[kiku007]

Originally Posted by Stribog

Do you guys seriously not know the difference between passenger cars / 1000 and motor vehicles / 1000?

Passenger car =\= motor vehicles.

Here is one source.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.econo...w/66296079.cms

I looked up trading economics but that site has not updated this number since 2010 when it was 18 motor vehicles / 1000. If you look up ceicdata you will see that India sells 20-21mn motor vehicles per year, cars form roughly 20% of that.

For the last time

Motor vehicles =\= cars. Cars are a subset of motor vehicles.

The Nitiayog finding is very clear

https://www.google.com/amp/s/auto.ec...-kant/67059021

22 cars / 1000

So unless you believe India sells ONLY cars and no other motor vehicle (bikes, buses, scooters, tractors, mopeds, lorries, multi axle trailers + movers and many others am leaving out of this non exhaustive list) then yes India has only 22 or whatever motor vehicles / 1000

We don't have any confusion on what constitutes motor vehicles. Don't get riled on that.

The question was very simple. Where did you get the data that showed that Motor Vehicles Per 1000 Indians grew from 22 to 50 in 4 years time? That article where a Niti Aayog person picked a round number from thin air?

[akshay_ritz]

Originally Posted by Porschefire

So, the market as of now -

:

Toyota, Maruti Suzuki and Honda, after being pioneers of automotive tech in India, losing their plot completely by planning low cost business models for India.

VW-Skoda duo continue to churn out decade old platforms for India.

Nissan-Renault aren't sure if they want to churn out anything worthwhile for India.

The Americans have either left India or packing their bags and checking in for their flight back home.

China seems eager to enter India (the horror!).

:

Koreans seem to be making hay while the sun is shining.

The Indian duo of Mahindra and Tata continue to improve.

That is an extremely accurate and frustrating summary of the entire car scenario in India. There are so many business books written on the "what got you here, will not get you anywhere ahead" syndrome but no one seems to be reading them. Everybody is happy whipping dead horses and invest in financially reengineering their companies versus bringing good innovation. . Why would they even attempt to do it? We buy outdated and unsafe cars by the thousands every year. Who cares about steel when you get a panoramic sunroof?

[46TheDoctor]

I hope Toyota doesnt dilute its quality, both the product and the service while cutting down the costs. Etios was a great product at Rs. 10 L but what it lacked was a bit of a character and desirability which could have been added by some exterior changes like projector/LED lights, etc. and changes in interiors like dashboard design and door panels, some addition of features, etc. even if it increases the cost by a lakh or two. Otherwise it is one of the most realiable, comfortable, long lasting and cheap to maintain car that i have come across. Toyota should never divulge from its core values that make the brand unique and even premium in the market, especially in India.

[aghate]

Lost for words here honestly. I keep reading about this copy-paste 'strategy' here and every time it feels such a let down from a major international manufacturer.
I agree with Samba's post. Even Toyota's UK Model range is good. If copy-paste was the strategy they could replicate that range in India.
Sigh! We only wish.

[mohansrides]

Originally Posted by GTO

...And Toyota India wants to further cut costs? God help this company. What "Toyota India" needs to do is think like "Toyota Global" and bring some truly international products here. Learn, Toyota, learn. See how Kia brought in a world-class product and has that 1 car outselling your entire portfolio!

Originally Posted by drmohitg

..Their biggest trump card till date has been the reliability over years of constant abuse on our roads. On the other hand Maruti is famous for its rattles..

Just about the only thing that Toyota has going for them in India is the reputation of quality and rock-solid reliability. My mechanic from the local FNG has told me numerous times to just close my eyes and buy an Innova or the Fortuner despite those cars being way out of my financial league. His justification was that I should man up and choose to pay for quality. He says that every time he pulls apart a Fortuner or an Innova, he is amazed by the quality of the components in those cars; which according to him is many light years ahead of those same components in a Maruti or a Hyundai or a Ford.

Now, it looks like Toyota is getting ready to burn the one bridge that they had with their customers. Bad decision absolutely. But, from a business point of view, I sadly understand their decision making. On the one hand is their brand image tied to good quality, while on the other, they are seeing that the only brand making any progress in this huge market is Maruti with their budget tin-cans. So, taking the budget route seems to be the only viable route to the Indian customer base. These are the times when the old adage of being true to oneself comes to mind. A Sehwag shouldn't try to be a Dravid and vice versa.

Oh well, I suppose time will tell how this plays out. As a customer, I just wish manufacturers took India and Indians seriously enough to give us good products at a reasonable price. But, that's wishing for the moon in the car business. So, I mostly stick to motorcycles.

Originally Posted by navpreet318

..In my opinion Toyota if at all it heads to the low cost model should keep it exclusively for the small cars. It shouldn't be replicated in its Innova and Fortuner segments....A low cost model will undermine that very USP.

This will be tough for them to pull off without creating meaningful separation within the brand. But, it is not totally out of the realm of possibility; because Toyota Global has some experience with that.

About 15 years ago in the US, while they enjoyed an infallible reputation with middle-aged people and seniors, it was plain as day that Toyota's customer base was eroding as its core customers were advancing in age and gettting past their car buying years. Market surveys suggested to them that...

1. ..the younger crowd viewed Toyotas as boring and lacking any driving excitement.
   
   
2. ..the younger crowd viewed the car buying process as painful, what with there being numerous variants, endless haggles and pushy sales people!! Paradoxically, the elders seemed to enjoy this very process.
   
   
3. ..there was the popular (and true??) perception that the car prices were deceptive in that the number advertised was typically for the bare bones variant without even basic creature comforts like power windows - add those features and the price suddenly went up by at least a few thousand dollars.

To combat the above perceptions, Toyota created a new brand called Scion. There were only 3 models. Each model had only one variant. Each model had a sticker price that was non-negotiable. It was like the super-market experience. You pick what you want and pay the price on the sticker and out you go with the reassurance that you paid the same as everyone else. No confusion. No hassle. Just the joy of driving. Super simple. So, the car buying process was nicely dumbed down for all of us back-benchers, while the ownership experience was proportionately enhanced.

Textbook theories aside, the beauty of the whole exercise was in its flawless execution. Toyota saw immediate results. Scions were instantly viewed as youthful and vibrant. Why? Well, maybe because they WERE youthful and vibrant (which the Camry clearly wasn't). More importantly, the Scion cars were seen as "not-a-Toyota" when it mattered. This despite the Scion TC having the engine as the "boring" Camry!!

All things considered, it was a brilliant marketing effort by Toyota. Where it suited them, they marketed Scion as a separate brand that did not share Toyota's boring DNA. But, when it came to talking about reliability, they successfully plugged the legendary reputation of the Camry as the parent vehicle of the TC. The Scion brand took off and had an eventful life before being sunset after it had served its purpose of having created a new customer base among the younger crowd.

Incidentally, the TC was a bit softly sprung for my liking - the pitch and roll was way too evident on canyon roads that I used to frequent. But, the TRD exhaust made some nice noises and the stick shift was cool from that scooped out driving position. All in all, it was a wonderful car that I enjoyed owning for a little while back there.

[shortbread]

I have said it before and I shall say it again, Maruti Suzuki is single-handedly responsible for the lack of progress in the Indian auto industry!

Firstly, they have halved the size of the market. Today any manufacturer entering the Indian auto space can only chase the balance 50% of the market share. The other half has been monopolised by Maruti. Having had a 15 year head start, Maruti's dealer network and understanding of the market is simply unparalleled. Plus their experise in creating low cost engineered vehicles with stringent quality controls backed by well managed service centres mean customers are satisfied with the same.

Secondly, Engineering mediocrity! Maruti has set the commercial standards of how to run a successful automobile business in India. Sell them cheap, make them even cheaper. There is no point in questioning Toyota's strategy in following the market leader.

Thirdly, Lacklustre export initiative! All this while Maruti used the excuse cannot export as busy meeting domestic demand, what now? The japanese are not interested in creating India into an export base. The Indian business is simply a cash cow for Hamamatsu HQ!

Fourth, poor product and terrible safety. Generations of Indians expect so little of their cars because they benchmrk standards against a Maruti! I know bhpians are different and so are younger generations. But for majority of the 'aam aadmi', 'ek maruti kaafi hain!'

Single-handedly ruined an industry that had so much potential in India. Wrap and entangle them in bureaucratic red tape and compulsorily stop production for two quarters. Many will lose jobs but a 2-2.5 million/year market will open up for other manufacturers. Will provide much needed oxygen to an asthmatic Indian auto sector. After six months Maruti will be back, they cannot quit India. Where else will they go, no one else wants to buy Suzuki in rest of the world!

[Stribog]

Originally Posted by kiku007

We don't have any confusion on what constitutes motor vehicles. Don't get riled on that.

The question was very simple. Where did you get the data that showed that Motor Vehicles Per 1000 Indians grew from 22 to 50 in 4 years time? That article where a Niti Aayog person picked a round number from thin air?

I have linked a news article, also you still don't seem to get the difference between the two. The Niti Ayog 'person' is saying 22 cars / 1000 NOT motor vehicles.

Also if you had no confusion on what constitutes motor vehicles, then you would not be raising the questions you have in the first place.

Finally let us not define emotions on others, that is classic projection. I am not and rarely if ever get riled up by online exchanges.

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by Stribog

I have linked a news article, also you still don't seem to get the difference between the two. The Niti Ayog 'person' is saying 22 cars / 1000 NOT motor vehicles.

Really? What are you even trying to say in the below point then?

Originally Posted by Stribog

Facts are as follows,

1) India has 50 motor vehicles (not even passenger cars) / 1000 people.
India was at 22 / 1000 just 4 years ago, so in other words the market is small but it has doubled in size in less than 4 years.

[manjunathkl]

I don't think anything is going to change for Toyota here. It was a big let down to see Toyota launch Etios twins back in 2010 or so. It looked too basic for a Toyota. Till then we knew Toyota for Innova, Corolla, Camry (very premium for that time). Etios was a grand step-down in brand perception.

So, Etios landed up only in the taxi segment which is only looking for transporting people from point A to B. I'm not saying Etios was not a good practical car, but it was never an aspirational car for private use. They launched a somewhat aspiration car in C2 segment - Yaris, but they mistimed it by launching a sedan in a miniSUV era.

Now, Toyota seems to be suggesting, they will copy Maruti's strategy of "low-cost/low-price" and try to win some market. I would call it utterly stupid because of the following reason:

Maruti has already occupied that space. Infact dominated that space for close to 30 years. That too, they are occupying such an unusually large market share. No one can shake them there.

Toyota must reinvent itself and offer something that no other carmaker offers. Even if that is a low volume segment. If the USP is very good, it can grow market share over time. Instead, what we see here is, offering the same thing that the other dominant player is offering - why will an average customer choose Toyota over Maruti?

The problem with Japanese thinking is, they are too proud of "quality" as their USP. Now, all manufacturers are offering reliable, high-quality cars, with only little variance. So, it is no more a valid USP, it is a mandatory requirement. So, they have to offer something else that is unique to them. Toyota has none.

Maruti = Mileage; Service network.
Skoda = Powerful, Sturdy, Higher segment only.
Hyundai = Fit and Finish; First in segment features, Global Models at Indian prices.
VW = Sturdy, German (over) engineering.
Ford = Driving dynamics, Safety, Enthusiast Driven.

Toyota, Honda, Nissan = Quality, Reliability (Which is already present to a similar degree in every brand including Maruti Suzuki).

So, nothing unique going for Toyota. It is sad to see that its management has still not figured out this basic business sense called - DIFFERENTIATION.

[manjunathkl]

Originally Posted by shortbread

I have said it before and I shall say it again, Maruti Suzuki is single-handedly responsible for the lack of progress in the Indian auto industry!

Agree, Maruti has an unfair advantage. Suzuki entered India pre-liberalization period and had enough time to establish itself and monopolize the industry. That too with govt backing. Post-liberalization, other brands had to set up everything without any such favorable terms that Suzuki enjoyed when it entered.

Because of this legacy, Maruti Suzuki still carries that unfair advantage and there is no free-market, equal opportunity in the Indian car market.

Originally Posted by shortbread

Secondly, Engineering mediocrity! Maruti has set the commercial standards of how to run a successful automobile business in India. Sell them cheap, make them even cheaper. There is no point in questioning Toyota's strategy in following the market leader.

I beg to differ here. When Maruti is so well established in this low-cost/low-price car segment, will Toyota not be crushed by Maruti, if Toyota enters the same space? Instead, they should differentiate and make low-cost/low-price less desirable.

Originally Posted by mohansrides

To combat the above perceptions, Toyota created a new brand called Scion.
....

All things considered, it was a brilliant marketing effort by Toyota. Where it suited them, they marketed Scion as a separate brand that did not share Toyota's boring DNA. But, when it came to talking about reliability, they successfully plugged the legendary reputation of the Camry as the parent vehicle of the TC. The Scion brand took off and had an eventful life before being sunset after it had served its purpose of having created a new customer base among the younger crowd.

I beg to differ on these lines. Scion succeeded because its brand's character was "youthful". Creating a different brand for only the "low-cost/low-price" factor is a sure-shot way of saying don't buy this brand. We have a live example: Datson, Nano.

On the other hand, when Hyundai's sister brand Kia, entered India with more premium cars it is a grand success.

Let me give some examples of quality of differentiators:

Better Quality with Lower Price = Best
Better Quality with Same Price = Good
Best Quality with Higher Price = Good

Lower Quality with Lower Price = Worse
Lower Quality with Higher Price = Worst

[mohansrides]

Originally Posted by manjunathkl

I beg to differ on these lines. Scion succeeded because its brand's character was "youthful". Creating a different brand for only the "low-cost/low-price" factor is a sure-shot way of saying don't buy this brand. We have a live example: Datson, Nano.

This thread is fast becoming contentious and I have no desire to perpetuate the unpleasantness. So, I will simply say this and leave it at that - anyone who reads what I have written carefully will come to see that I have never stated that a potential launch of a sub-brand by Toyota to sell budget cars will most definitely succeed. All I said was that Toyota has some experience in launching sub-brands as a business maneuver to tackle tough business problems. That's all.

But, while I have not made any conclusive statement about the outcome of a sub-brand launch by Toyota in India, you sir have certainly stated with the utmost confidence that such a move will definitely not work. I suppose you have reason to feel confident in your assessment on the basis of just one example of Datsun; especially when we all know that numerous examples exist to support either side of this hypothesis.

So, as much as I could easily question you as to how you know for sure that such a business move will surely fail, I am not going to.

Peace.

[manjunathkl]

Originally Posted by mohansrides

This thread is fast becoming contentious and I have no desire to perpetuate the unpleasantness. ...

All I said was that Toyota has some experience in launching sub-brands as a business maneuver to tackle tough business problems. That's all.

Just like you, I don't want to perpetuate any unpleasantness. I was simply trying to understand what purpose will it serve for Toyota to launch a sub-brand and which tough business problem will it address. There has to be some context to why you suggested a sub-brand, I was just trying to explore that.

Originally Posted by mohansrides

But, while I have not made any conclusive statement about the outcome of a sub-brand launch by Toyota in India, you sir have certainly stated with the utmost confidence that such a move will definitely not work. I suppose you have reason to feel confident in your assessment on the basis of just one example of Datsun; especially when we all know that numerous examples exist to support either side of this hypothesis.

I gave real examples of Datson and Nano, to base my opinion. Can you give me the numerous examples to support the theory of low-cost/low-price subbrand succeeding in India?

Originally Posted by mohansrides

So, as much as I could easily question you as to how you know for sure that such a business move will surely fail, I am not going to.

Sorry, if I have hurt your feelings by raising some questions on your assessment. The beauty of this forum is that one can place ideas for others to consume. Not all ideas are for everyone, but never the less it has to be placed and discussed.

I will encourage anyone to raise any questions on my assessments. In the end, either I will correct my knowledge or correct the questioner's knowledge. It is a win-win for both.

There is no unpleasantness in discussing ideas.

[xway]

Honestly I have not been able to understand Toyota in India - their cars worldwide have totally different quality than whats seen in India. Camry and Corollas that I have seen in other countries are completely out of league from their versions here.

In India i find their prodcuts way over priced and sub par compared to others.

Etios dashboard with cheap plastic and center console looks ghastly (no offence to anyone) and can not be justified - heck even alto - 800 provides better dashboards then toyotas car priced 4-5 times more.

I wonder what cost cutting remains to be done, as their car plastics, to dashboard to nitty gritties everything reeks cheap.

The only thing might be their engines which have a great reputation right from their first product i.e. Qualis. Back then the price was very competitive for what it offered in all toyota products.

Now it cant be said the same - Toyota has been milking their brand name too much and demand a very high premium for that - case in point Innova price now - compare it with the prices at that time. Their are cases of people selling their used Innovas at a higher price than they paid after using it for years. This is enough to know the unjustified price escalations in their products.

Toyota engines are rock solid with bullet proof reliability everyone says including all mechanics, FNGs, service guys - but then there are Santros, Altos, Swifts running with 3 lac plus kilometers on the odo without any fuss.

Now when they say cost cutting I wonder what remains here to be cut, maybe they will put cheaper nut bolts paint steel - dont know but as it stands now their quality is way below sub par even now for their budget products, and for others price is way high.

[trinity0114]

Originally Posted by xway

In India i find their prodcuts way over priced and sub par compared to others.

Its an organised loot IMO in the name of reliability & Brand Trust. In this day & age they launched a fit for 1980s product(Etios) with blatant levels of cost cutting, less said the better about its design & desirability and got away with decent levels of success. Imagine Etios was launched by Tata/Fiat/Skoda people wouldn't even have had touched it with a bargepole but because it was a Toyota it sold.

Up until recently most of their mass market cars were basic offerings with minimal electronics & simple mechanicals(qualis, innova, etios), hence ought to be reliable. I think apart from reliability & longevity their products have nothing much going for them.

Originally Posted by xway

Toyota engines are rock solid with bullet proof reliability everyone says including all mechanics, FNGs, service guys - but then there are Santros, Altos, Swifts running with 3 lac plus kilometers on the odo without any fuss.

Yes we have multiple examples of engines from different manufacturers both petrol & diesel running lakhs of kilometers without issues but its only toyota engines which are cited as long lasting. The last gen Innova had a big 2.5L engine producing a measly 102 BHP, when you make such a large engine so under-stressed means it will be long lasting. The innova crysta's engine today makes a lot of power but Toyota carefully plans its maintenance schedule so that every 5000 km you have to visit the service centre which results in good life of the mechanicals. So i think their reliability factor is nothing out of the world & is more hype than substance

[Chai]

Toyota and Suzuki a perfect amalgamation
The Electronic Vehicle (EV) is the second major paradigm shift in the history of mobility with the first being horse carts to IC engines. Even though there has been a tremendous improvement to all aspects of an automobile but the heart is still the same IC engine.
EV vehicles have to draw energy from the grid whose primary objective is to provide electricity to homes and industries. And in developing and under developed economies it is yet to achieve its primary objective of providing a stable supply to all corners of their boundaries. The grid infrastructure is far from ready to accommodate the surge in demand caused by EV. And hence mass adoption if not couple is at least a decade away in these markets unlike what we are currently seeing in a more developed and stable economies and this according to me will be the tipping point.
Suzuki is a strong player in the affordable segment primarily catering to developing and under developed markets while Toyota is part of the big boys club but is a non-starter on EV's like the others in their club and requires few more years before they taste success.
While everyone thinks that the big boys have lost to Tesla in the EV race which is sprinting away but they know they are in a marathon.
To understand this better just look at what happened in the smartphone segment, while it was Apple, Samsung, Sony etc. who fought hard to establish the market through innovation but today it is the latter entries who are defining what should be the next feature addition and consequently grabbing market share with the exception of Apple.
Similar would be the case in EV's. Once Tesla starts production in China, proliferation of technology will take place and others will be quick to adopt and adapt and deliver far better products at a much faster pace than one can imagine today.
With Suzuki and Toyota coming together Suzuki will continue to focus on the IC market and be the primary driver of design and sales while it lasts while Toyota focuses on developing affordable EV's. And once EV's reach the tipping point, they just have to flip positions either by continuing their association or merger and renew their domination in the new paradigm while Tesla continues to be the Apple of EV's.