American Suzuki bankrupt

[Dave Mellor NJ]

I just read where American Suzuki is filing for bankruptcy and leaving the car business. They're continuing motorcycles, outboards and other small stuff and the Japanese car business. I think this is great news and hope it's the first of many.American Suzuki files for bankruptcy protection - Yahoo! News

[Dave@Moon]

I think this is great news and hope it's the first of many.

I take it you're not employed by or own a Suzuki dealership, or work for the company.

About 500 Americans are losing their jobs with the company, and thousands more are losing theirs at the 300 or so dealerships still operating.

I have no great love for Suzuki cars myself, but there are more empathetic ways to approach this situation.

[Guest BJM]

I looked at Suzuki for a small SUV and found virtually everything is GM influenced. They had I think 1 small sporty sedan that I liked and it was priced well, but I don't need a small sporty sedan. Dave, I have to beleive virtually ALL Suzuki dealerships are NOT stand alone so while Dave's comments are a little harsh, the technicians, salespeople, and parts guys won't be losing their jobs.

The local Suzuki dealer is a multi brand, brand new facility having or had SAAB, Suzuki, Mitsubishi and Kia. Of those, 2 are gone, Mitsubishi is on life support and Kia is going gangbusters.

[NTX5467]

Our local Suz dealer does have a stand-alone small dealership, down the street from the parent Ford dealer. From what I heard, warranties will be honored and repair parts will be available (possibly due to federal law?). Existing vehicle inventory wil be sold out and THAT's when the supply line will end. They also had a mid-size pickup that was a Dodge Dakota, reskinned. Slow sales and unfavorable monetary exchange rates were what they attributed the closing to.

The other side of the deal is that I don't see how the dealers were making any money, other than on used cars and service work. I suspect many dealers were possibly looking for a way out anyway.

Hate to see 'em go, though. Many of the dealerships might be re-done as off-road vehicle dealers, IF territories might tolerate that.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[Dave@Moon]

Suzuki USA Is Bankrupt - Here's Why - GOOD CAR BAD CAR

American car buyers didn't kill Suzuki with their lack of Suzuki buying. Suzuki killed Suzuki USA by not giving American car buyers what they wanted. And the euthanasia process didn't begin yesterday.

[Steve Moskowitz]

What is the world coming to.....have to agree with Dave on all his comments! Suzuki just never quite got it. It was a long shot to begin with and never looked viable to me (I was offered the franchise). I am sorry for those that will lose their job and dealers who may lose their investment. Been there, done that.

[rocketraider]

Suzuki killed Suzuki USA by not giving American car buyers what they wanted.

Shades of General Motors prior to killing off Oldsmobile. Took a good car and made it into a shadow of itself, and then had the nerve to wonder why sales kept dropping.

And dropping, and dropping, and dropping...

[mercer09]

Suzuki truck was not the Dodge Dakota- it was the Nissan Frontier.... FYI-called the Equator

[John_Maine]

The closest Suzuki dealer to me used to be Lincoln-Mercury-Suzuki. They had two locations but when Mercury bit the dust, they gave up Lincoln, closed their large store and sold Suzukis out of the smaller store. Too bad, with different ownership, that dealership had been around since the 50's.

[Studemax]

The biggest Suzuki dealer in the country is here in Wichita.

They say they'll survive....

[Matt Harwood]

I just read where American Suzuki is filing for bankruptcy and leaving the car business. They're continuing motorcycles, outboards and other small stuff and the Japanese car business. I think this is great news and hope it's the first of many.American Suzuki files for bankruptcy protection - Yahoo! News

you're actually cheering that a company that employs thousands of people (almost all of them fellow Americans) has gone out of business and you're hoping that more go under?!?

Edited November 9, 2012 by Steve Moskowitz
OK everyone..let's keep this civil. No personal attaacks. (see edit history)

[CarlLaFong]

You... you're actually cheering that a company that employs thousands of people (almost all of them fellow Americans) has gone out of business and you're hoping that more go under?!? I don't even have the words to respond. Is the weather in your world really that dark?

I was thinking exactly the same thing. I won't go into any real amateur analysis of statements like these, but how many cheered when Saab folded? How about BLM? What if Mercedes went BK? Because Suzuki is one of "them" we are supposed to think, "Good riddance to the job stealing fiends and their tinny cars." The worst thing the Japanese vehicle builders did, was to bring to the US a product that was, far and away, a better product than we were building, at the time. We built Chevettes, Vegas, Pintos and they gave us Honda Civics. They forced the US automakers to build a better product, which they did. There also seems to be a misconception that "all of the money" goes back to Japan, to be used for their nefarious purposes. These are all publicly traded companies with stockholders everywhere on Earth. Granted, the lion's share of the profits go to the company, but many people profit. There are also, as noted, the dealers, their employees and countless thousands of small businesses profiting from these cars. I do not find any reason to celebrate the failure of Suzuki.

[Matt Harwood]

Steve, with all due respect, I kind of resent the edit and your comment attached to it--there was absolutely no personal attack in there, just wondering that anyone would even think such a thought. Your comment attached to the edit on my comment makes it sound like I said something offensive or a personal attack, which I most certainly did not. There was nothing uncivil or even angry in what I said, just a sense of disbelief. Perhaps your edits will light a fire where there was none to begin with, don't you think?

In fact, your edit and accompanying comment has distorted the intent and tone of my post to the point that I'm now extremely uncomfortable with it even being there, ambiguous yet threatening and casting aspersions on me, whereas I'm always extremely careful how I say things when I am able to write them for myself.

Not cool.

[R W Burgess]

Matt, I think Steve was making this statement to everyone, not just you in particular. I just deleted another post on this thread.

As Steve, said..keep it civil!

[Guest BJM]

Well. we live in a modern automotive market that is truly world-wide so no I would not hope any company goes out of business unless their culture and product are out of whack with the marketplace. Let's not forget that virtually every decade has seen automotive manufacturers go out of business. The last great purge being the independents in the 1950's.

I just think it takes a TON of capital to be a modern car manufacturer. You just can't start from scratch like in the 1910's.

[stock_steve]

...I just deleted another post on this thread...keep it civil!...

Great job.

Keep it civil.

Edited November 10, 2012 by stock_steve (see edit history)

[Dave@Moon]

The last great purge being the independents in the 1950's.

Suzuki isn't leaving the car business, just the American market for automobiles. Isuzu recently did the same thing, keeping only a commercial truck presence here. Mitsubishi is now down to 2 car models, a small SUV, and an electric vehicle. They may be next.

There have periodic purges of imports from the U.S. market since they became a factor after WW2. The biggest (much bigger than today's) occurred from roughly 1980 through the early 1990s. Triumph, MG, Fiat, Renault, Peugeot, Alfa Romeo, Yugo, Sterling/Rover, Jensen, Citroen, and more were all lost in that period from our market. Go back just a few more years and you have Opel, Austin, and Hillman/Sunbeam (incl. the Plymouth Cricket).

This has never been an easy place to sell cars. A successful product that makes it here should be celebrated, not denigrated for where it came from (e.g. "them", "the first of many", etc.). That's especially true if it's being denigrated for things that aren't true, as many of the deleted posts* on this thread were doing.

(*And the now thankfully deleted and excessively partisan "Cash for Clunkers" thread in the Buick forum.)

Edited November 10, 2012 by Dave@Moon
left out quotation mark, added last line (see edit history)

[Guest Joe Kieliszek]

Hello,

Don't forget the '60 to '62 DAF from Holland; dad had one and pulled the bumper off of it trying to remove a big shrub from behind the garage..

Thanks,

Joe

[1937hd45]

Unless Lotto hits I'll never be in the "New Car" market no matter who is making them. Sorry to see more people loose jobs. Bob

[rocketraider]

The biggest (much bigger than today's) occurred from roughly 1980 through the early 1990s. Triumph, MG, Fiat, Renault, Peugeot, Alfa Romeo, Yugo, Sterling/Rover, Jensen, Citroen, and more were all lost in that period from our market. Go back just a few more years and you have Opel, Austin, and Hillman/Sunbeam (incl. the Plymouth Cricket)...This has never been an easy place to sell cars.

Yugo and British Leyland notwithstanding, all of them left the US market because increasingly strident emissions, crash and safety standards made the American market unprofitable for them. Never mind they were and are well-made and perfectly adequate (and sometimes outstanding) automobiles. The rest of the world has them, why not US?

[Guest]

I just read where American Suzuki is filing for bankruptcy and leaving the car business. They're continuing motorcycles, outboards and other small stuff and the Japanese car business. I think this is great news and hope it's the first of many.American Suzuki files for bankruptcy protection - Yahoo! News

Dave, I have a question for you. Why do you think it's great news? and who do you hope will follow?

[Dave@Moon]

Yugo and British Leyland notwithstanding, all of them left the US market because increasingly strident emissions, crash and safety standards made the American market unprofitable for them. Never mind they were and are well-made and perfectly adequate (and sometimes outstanding) automobiles. The rest of the world has them, why not US?

Of all the cars I listed, only Peugeot (in 1995) left this market on the eve of any changes in the safety and emissions standards here (in their case the coming OBD II requirements). Many of them, notably Fiat, Opel, and the British Leyland cars, left with a year or so of the adoption of new standards that they had just spent the money to comply with. Meanwhile other manufacturers were able to sell cars here with no interference from safety and emissions standards whatsoever. If Hyundai and Mitsubishi could have VERY successful launches of untried cars here during the same period that all those hoary old manufacturers were losing market share while complying with exactly the same standards, to say nothing of the roaring success of previously rarely seen cars like Mazda and Subaru at the same time, it's hard to understand why that would be the difference for them.

What every single one of those manufactures I listed has in common is a disastrous sales history in this country during the last 1-3 years of their presence here.

[Dave Mellor NJ]

Dave, I have a question for you. Why do you think it's great news? and who do you hope will follow?

I hate to see people losing jobs, hopefully they can catch on with other companies, but all these jobs were at the expense of tremendously more jobs that died with the American companies. All the foreign companies that were cited in the above posts as having left the US were European. They were equally unable to compete with the Asians who come out with new offerings every couple of years simultaneously with another American nameplate biting the dust. I have a right to my opinion just like Matt Harwood and you and others. No matter what side of the aisle you are on the only hope for this country is for all of us to start buying American.

[Dave@Moon]

No matter what side of the aisle you are on the only hope for this country is for all of us to start buying American.

The problem with that is: Very few people have a true appreciation of what is "American" these days. For instance:

The most American vehicle for 2012 probably isn't going to be a Ford, or General Motors product, or even a Chrysler or Jeep. It's most likely going to be the 2012 Toyota Camry. That's according to the federal government's annual U.S./Canadian parts-content figures, as posted on new-car window stickers and required by the American Automobile Labeling Act (AALA).

According to Toyota, the gasoline version will have a market-leading 92-percent North American-sourced parts. Content for the 2012 Toyota Camry Hybrid—with its Japan-sourced battery pack and drive components—will be 59. But since the window-sticker percentages are calculated on a 'carline' basis, that still calculates to an estimated combined AALA figure of 89 percent for the 2012 Camry lineup.

--2012 Toyota Camry Shaping Up To Have Highest American Content

It’s no simple task to determine — you’ll see some wrinkles below — but we took our best shot. Weighted for sales, here’s how the big players measure up in domestic-parts content:

GM: 69%

Ford Motor Co.: 64%

Chrysler Corp.: 60%

Honda/Acura: 58%

Toyota/Lexus/Scion: 44%

Nissan/Infiniti: 31%

Mitsubishi: 25%

Subaru: 20%

Mercedes-Benz: 16%

Suzuki: 12%

Mazda: 11%

Volkswagen/Audi: 9%

BMW/Mini: 5%

Jaguar/Land Rover: 3%

Porsche: 3%

--Domestic-Parts Content: Where the Automakers Stand - KickingTires (data for 2010)

BTW, while the 2012 Suzuki SX4 had 0%, the Grand Vitara had 1%, and the Kizashi had 2% domestic content respecitively, the Suzuki Equator (made by Nissan) had 50% domestic (U.S.) sourced content. That's more than literally dozens of Ford, GM, and Fiat-Chrysler products. The weighted sales average of these cars was probably similar to the 2010 results above. ( Part 583 American Automobile Labeling Act (AALA) Reports | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) )

[Guest]

I hate to see people losing jobs, hopefully they can catch on with other companies, but all these jobs were at the expense of tremendously more jobs that died with the American companies. All the foreign companies that were cited in the above posts as having left the US were European. They were equally unable to compete with the Asians who come out with new offerings every couple of years simultaneously with another American nameplate biting the dust. I have a right to my opinion just like Matt Harwood and you and others. No matter what side of the aisle you are on the only hope for this country is for all of us to start buying American.

Dave, to put this into perspective you have view automotive history. It was Ford and GM and Chrysler that went to Europe, Germany in particular and the United Kingdom which includes India and southeast Asia and Latin America. This was done at the beginning of the 20th century. In Germany GM bought out Opel and in England bought Vauxhall. In Australia GM bought Holden in 1931. In the early 30's Nissan's Datsun brand was building cars and trucks /engines under licence from Austin. Yes, VW was the first import to make a large presence in the U.S. and that was because there was a market for this type of car...A market the domestic's had no car for and didn't care for anyway until the numbers started adding up. By the end of the sixties the domestic's had all but given up, that is until 1973. The domestic makers did something of a different approach this time. By this time U.S. makers made buy-ins into companies like Mitsubishi, Jeco, Isuzu, Hitachi, etc. If you really want to hold any one entity at fault at this time it would be the domestics because for example Chrysler Corporation who was partners with Mitsubishi had Mitsubishi build cars for Chrysler and badge them as for example Plymouth Cricket or Dodge Colt. Later, Chrysler started building some small car themselves like Omni / Horizon, however the early ones had technology from VW/Audi as they provided engines and transaxles for Chrysler. Same thing with Ford Motor, instead of building a small car "here" Ford built it's small car in Germany and sold it here calling it Fiesta. Ford also brought cars like Taurus Capri and Pantera. GM brought Opel, Vauxhall, Isuzu etc.

So tell me, is it better for a U.S. headquartered company go overseas and use it's captive partners cars and labor and bring it back here to be sold. Or is it better for Toyota, Nissan, Honda to come here and set up it's National headquarters, build test centers, set up U.S. engineering departments, build stand alone design centers, and proving grounds, build foundries to produce engines, drivetrains, build factories, set up schools for training dealer technicians, schools for product planning, marketing, schools for manufacturing personnel, use U.S. suppliers, Partner with Power companies to share EV technology, donate cars to Police departments, make charitable donations to many causes, Pay any employee as long as they make good grades to go to night school to earn a degree??????????

When talking to two of my friends recently I remarked how ironic it was that one friends Mustang had it's engine built in Mexico, the other friends Chevy truck's engine as well as the truck itself was made in Canada and my Nissan was built in Smyrna Tennessee and it's engine was made (not assembled) in Decherd Tennessee.

What I can tell you after having lived it and retired from one of them is these cars, all cars and the automotive industry are a part of the global business network which in terms of the automotive world started when American companies started their expansion long before companies in Asia and Europe did.

As a old friend and former leader going on 104 years young and considered the father of U.S. operations always says " Love Cars. Love people. Love life."

Edited November 14, 2012 by helfen (see edit history)

[Steve Braverman]

I bought a 2005 Suzuki Forenza wagon new. I wanted a small wagon with a manual transmission. It was a decent car, and it was very cheap to buy. the sticker was $14k, but after incentives, it cost me $11k. The car had all the niceties, power everything. It rode nice, and got ok gas mileage (28mpg). I thought it looked great. It was styled by Pininfarina.

I got bored with it after a few years and traded it for a Dodge Dakota, a move I've regretted. Nothing wrong with the Dakota, I love it. I just miss the Suzuki. It was a tremendous bang for the buck.

Btw, the Forenza was basically a restyled Daewoo from Korea, with an engine from Holden in Australia, and a transmission from ZF in Germany. Truly a global car. I bought it from a nice American salesman named Dan at a large dealership that started out as Thomas Dodge. They took on Subaru, and later Suzuki. Chrysler pulled their Dodge franchise, and they soon went out of business.

[Dave Mellor NJ]

Dave, to put this into perspective you have view automotive history. It was Ford and GM and Chrysler that went to Europe, Germany in particular and the United Kingdom which includes India and southeast Asia and Latin America. This was done at the beginning of the 20th century. In Germany GM bought out Opel and in England bought Vauxhall. In Australia GM bought Holden in 1931. In the early 30's Nissan's Datsun brand was building cars and trucks /engines under licence from Austin. Yes, VW was the first import to make a large presence in the U.S. and that was because there was a market for this type of car...A market the domestic's had no car for and didn't care for anyway until the numbers started adding up. By the end of the sixties the domestic's had all but given up, that is until 1973. The domestic makers did something of a different approach this time. By this time U.S. makers made buy-ins into companies like Mitsubishi, Jeco, Isuzu, Hitachi, etc. If you really want to hold any one entity at fault at this time it would be the domestics because for example Chrysler Corporation who was partners with Mitsubishi had Mitsubishi build cars for Chrysler and badge them as for example Plymouth Cricket or Dodge Colt. Later, Chrysler started building some small car themselves like Omni / Horizon, however the early ones had technology from VW/Audi as they provided engines and transaxles for Chrysler. Same thing with Ford Motor, instead of building a small car "here" Ford built it's small car in Germany and sold it here calling it Fiesta. Ford also brought cars like Taurus Capri and Pantera. GM brought Opel, Vauxhall, Isuzu etc.

So tell me, is it better for a U.S. headquartered company go overseas and use it's captive partners cars and labor and bring it back here to be sold. Or is it better for Toyota, Nissan, Honda to come here and set up it's National headquarters, build test centers, set up U.S. engineering departments, build stand alone design centers, and proving grounds, build foundries to produce engines, drivetrains, build factories, set up schools for training dealer technicians, schools for product planning, marketing, schools for manufacturing personnel, use U.S. suppliers, Partner with Power companies to share EV technology, donate cars to Police departments, make charitable donations to many causes, Pay any employee as long as they make good grades to go to night school to earn a degree??????????

When talking to two of my friends recently I remarked how ironic it was that one friends Mustang had it's engine built in Mexico, the other friends Chevy truck's engine as well as the truck itself was made in Canada and my Nissan was built in Smyrna Tennessee and it's engine was made (not assembled) in Decherd Tennessee.

What I can tell you after having lived it and retired from one of them is these cars, all cars and the automotive industry are a part of the global business network which in terms of the automotive world started when American companies started their expansion long before companies in Asia and Europe did.

As a old friend and former leader going on 104 years young and considered the father of U.S. operations always says " Love Cars. Love people. Love life."

You make some good points,Helf. I'll still never own one but I can't convince my kids not to. In the last 50 years I've watched at least 6 American assembly plants close up in NJ or right over the bridges (Chester,Pa and Delaware). All at the time numerous foreign plants bloomed in Dixie enticed by huge tax incentives, low cost flat land,lax environmental standards,relatively low labor costs and standards and climate. It's certainly better to get a car from one of these sources than their home plants but I'd love to see a trend to reverse their growth.

[Dick380185]

Suzuki is a very old and diverse company. The company has had its share of innovations along the way, but has mostly produced conservative and well-though-out vehicles. Their cars continue to be very popular and successful in many other regions of the world. Being a Suzuki motorcycle enthusiast (primarily), I was quite pleased when the company decided to offer cars to the American public. I was especially excited when I saw the new Kizashi. I thought THIS was the vehicle that would spice-up their rather bland offerings, and really jump-start Suzuki. It is a very nice automobile, but alas, too little too late. I'm disappointed to see them go.

[Guest]

You make some good points,Helf. I'll still never own one but I can't convince my kids not to. In the last 50 years I've watched at least 6 American assembly plants close up in NJ or right over the bridges (Chester,Pa and Delaware). All at the time numerous foreign plants bloomed in Dixie enticed by huge tax incentives, low cost flat land,lax environmental standards,relatively low labor costs and standards and climate. It's certainly better to get a car from one of these sources than their home plants but I'd love to see a trend to reverse their growth.

On the other side of the same coin how do you think the English, German, Australian, Brazilian etc. people felt when Ford, Chrysler, GM came to them in the twenties and thirties? I think you would be feeling a lot worse if Toyota had bought GM like GM did in Germany buying out Opel before WW2. Or Holden.

People may not like the fact that Global companies are here ( along with Global U.S. companies ) competing with companies based in the U.S., but if you look back at what american car companies did in other countries you will find they took a different initial approach......They bought out the competition and they benefited. Did you see the money here? I doubt it.