March 2014 - Hybrid Dashboard Report

April report is out.

Source: April 2014 Plug-In Electric Vehicle Sales Report Card
Source: April 2014 Dashboard - HybridCars.com

 

Rank Best-Selling Car April 2014 /April 2013
#1 Toyota Camry 38,009 /31,710
#2 Honda Accord 34,124 /33,538
#3 Toyota Corolla/Matrix 29,061 /24,273
#4 Honda Civic 27,611 /26,453
#5 Ford Fusion 26,435 /26,722
#6 Nissan Altima 25,004 /21,991
#7 Chevrolet Cruze 21,572 /22,032
#8 Hyundai Sonata 20,495 /16,077
#9 Hyundai Elantra 20,225 /24,445
#10 Chevrolet Malibu 19,944 /21,734
#11 Ford Focus 19,104 /22,557
#12 Kia Optima 14,589 /14,678
#13 Kia Soul 14,403 /11,311
#14 Nissan Sentra 14,080 /10,734
#15 Chevrolet Impala 13,915 /10,943
#16 Volkswagen Jetta 12,934 /13,078
#17 Toyota Prius 12,039 /13,031
----Toyota Prius Sedan ^ 10,298 /12,432 * Toyota Prius Plug-In ^ 1741 /599
#18 Subaru Outback 10,663 /8730
#19 Nissan Versa 10,481 /7155
#20 BMW 3-Series/4-Series * 9794 /8236

TOYOTA U.S. SALES SUMMARY April, 2014

 

What happened to the Accord plug-in ?!?

 

At 37 units, it only outsold the i-MiEV... So it's almost considered another compliance model. However I think it largely has to do with the tiny supply, and more importantly the unreasonably high MSRP plus dealerships are trying to mark it up. In addition I have a feeling a lot of people don't trust Honda after the high failure rates of their batteries in their earlier Civic Hybrids.

 

Scratched my head on this. The same equivalent statement could be "But focusing on ignoring demand in areas where customers need to be deterred makes more sense." When I look at what it takes to buy a PiP in Florida, it become apparent that Toyota is determined to make that as difficult as possible. They will probably succeed...and then I would be assailed for not jumping through extreme hoops to buy a PiP instead of something available in FL.

 

Been there, done that.

 

Saw your writeup. You actually made an effort. It is just strange to me that so many car makers/dealers will not make much of an effort to sell a profitable car to a determined/educated customer. But then again, incompetence like this is a valuable ingredient to make Tesla successful.

 

Even though I have not flagged many "likes", post like these are informative reading.

 

It's a basic education/support issue. You don't rollout to more customers if the current base is still struggling with adoption of the product. We see that routinely in the computer industry. Why would the automotive industry be any different?

 

So how much did you struggle with adopting the PiP?

 

lol, I don't think john realises that some of us understand toyota kind of missed the mark on the prius phv, hopefully they will regroup with the next design.

This first generation was designed for what toyota thought japan wanted, but it seems the japanese plug-in market is much smaller than toyota expected.
Toyota: Prius PHV to sell for $41,000 in Japan Jan 30 | WardsAuto

Nissan was wrong about the Japanese market also, but Mitsubishi is doing well with the Outlander phv.
Japan Electrified Vehicle Sales (2013 Report) −
With only 3538 sales of the prius phv in japan in 2013, I hope toyota has learned something about the plug-in market and does much better with the next generation. Worldwide the prius phv comes in 3rd for 2013, just ahead of Tesla S, but Tesla hadn't even started asian sales in 2013.
World Electrified Vehicle Sales (2013 Report) −

 

lol? That supports what I posted.

 

Aha, thanks for clearing that up John.
I thought you were saying 'consumers' needed more education.
Here it turns out you were saying 'Toyota' needs it.
This is in agreement with what many of us have been saying.
Thank you for clearing that up

 

Haven't you noticed the debate enjoyment? Looking at the big picture is routinely avoided. Regardless of what I point out, only part of it is acknowledged. Gotta leave out something. Otherwise, the posts would come to a end. It's the behavior we've been seeing for years, quite predictable in this venue. Can't have clarity.

 

John, your posts regularly make these grand statements yet don't say anything.
Could you perhaps illustrate your vague statements with examples of what it is you are trying to convey?
I am not even certain if you are confirming, or denying my statement (or neither).

 

Neither Toyota nor Ford bet the farm on plugging in. The portrayal of "not getting it right" is getting old. They both offer a viable hybrid platform with much opportunity. Nissan took the chance on a single offering, but made great strides for it to be affordable. GM risked it all, gambling that an expensive choice would somehow be competitive. That didn't work, which is why we have had to deal with such a massive amount of rhetoric.

We all knew how incredibly difficult the market would be to penetrate. But since Toyota successfully diversified Prius, expanding into smaller & larger models, it became a target. We see how little there is to gain from expanding PHV rollout. We also see the benefit of figuring out how to penetrate deeper into existing markets, rather than spreading limited inventory thinner.

Remember how effective it was limiting inventory with the Classic model? Most people don't. In fact, they believe demand was low... since those hoping to undermine never mention the limited supply. It's easy to foresee the same thing playing out again with the next generation PHV... especially with so many damage-control efforts at play with a certain plug-in which took the one-size-fits-all approach.

Having participated in the hybrid market for over 14 years, it's easy to see the big picture. For those who don't realize far more is at play than just the information provided in current threads, I don't have a good suggestion, other than just asking them to share what they see. There's no way to know what part of the picture they are missing. The past has taught me that their misunderstanding will clear up as they stumble across more information.

 

It's not incompetence if it was intentional.

I get why the manufacturers would make it difficult with a compliance car. They likely simply didn't want to build those cars from the start. I don't understand why Honda only released the Accord PHV in two states, perhaps they knew the high price would limit sales anyway. Which would further drop once the hybrid becomes fully available. Toyota had, at one point, announced June 2013 as nationwide availability for the PPI on their website.

So you admit that Toyota misread the market for plug in hybrids with the PPI? That they are just in a holding pattern until the next generation becomes available.

 

How is increased sales and market share little gain? In what way does "We want to sell more where we are at, but not in new markets where there is demand" make sense?

With actual sales short of sales projections, how is there a limited inventory? Have the fire sales finally cut that down?

So your plan is to let the ignorant stumble around on their own on the off chance they find they info you already know. meanwhile you post vague allusions in the attempt to appear a wise guru, but really just make you look like a pompous moron.

It is no secret that I didn't follow Volt development. The extent of my interest was that it would be cool if GM actually released it. What is a secret is that I gave it less thought after its release. What got me interested in the Volt, and likely labeled a Volt/GM defender here were the Volt owners that came and posted their experiences and knowledge of the car.

Perhaps my impression of the PPI is marred by the fact that much of its benefits were being attained by DIYers back in 2005, but posts like USBSeawolf's have gotten me to see how it could be the better choice for some. Yours just seem bitter when not out right confusing with marketing speak. If they aren't going to actually help inform, why bother?

 

That's an absolutely fantastic example of not seeing the whole picture. Thanks!

The either/or mindset is a common problem, especially when it comes to plug-in vehicles. People assume if it wasn't this, it must have been that. They don't consider other choices or outcomes, mainly because they aren't even aware of them... hence not having all the information.

In this case, Toyota had addressed a variety of different outcomes and planned a strategy for each. This is a very, very common practice in the software industry. You just plain don't know how customers will respond. That means having to accommodate by building in flexibility. So, no matter what the outcome ends, you were already prepared for it.

The rhetoric emerges from those who spin that proactive approach as reactive. Those of us who studied the plan are well aware of the flexibility long ahead of time. Those who didn't join in until later, typically when some type of undermining effort catches their attention, lack detail to correct assess what's happening.

In other words, since Toyota planned for several different scenarios. Focus on just one provides a distorted interpretation of what actually happened.

Put another way, knew all of their bets wouldn't win and allowed for adaption along the way.

 

So, where is this great overall plan O'Master, or are you just as much in the dark as the rest of us on Toyota's actual plans?