude to.

IMO the article misrepresents the data that it presents. It stinks of either being written by a BMW fanboy or a MB hater (pretty weak) or of someone looking to provoke a fight between the two brands (which is pretty cool if you ask me).

Back on point, the 5 series numbers bounced back up significantly. All the way to 4914 units, handily crushing the E class by almost a thousand units. Not that you can get this from the article which interestingly doesn't even mention the 5 series. I had to go to GCBC get the numbers. I am still very curious as to why the 5 sold so poorly last month. It looks like it was just an uncharacteristic anomaly pointing towards a business weenie failure as opposed to an issue with the car.

Regardless, this is great news for enthusiasts like us.... Bigger discounts and hopefully boat loads of trunk money coming our way!

instantfob

BMW is on an offensive starting October. Deal is so good that I got rid of the 2013 ActiveHybrid5 and picked up a 2015 Z4 35is.

There was extra $2k trunk money in the leftover 2014 5ers last month.
For November month the 2015 got residual bump on 39 month program. (39m residual is 1-2% higher than 36m)

According to my CA, they are blowing out 5/6/7 series for next two months. Let me know if you need an referral.

DerekACS

Meanwhile during October in Canada, BMW Sales fell 1.8% compared to Oct./2013. Mercedes-Benz sales increased by 12.3% to a Best Ever October of 3530 units.

Year to date sales for BMW are up by 5.3%, while MB sales are up by 8.4% to a record high of 31,278 units, outselling BMW by almost 4000 units YTD to claim the Number 1 Luxury marque.

By the way, Mercedes-Benz in Canada outsells Acura & Lexus combined !!!

instantfob

I am guessing the battle between BMW and MB will heat up more when 2015 ML catches up and make their way into dealerships.

Germancar1

Yep I agree. Really catchy headline, with much ado about nothing.

The problem with counting sale is that hardly anyone here realizes that these "sales" numbers that are released every month are just deliveries/sales to the dealers, not actually customers.

The reason why BMW's numbers fluctuate so much is because they can't ship 5K 5-Series month after month, there is not that high of demand for the car. One month they ship a lot to stock all the dealers and then based on how they actually sell (to customers) that will determine what they get next month.

You have to check true "sales" you have to look at the registration data.


People here actually think that in the span of one month, people realized something about a car and decided not to buy and that caused the "sales" numbers to drop. Ridiculous. That takes time for something like that to happen.


And the article is Wrong as hell, as they can't even get the numbers right. They're counting Sprinter sales which aren't luxury vehicles and NO ONE else even counts those in the MB total.

M

petee1997

Mercedes sales would have been much higher in Oct. if dealers had any 2015 E class. My dealer has not received one E400 to date. Mine will arrive sometime next week and it will be the first W212 E400 4M.

Germancar1

And the 2015 CLS. Only 33 were shipped last month!

M

ddeliber

How can your statement about shipment to dealers be true when they show positive numbers in sales for cars that have been discontinued and consistent sales numbers covering times during production halts (retooling for a new model, shutdowns for holidays etc)? I am not saying that I know for sure how these sales are recorded, but unless I am missing something, your claim doesn't add up.

Last year and even more so in 2011 the 5 series showed very steady sales numbers at well over 4k/mo. E-classes show very consistent numbers pretty much all the time. Sounds like pretty good demand to me.

I am not sure if your 1 month drop point was directed at me but I never alluded to demand being the cause. I just thought that such a dramatic drop over such a short period of time was interesting and I was looking for thoughts as to why.

Germancar1

For one all you have to do is research it, these sales numbers are shipments to dealers. Don't you know that cars are held at ports all over the country and shipped out as needed? That is what is being discussed when manufacturers say they have a 30, 60, 90 day supply of vehicles on hand. There have been cars found at port that have been out of production for months. Happens all the time.

Last year and 2011 don't have anything to do with Oct of 2014 sales. If you look at BMW on the whole they have some pretty wild swings in sales for some of their models. Demand doesn't spike and drop like that month to month. Think about it. 5K one month at 1-2K the next month. These are shipments, not actual sales to people.

I didn't say anything about the E-Class fluctuating. Clearly the E-Class didn't ship that many last month because of the switch over to the 2015 model, ditto for the CLS.

M

ddeliber

You didn't address my question about discontinued models showing sales. By way of example, I believe R-classes stopped production in 2012, but yet they show sales more than a year afterwards. A bit more than 30 60 and 90 day supplies.

Last year and 2011 have to do with your point about there not being that much demand for 5 series. Plus we are not just talking about BMW here. The numbers for the vast majority of cars are available at a click of a mouse. I don't think anyone is going to argue that Acura/Honda shipped 48 TSXs from any port last month.

Germancar1

I just stated in the previous post that cars are found and shipped from the port all the time, cars that have been out of production. Did you not see it? Re-read the post. Again, there have been cars found a year after production has stopped, brand new and then sold. It happens.

2012 and 2011 have nothing to do with with 2014 as far as sales go. I'm going to say this again since you missed it. I stated: "The reason why BMW's numbers fluctuate so much is because they can't ship 5K 5-Series month after month, there is not that high of demand for the car."

I said that there is not THAT HIGH of a demand for the car, i.e for them to keep shipping over 5000 units a month. Not that high of a demand, NOT that there isn't demand for the 5-Series. Big difference. 2011 and 2013 are past years, has nothing to do with demand at the end of 2014.

M

ddeliber

Yes I read your post, it simply didn't address my point reasonably so I wanted you to clarify. You said months which is somewhat reasonable not years which is not.

My example mentioned the R-class so lets stay there (even though the same can be shown for many discontinued models)... you are now saying that there have been cars found a year after production has stopped. I said R-class sales are showing up more than a year later. In fact they are reporting sales almost 2 years later, in early 2014. Based on your logic the reason sales were reported is they must have found them in the Alabama plant/storage and shipped them because the sales numbers are shipments to dealers not sales. This just does not pass the ridiculous test so I thought I would ask again.

I ask others to ask themselves what is more likely:
MB progressively shipped a whopping 30 discontinued 2012 R-classes progressively over the 12 months of 2013 (no more than 8 in any month) from their factory storage facilities to various dealers in the states, and then shipped 7 more of the same models over the course of the first 8 months of 2014 because they found them - or - that dealers had leftover stock that they couldn't move and eventually sold them over the course of the next 2 years and titled the cars (notice I didn't say registered).

I personally agree with you that tracking registrations as opposed to sales is a better way of tracking actual sales as deliveries to customers. However, I absolutely do not agree that the sales stats reported by car manufacturers are just shipments to dealers (stock + custom orders). They count titles issued the same way CarFax collects for their reports. Unsold dealer stock are not titled and thus don't count in the sales stats reported by the manufacturer.

The reason why registrations is a better metric of sales is that dealers often "punch" cars that they have on their lots to collect on rebates/dealer money/sales bonuses when they feel it is beneficial for them to do so. Essentially taking ownership of the cars themselves only to sell them when they can as either new or used (there is a lot of debate on what is legal/ethical here, but dealers often say whatever they want to their customers). These cars along with others that they take possession of as loaners or whatever were not sold but are recorded as such in the month that they were punched because a title was issued.

I remember reading about Fletcher Jones punching something like 900 E-classes at the end of the year last year to pocket the dealer incentives (something like just under $10k+ per car) and collect top tier sales bonuses. I don't know if it is true (900 * $50k ish cost is a lot to hold on a balance sheet) but it is what I saw.

If anyone is curious about the R-clase sales that I referenced here is the link: http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

Not sure what to say about this... I think you know my point but you just like to argue so I am just going to leave it at that... Incidentally, I have no idea where you came up with the 5k units every month number, I sure didn't say it and the sales numbers don't say it. 4 - 4.5k is more like it and that is what BMW reported pretty consistently in 2011 and 2013.

Oh, and BTW quoting someone's post and then modifying the quote in a reply is simply weak. I would never intentionally try to misrepresent what anyone says in a quote even someone I strongly disagree with. It looks like it could have been an accident so I won't say anything further on it.

Germancar1

Clearly I did address it, you just didn't read it.




Total confusion. Actually, either scenario could have happened. I have seen this before.

You're just wrong here. NO they don't. Unsold dealer stock is counted in these sales reports if that stock was shipped this month. Not so sure what is so hard to get here.



Do you know what what you're talking about? I haven't modified anything that anyone said here.

M

petee1997

The numbers shown are for cars sold and delivered by the dealer. Not cars sold from the manufacturer to the dealer.

However the OP is correct when the dealer reports a sale to collect incentives on a new car, that sale is counted because the dealer is shown as the buyer even though he does not license the car. The warranty starts ticking away at that point.

ddeliber

I am thinking the same thing about you. Not only did I state that it wasn't addressed reasonably, but I also clearly articulated what wasn't reasonable about it - you said months and only in a subsequent post did you say year (and never years). Read it again.


Yes (I see this all the time as well) and Yes.

By way of a 10 second example, there are currently 4 new 2013 and 2 new 2012 CLSs on cars.com. And cars.com does not have all new stock in their databases nor are they 100% accurate. As I said it is a 10 second example.

In fact I believe it is ridiculous to think it is more likely to have that many cars found lying around than unsold stock of a discontinued model. Also, to which dealers would 2 yr old new found cars be shipped?


Its pretty clear that we are not going to agree here. Its ok, we don't have to agree.

It has nothing to do with getting a concept. I understand what you are saying, I just don't agree with you. I will add that I at least tried to demonstrate why I am right.


Read the quote in your post 61 and then re-read what was quoted: post 60.

ddeliber

Since you agree that "punched" cars are counted but not delivered to a customer would you agree that the following is more accurate?

The numbers shown are for new cars that are titled by each state. Not cars sold from the manufacturer to the dealer

Germancar1

It is the same difference, doesn't matter how long, the car is still out of production. My goodness.


I think it is equally ridiculous to think that the numbers you see on a sales report on the 1st of every month includes every car that was turned over to an actual customer.


Yep agree to disagree, because you're wrong. Manufacturer sales reports are shipments to dealers and I've ready this numerous times.


Yeah what I stated got added to your post by mistake in the quote, that was my answer to your previous response, not an addition to it, a typo/mistake.

M

Dema

Why do not sales number based on DMV new VIN registrations? It would be real numbers, considering that very low percent drives cars without registration.

ddeliber

My God, talking about people not even reading posts and still replying. I NEVER said, intimated, reflected upon or even hinted that the sales numbers represented customer deliveries. In fact I went in to a rather long description about the issues with using titles vs registrations. Remember the part about punched cars? It was pretty big and central to the point about why registrations are better. I can copy and paste it in a separate reply and make the font bigger if that would help.

Having said this, I will restate my point briefly and you can re-read the rest. The sales numbers count the number of titles issued because that is when the car is technically sold. This is NOT the same as deliveries to customers because dealers buy or "punch" cars all the time. It is also absolutely not the same as the number of shipped cars to dealers. You do understand that cars can be in stock and sold to the dealership (but not a customer) as well as in stock and unsold right? The sales numbers reported by the manufacturers count both sold to customers and sold/punched to/by the dealers but not those that are in stock and unsold/untitled. Counting registrations would eliminate the punched cars from those numbers, while potentially not crediting cars that take a while to register in the correct month.

Furthermore, counting all cars shipped to dealers (regardless of them being sold) would among other things count brand new models shipped to stock as sold even before they were for sale (like the CLA last year and the i3 this year), and not count discontinued models as the dealers are still selling off their remaining stock. These are just two examples where the sales numbers do not back up your position.

So much for brief, sorry.

Now I'm just spit balling here, but it might help everyone understand where you are coming from if you were to, you know, provide some type of reference in staid of because I said so and I read it, no matter how many times.

I figured, no problem.

Germancar1

I'm done with it, I made my point on the matter. The plot has been lost. You have to have a paid subscription to Automotive News to read the insider info.

M

YYZ-E55

Not accurate, the MB numbers include MB Vans (Sprinter). Back out the vans and 27,767 is the real number YTD October, around 300 units ahead of BMW.

Germancar1

Neither number is right. BMW is ahead of MB in the U.S. YTD:

For October 2014:

BMW - 30,602
MB - 28,593

YTD 2014:

BMW - 267,193
MB - 261,804

= 5398 unit lead for BMW

SOURCES: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...281336651.html
*
http://www.bmwblog.com/2014/11/03/oc...se-11-percent/


These numbers exclude Smart, Mini and Sprinter as it should be and how the press counts MB vs BMW sales.

M

K-A

Enthusiasts really shouldn't care about sales figures. All they represent at this point is who is expanding further with crappy models like the FWD CLA and GLA and who's discounting more. In essence, in terms of keeping up what got enthusiasts infatuated with these brands in the first place, more sales are something that makes paying a premium for these cars less enticing (imo), and makes the brands less aspirational. Especially as they share design cues, parts and methods from $29k to over $120k.

Just wait until BMW releases more foolish GT/GC/X models (dilution and non focused image with all these confusing and unattractive models) and then their first FWD econobox. Brand cachet will be affected as entry segment mass market consumers start to be the most prevalent buyers and the brands become successful in an entirely different way than what got them here in the first place. Like becoming a Toyota with the Lexus division.

To me, less models, more exclusivity, higher margins to be reinvested into ensuring EVERY new model serves a purpose in upholding the brands virtues with no compromises, and less tacky "fire sale" type discounting which destroys resale therefore long term brand appeal and relinquishes any timeless and iconic status of aging models.

But I'm an enthusiast, not a shareholder, so all I care about is the emotive side of it. The prestige factor gets sucked out as the high volume/low margin/discount side of things take place.

MB already has more models to sell than BMW, yet they're still behind in sales. That's not a good sign in terms of not continuing to throw dilution and massive discounts at the wall. IMO they should maintain their prestige approach and at least make it look like they aren't going to try and chase sales like BMW anymore.

instantfob

Forget this ...

I am going with Lincoln ... because of Jim Carrey's parody!
very exclusive since no one drives them .. yet

petee1997

Correct.