<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Help: Why Are SUVs More Profitable?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/</link>
	<description>What happened to the global economy and what we can do about it</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:48:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: BN</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16815</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BN]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2009 22:45:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16815</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bottled water costs 0.15 in bulk and $1.25 at retail.
That is the profit for the retailer.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bottled water costs 0.15 in bulk and $1.25 at retail.<br />
That is the profit for the retailer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bilety lotnicze</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16639</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bilety lotnicze]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 09:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16639</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think this post hits the nail on the head. I think it comes down to fuel use and millage per gallon. Why would a car that burns so much be &quot;more profitable&quot; than and electric one in the long run?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this post hits the nail on the head. I think it comes down to fuel use and millage per gallon. Why would a car that burns so much be &#8220;more profitable&#8221; than and electric one in the long run?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 10 things to learn on June 5th</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16633</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[10 things to learn on June 5th]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 03:07:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16633</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Help: Why Are SUVs More Profitable? &#171; The Baseline Scenario Many discussions of auto company economics include the assertion that SUVs and pickup trucks are more profitable than small cars, and so a shift from the former to the latter &#8211; as discussed by Felix Salmon, for example &#8211; will not be good for the auto companies, particularly GM and Chrysler (since they are in the news these days). I accept that as a historical statement, but I don&#8217;t understand why that is the case. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Help: Why Are SUVs More Profitable? &laquo; The Baseline Scenario Many discussions of auto company economics include the assertion that SUVs and pickup trucks are more profitable than small cars, and so a shift from the former to the latter &ndash; as discussed by Felix Salmon, for example &ndash; will not be good for the auto companies, particularly GM and Chrysler (since they are in the news these days). I accept that as a historical statement, but I don&rsquo;t understand why that is the case. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: geofftop</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16584</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[geofftop]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 15:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUV&#039;s are I disaster for the environment they should not be legal in this day and age. I agree with the poster above we need more mass transit.  

Search for tons of great documentary films. 
Educate yourself: http://geofftop.com/gt_graphic.php]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SUV&#8217;s are I disaster for the environment they should not be legal in this day and age. I agree with the poster above we need more mass transit.  </p>
<p>Search for tons of great documentary films.<br />
Educate yourself: <a href="http://geofftop.com/gt_graphic.php" rel="nofollow">http://geofftop.com/gt_graphic.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sid</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16564</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sid]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 10:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16564</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;studies have shown...&quot;

pic? link?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;studies have shown&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>pic? link?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tippy Golden</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16557</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tippy Golden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 05:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16557</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I might add here:

Are we pining for a lost dystopia where anyone can take out a loan to buy an SUV and the life-style branding that comes with it?

Are we suggesting that the American auto industry --- under pressure to build smaller, more fuel-efficient cars --- will be less profitable?

I live in the city of Vancouver. It&#039;s June and we have these beautiful, tree-lined streets. But the noise, and pollution, and congestion, drives me nuts. Streams of cars in downtown gridlock with one or two people inside.

In my daydream I&#039;d like to see more user-friendly public transit; and small, quiet, low-emission electric cars on our streets.

Any hope the American auto industry will build such cars?

A taxi driver told me not in our life time.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I might add here:</p>
<p>Are we pining for a lost dystopia where anyone can take out a loan to buy an SUV and the life-style branding that comes with it?</p>
<p>Are we suggesting that the American auto industry &#8212; under pressure to build smaller, more fuel-efficient cars &#8212; will be less profitable?</p>
<p>I live in the city of Vancouver. It&#8217;s June and we have these beautiful, tree-lined streets. But the noise, and pollution, and congestion, drives me nuts. Streams of cars in downtown gridlock with one or two people inside.</p>
<p>In my daydream I&#8217;d like to see more user-friendly public transit; and small, quiet, low-emission electric cars on our streets.</p>
<p>Any hope the American auto industry will build such cars?</p>
<p>A taxi driver told me not in our life time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tippy Golden</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16555</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tippy Golden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 04:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16555</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am no expert, but this discussion feels a bit silly.

0% financing for gas-guzzling SUVs resulted in securitized loans (aka toxic assets)that partly fueled the financial melt down.

Where exactly is the profit here?

Rather, it seems, the zero sum gain is billions of government debt to bailout GM and Chrysler, and to save jobs.

Some land planners consider the American city an --- historical aberation. --- Cheap and plentiful gas, subsidized infrastructure, and vast tracks of car-dependent single-family housing.

An economy based on oil, housing starts and car sales. But this formula isn&#039;t working right now, and most likely, cannot last forever.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am no expert, but this discussion feels a bit silly.</p>
<p>0% financing for gas-guzzling SUVs resulted in securitized loans (aka toxic assets)that partly fueled the financial melt down.</p>
<p>Where exactly is the profit here?</p>
<p>Rather, it seems, the zero sum gain is billions of government debt to bailout GM and Chrysler, and to save jobs.</p>
<p>Some land planners consider the American city an &#8212; historical aberation. &#8212; Cheap and plentiful gas, subsidized infrastructure, and vast tracks of car-dependent single-family housing.</p>
<p>An economy based on oil, housing starts and car sales. But this formula isn&#8217;t working right now, and most likely, cannot last forever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16537</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16537</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nobody ever wants to ride in my Honda Civic del Sol.  They find it too small, too low to the ground, too painful to get in and out of.  So when there&#039;s only two of us, we take the SUV anyway.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nobody ever wants to ride in my Honda Civic del Sol.  They find it too small, too low to the ground, too painful to get in and out of.  So when there&#8217;s only two of us, we take the SUV anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16536</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:20:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16536</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It has to do with the price sensitivity of the consumer segment that purchases inexpensive vs. more expensive cars and the competition the product is exposed to.  

With regard to SUV&#039;s vs. small cars, the price sensitivity of the small car consumer segment is much higher than for SUV&#039;s.  Since a price sensitive consumer will switch brand/product for a small difference in price, the price competition among small cars is much greater.  Conversely, an SUV consumer is less price sensitive, meaning that a consumer will not switch brands/product due to only a small difference in price.  In other words, inexpensive cars compete on price while expensive cars compete on features, performance, styling, etc.  

Trucks are in a world of their own, because until recently there was no serious competition from anyone but the big three.  Truck consumers are also generally much more oriented toward buying domestic.  These limited competition, meaning that as long as none of the big three started a price war, the big three could maintain high profit margins on trucks.  

So it really doesn&#039;t have much to do with the size.  You would have seen the same profitability in luxury cars that were not as big as SUV&#039;s if the big three made any.  Unfortunately, no one really views any domestic cars as &quot;luxury&quot;.  Luxury cars are traditionally believed to be BMW, Mercedez, or Lexus, and they have similar profit margins on those due to the limited price sensitivity of that consumer segment.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It has to do with the price sensitivity of the consumer segment that purchases inexpensive vs. more expensive cars and the competition the product is exposed to.  </p>
<p>With regard to SUV&#8217;s vs. small cars, the price sensitivity of the small car consumer segment is much higher than for SUV&#8217;s.  Since a price sensitive consumer will switch brand/product for a small difference in price, the price competition among small cars is much greater.  Conversely, an SUV consumer is less price sensitive, meaning that a consumer will not switch brands/product due to only a small difference in price.  In other words, inexpensive cars compete on price while expensive cars compete on features, performance, styling, etc.  </p>
<p>Trucks are in a world of their own, because until recently there was no serious competition from anyone but the big three.  Truck consumers are also generally much more oriented toward buying domestic.  These limited competition, meaning that as long as none of the big three started a price war, the big three could maintain high profit margins on trucks.  </p>
<p>So it really doesn&#8217;t have much to do with the size.  You would have seen the same profitability in luxury cars that were not as big as SUV&#8217;s if the big three made any.  Unfortunately, no one really views any domestic cars as &#8220;luxury&#8221;.  Luxury cars are traditionally believed to be BMW, Mercedez, or Lexus, and they have similar profit margins on those due to the limited price sensitivity of that consumer segment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Afternoon Reading: What Is the Chinese Symbol for the Hummer Brand? &#124; Blogoboro.com Blogs</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16534</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Afternoon Reading: What Is the Chinese Symbol for the Hummer Brand? &#124; Blogoboro.com Blogs]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:02:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16534</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] wonder why sport-utility vehicles are more profitable for auto makers than small cars? Baseline Scenario explores some reasons why this might be the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] wonder why sport-utility vehicles are more profitable for auto makers than small cars? Baseline Scenario explores some reasons why this might be the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JN</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16524</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JN]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:27:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16524</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I haven&#039;t read all of these, but in skimming them I didn&#039;t see anyone mention the height effect.  People pay more for SUVs because the view is better making them feel a little less frustrated while trapped in traffic.  Interesting how if one believed in vehicle-caused global warming, one could say that office heights caused the hubris that drove the banking meltdown in the same way that SUV heights are driving the climate meltdown.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t read all of these, but in skimming them I didn&#8217;t see anyone mention the height effect.  People pay more for SUVs because the view is better making them feel a little less frustrated while trapped in traffic.  Interesting how if one believed in vehicle-caused global warming, one could say that office heights caused the hubris that drove the banking meltdown in the same way that SUV heights are driving the climate meltdown.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve schmandt</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16506</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[steve schmandt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16506</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just out of curiosity what was your Krugman reference appro of?  I see no reference to him anywhere in this article or these comments.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just out of curiosity what was your Krugman reference appro of?  I see no reference to him anywhere in this article or these comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve schmandt</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16504</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[steve schmandt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16504</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well put.  Your reasons and i guess the tariffs mentioned also applied to the SUVs and together they explain why the US SUV segment was so free of competitive pressures to drive the prices down and cut into the very high profits from outfitting a truck as an SUV.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well put.  Your reasons and i guess the tariffs mentioned also applied to the SUVs and together they explain why the US SUV segment was so free of competitive pressures to drive the prices down and cut into the very high profits from outfitting a truck as an SUV.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve schmandt</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16502</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[steve schmandt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:21:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16502</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m surprised nobody else so far has mentioned the marketing genius coupled with the aging boomer mentality.  Many SUVs are 4-wheel drive, but most owners never even use the 4 wheel drive off-road capability of these machines.  But almost all of the advertising shows SUVs in inaccessable natural places like mountain-tops.  I believe a good part of the marketing success was due to selling to people who wished they were off-road adventuring campers!  That image really helped sell imo, lots of SUV&#039;s to boomers who wanted to believe they do serious adventure camping but only really drove in the city.
Another selling point is the strong illusion of safety.  In a larger pickup or SUV the driver is a) in a much heavier vehicle and b) sitting much higher than in a passenger car.  This combination makes you feel much safer on the highway -- you have better vision of the road, and in a serious crash it feels like a heavier vehicle will be much safer.  I have no idea of the truth, i do imagine that all things being equal a heavier vehicle *might* be safer.  I do know from personal experience of highway driving in a camry and a Tundra full sized pickup, the Tundra *feels* much safer.
Note that these pickup/SUVs are also top heavy and tend to roll much more easily that a sedan so the actual accident and seriousness of injury stats may be contrary to the feeling that the Tundra is a lot safer.  Again the buyer may be paying more for an illusion there too.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised nobody else so far has mentioned the marketing genius coupled with the aging boomer mentality.  Many SUVs are 4-wheel drive, but most owners never even use the 4 wheel drive off-road capability of these machines.  But almost all of the advertising shows SUVs in inaccessable natural places like mountain-tops.  I believe a good part of the marketing success was due to selling to people who wished they were off-road adventuring campers!  That image really helped sell imo, lots of SUV&#8217;s to boomers who wanted to believe they do serious adventure camping but only really drove in the city.<br />
Another selling point is the strong illusion of safety.  In a larger pickup or SUV the driver is a) in a much heavier vehicle and b) sitting much higher than in a passenger car.  This combination makes you feel much safer on the highway &#8212; you have better vision of the road, and in a serious crash it feels like a heavier vehicle will be much safer.  I have no idea of the truth, i do imagine that all things being equal a heavier vehicle *might* be safer.  I do know from personal experience of highway driving in a camry and a Tundra full sized pickup, the Tundra *feels* much safer.<br />
Note that these pickup/SUVs are also top heavy and tend to roll much more easily that a sedan so the actual accident and seriousness of injury stats may be contrary to the feeling that the Tundra is a lot safer.  Again the buyer may be paying more for an illusion there too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Murtaza Soni</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/02/help-why-are-suvs-more-profitable/#comment-16493</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Murtaza Soni]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=3930#comment-16493</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is about practicality. Off late, the price difference between SUVs and small/medium sized cars is becoming lesser and lesser. A big car will always serve a lot of other purposes which small cars can&#039;t. I am sure, a lot of buyers first try to get a SUV which fits in their budget. When that is not possible, they settle for smaller cars.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is about practicality. Off late, the price difference between SUVs and small/medium sized cars is becoming lesser and lesser. A big car will always serve a lot of other purposes which small cars can&#8217;t. I am sure, a lot of buyers first try to get a SUV which fits in their budget. When that is not possible, they settle for smaller cars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

