Death Of The Australian Motoring Industry

[disco man]

This article is from AMC.

The golden age of motoring in Australia is coming to an end.When Ford and Holden close their factories sometime after 2016,they will be closing the engine room that has driven the development of some fantastic cars as well as providing the inspiration and motivation for a generation of design and engineering heroes.

The VF Commodore is,without any doubt,the most complete and impressive Australian car of any and all times.The Ford Falcon might have run out of puff but the Territory is still a homegrown SUV that ticks lots of boxes for 21st century families.

And Toyota?well we know what has happened there,the closure of the Altona factory and the Camry coming to the end of it's lifespan.Since Ford and Holdens have been the mainstays for generations,it's cabbies that are most likely to miss the Camry hybrid when Toyota writes the final dismal chapter in the history of the Australian car industry.

Looking back now,the decline and failure of local motoring can be traced back to the day when senator John Button announced his ambitious plan to revolutionise, rationalise, and restructure the car industry.

At the time,in the 1980's,local motor manufacturers were protected by a 57.5 per cent tariff wall and a limit on the number of annual import licences for foreign cars.Things were so skewed that one importer made a bigger profit in one year from selling its licences to BMW than it did selling its own cars.

So Holden and Ford had a huge homeground advantage and Nissan,Mitsubishi and Toyota also made lots of cars and big profits with Volvo assembling kits of parts into 240 sedans around the back of the Nissan factory in Clayton,Victoria.

The idea behind the 'Button plan' was to force the manufactures to co-operate,reduce complication and duplication,and put a bigger emphasis on exports.What it led to,first of all,was an incredible run of 'badge engineering' deals that were-at best-passable,but generally a disaster.

No-one went into a Nissan showroom looking for re-badged Falcon ute called with no imagination,'The Ute'.And when Toyota and Holden were forced into a shotgun wedding by their foreign parents we got a Commodore called the Lexcen,named after the man who designed the America's cup-winning yacht for Allan Bond.Other badge swaps included the Maverick,Apollo,Corsair.

Things got worse as the tariffs fell,quotas were removed,and then Paul Keating floated the Australian dollar in a move that made imports much cheaper and led to the gold rush that now has more than 60 brands competing in the world's most competitive new-car showroom despite annual sales of just over one million vehicles-a pittance compared with the USA at 13 million.

Australia was also committed to a level playing field at a time when no one else was obeying the same rules.Thailand became the Asian manufacturing hub with cheap labor rates and huge government incentives,at the same time as anyone in South Korea who bought an imported car also got an automatic tax audit for five years.

Of course,there was plenty of headline grabbing good stuff in Australia as things got tougher in the back of the book. HSV and FPV gave muscle car fans the cars they had craved,with incredible levels of performance and value that made them truly world class.If only they could have been built with left hand drive and internationally competitive pricetags.

Nissan formed a special vehicles division that did good work on the locally made rear wheel drive Skyline six and even localised the original GT-R to make it more accessible and affordable,and even Toyota had a go for a while with TRD Australia's tweaking of the Camry and Hilux ute,although that experiment was killed way too early.

When Nissan decided to force-feed Pulsars from Clayton to avoid a massive fine for failing to hit a local production minimum,a panic move that killed demand,its days as a local maker were over.

Mitsubishi,always too Adelaide-centric and conservative after the success of the original Magna,wrote a death warrant with a 380 that was the right car at the wrong time.

Holden looked good for a long time with everything from the born-again Monaro and a Pontiac export deal,as well as a string of impressive concept cars and strong demand for it's V8-powered Commodores,and the late Geoff Polites looked to have saved Ford when he ram-rodded the Territory project through the boardroom in Detroit.

So,today we have a brilliant HSV GTS that stands comparison with the world's best four door performance cars,a Territory that still makes sense with a diesel engine,and a dull but worthy Camry that is the only signficiant -but loss making export vehicle.

As a reporter,observer and analyst since 1978,I have seen a seismic shift in Australian motoring.There have been some truly awful cars,like the Commodore four and the Nissan Pintara,and some very good ones including the Monaro.

But the final nail in the coffin of local makers is the rise and rise and rise of SUV's and small cars. Families have abandoned traditional Aussie sixes for four wheel drives that promise far more than they deliver at the same time as the rising cost of motoring has seen people buying small cars in record numbers.

That means the Falcon and Commodore are mostly irrelevant and under appreciated.And the Territory is too old and the Cruze is too little too late.What comes next is more and more imports,as Australians gorge themselves on cars that have never been cheaper and better.

Tens of thousands of jobs will be lost through the coming factory shut-downs,as well as the inspiration and training for future generations of talented youngsters who could have found a home in motoring,but we will loose something that is irreplaceable and part of a national culture that has made the automobile part of the fabric of Australian life.

To tweak things just a little,"Football,meat pies,kangaroos and Aussie cars" has been a part of who we are and what we do.Now that's about to change,and nobody really knows how things will look after 2017.

[PAT303]

Ford and Holden had everything at their feet and what happened,they didn't bother to improve their vehicles or move with the times because the tariffs protected them,even now they are still making vehicles no one wants.The car industry has been a leach on the Australian tax payer for years,good riddance. Pat

[JDNSW]

Mostly not exactly a leech on taxpayers as a leech on car buyers.

As the article points out, the end was inevitable under the Labor Button plan. It might have worked if there had ever been a truly Australian car manufacturer. Actually, there were several, but none were successful, usually because they could not compete with the government supported multinationals.

I suspect that the main reason there has never been a successful Australian car (other than the small domestic market) is that Australians have always attacked rather than supported successful businesses - whenever a business looks successful, tax and other policies here always seem to make it more attractive for foreigners to buy the shares compared to Australians.

For example, in the 1970s, an Australian individual who could afford to buy large parcels of shares paid 67 cents in the dollar income tax compared to about 35 cents for the foreign company - but capital gains were untaxed. So what did they mostly do? - if the business was successful, sell the shares!

John

[disco man]

A quick look at Australian factories and assembly plants in the 1960's
GM-H Mosman Park,
Ford Fremantle,
GM-H Elizabeth,
Ford Birkenhead,
GM-H Woodville,
Ford Campbellfield,
GM-H Fisherman's bend,
Ford Geelong,
Rootes Group Port Melbourne,
Standard Motors Port Melbourne,
GM-H Dandenong,
Volkswagen Clayton,
Ford Lidcombe,
GM-H Pagewood,
BMC/Leyland Zetland,
Ford Eagle Farm,
GM-H Acacia Ridge,
GM-H Fortitude Valley,

Now its all gone,what a waste:(

[JDNSW]

......

Now its all gone,what a waste:(

Well, yes - but look on the bright side. You list three imported vehicles in your signature. If the same protection that kept these plants busy in the 1960s applied today, these would have cost you at least 50% more. That is, if they were available at all.

Have a look at a bit of history. Up until the 1960s, Australia imposed punitive duties on all imports except for ones from the Empire. This meant Australians usually had English cars (or imports from US manufacturer's Canadian factories).

During WW1, imports of complete cars were banned to conserve shipping space for military purposes, resulting in the growth of body builders such as Holden and Ford Australia. After the war finished, the ban was replaced by tariffs to protect the industries that had grown up during the war.

With the start of WW2 (in fact, even before the start), Australia started on forced industrialisation, as supplies that had been coming from the UK in particular became unavailable. With the end of the war, while imports became available again, the Australian government, concerned for the workforce now employed in these industries as well as returning servicemen, needed to keep this industry going. As the head of GMH (L.Hartnett) had headed the government's wartime industrial push, a proposal from GMH to start full scale production in Australia of an abortive 1942 Chevrolet design, was accepted, with the government not only providing massive protection, but paying the costs of tooling.

With the change of government in 1949, other manufacturers started demanding the same treatment, and although, as far as I know, none got a direct payment like GMH, tariff reductions on parts as long as significant local content was used resulted in a wide range of cars from Landrovers to Jeeps and Citroens to Volkswagens and Falcons to Valiants were being assembled in Australia by the late 1960s. These included unique models from some manufacturers, especially as the Australian content rules tightened. (Just assembling a vehicle from imported parts represents about 60% of the cost - add things like tyres, glass and upholstery, and you can get close to 70%. After that you have to start doing things like making panels, engines, gearboxes, etc, which gets expensive to set up.)

By the 1970s, other countries that had been devastated by war recovering, and with better communications, Australian car users were starting to get restive, especially when Japanese cars were appearing that were in some aspects better that local cars, and cheaper despite the massive protection. This ultimately resulted in the Button plan - see above.

Before WW1, Australia had perhaps the highest living standard in the world on average. By the 1970s we were still fairly well up the ladder but nowhere near the top. It is possible that this reflects the high level of manufacturing protection, and as this has reduced, our position has again climbed relative to other countries. Maybe a coincidence, maybe not.

John

[frantic]

Ford and Holden had everything at their feet and what happened,they didn't bother to improve their vehicles or move with the times because the tariffs protected them,even now they are still making vehicles no one wants.The car industry has been a leach on the Australian tax payer for years,good riddance. Pat

ROFL you ate that line and believed it:D

At a "cost to the tax payer" they built about 150,000 cars, at an average value of $40,000 = around $6 billion we will no import instead of make here.
At a "cost to the taxpayer" they employed 20-30,000 directly, (include all their parts suppliers)earning an average of say $50,000 each = $1-1.5 billion no longer paid and spent here.
Of that 1-1.5 billion,"at a cost to the taxpayer" NOW;) when the plants close the govt will lose around 25% paid in income and various other taxes= $ 250-375million lost to govt income.
Now how many other jobs will be lost "at a cost to the tax payer" with the loss of between $750-1200million being spent in the community after tax?
At a "cost to the tax payer " two third of those who leave their car jobs will be on welfare long term, 14-20,000 more unemployed x $ 16,000= $200-320million more paid in welfare ALONE!
Hmm now what was the govt subsidy again???? From memory around the 300 million mark.

[Jeff]

Well, yes - but look on the bright side. You list three imported vehicles in your signature. If the same protection that kept these plants busy in the 1960s applied today, these would have cost you at least 50% more. That is, if they were available at all.

Have a look at a bit of history. Up until the 1960s, Australia imposed punitive duties on all imports except for ones from the Empire. This meant Australians usually had English cars (or imports from US manufacturer's Canadian factories).

During WW1, imports of complete cars were banned to conserve shipping space for military purposes, resulting in the growth of body builders such as Holden and Ford Australia. After the war finished, the ban was replaced by tariffs to protect the industries that had grown up during the war.

With the start of WW2 (in fact, even before the start), Australia started on forced industrialisation, as supplies that had been coming from the UK in particular became unavailable. With the end of the war, while imports became available again, the Australian government, concerned for the workforce now employed in these industries as well as returning servicemen, needed to keep this industry going. As the head of GMH (L.Hartnett) had headed the government's wartime industrial push, a proposal from GMH to start full scale production in Australia of an abortive 1942 Chevrolet design, was accepted, with the government not only providing massive protection, but paying the costs of tooling.

With the change of government in 1949, other manufacturers started demanding the same treatment, and although, as far as I know, none got a direct payment like GMH, tariff reductions on parts as long as significant local content was used resulted in a wide range of cars from Landrovers to Jeeps and Citroens to Volkswagens and Falcons to Valiants were being assembled in Australia by the late 1960s. These included unique models from some manufacturers, especially as the Australian content rules tightened. (Just assembling a vehicle from imported parts represents about 60% of the cost - add things like tyres, glass and upholstery, and you can get close to 70%. After that you have to start doing things like making panels, engines, gearboxes, etc, which gets expensive to set up.)

By the 1970s, other countries that had been devastated by war recovering, and with better communications, Australian car users were starting to get restive, especially when Japanese cars were appearing that were in some aspects better that local cars, and cheaper despite the massive protection. This ultimately resulted in the Button plan - see above.

Before WW1, Australia had perhaps the highest living standard in the world on average. By the 1970s we were still fairly well up the ladder but nowhere near the top. It is possible that this reflects the high level of manufacturing protection, and as this has reduced, our position has again climbed relative to other countries. Maybe a coincidence, maybe not.

John

You missed quite a few steps in the history, John. Like the EEC forcing Britain to abandon trade with its Empire in favour of them and the Japanese dumping cheap cars on the Australian market in protest of our tariffs, or Bob Hawke destroying the Australian manufacturing industry in order to reduce the unions power.

Jeff

:rocket:

[TerryO]

How many people who complain about the Australian car industry closing down actually own a recently built Australian car that they purchased new?

The answer is very few, this is a Land Rover forum, most of us have chosen a foreign built vehicle to be our vehicle of choice. Why? Neither Ford nor Holden build the type of vehicle we want and we like Land Rovers. So we buy foreign as does most everyone else, if Australians aren't going to buy local built cars then how can they complain when the businesses become unviable? As far as I can see everyday Australians decided well before the government to stop supporting the local industry, so end of story.

[disco man]

Well, yes - but look on the bright side. You list three imported vehicles in your signature. If the same protection that kept these plants busy in the 1960s applied today, these would have cost you at least 50% more. That is, if they were available at all.

Have a look at a bit of history. Up until the 1960s, Australia imposed punitive duties on all imports except for ones from the Empire. This meant Australians usually had English cars (or imports from US manufacturer's Canadian factories).

During WW1, imports of complete cars were banned to conserve shipping space for military purposes, resulting in the growth of body builders such as Holden and Ford Australia. After the war finished, the ban was replaced by tariffs to protect the industries that had grown up during the war.

With the start of WW2 (in fact, even before the start), Australia started on forced industrialisation, as supplies that had been coming from the UK in particular became unavailable. With the end of the war, while imports became available again, the Australian government, concerned for the workforce now employed in these industries as well as returning servicemen, needed to keep this industry going. As the head of GMH (L.Hartnett) had headed the government's wartime industrial push, a proposal from GMH to start full scale production in Australia of an abortive 1942 Chevrolet design, was accepted, with the government not only providing massive protection, but paying the costs of tooling.

With the change of government in 1949, other manufacturers started demanding the same treatment, and although, as far as I know, none got a direct payment like GMH, tariff reductions on parts as long as significant local content was used resulted in a wide range of cars from Landrovers to Jeeps and Citroens to Volkswagens and Falcons to Valiants were being assembled in Australia by the late 1960s. These included unique models from some manufacturers, especially as the Australian content rules tightened. (Just assembling a vehicle from imported parts represents about 60% of the cost - add things like tyres, glass and upholstery, and you can get close to 70%. After that you have to start doing things like making panels, engines, gearboxes, etc, which gets expensive to set up.)

By the 1970s, other countries that had been devastated by war recovering, and with better communications, Australian car users were starting to get restive, especially when Japanese cars were appearing that were in some aspects better that local cars, and cheaper despite the massive protection. This ultimately resulted in the Button plan - see above.

Before WW1, Australia had perhaps the highest living standard in the world on average. By the 1970s we were still fairly well up the ladder but nowhere near the top. It is possible that this reflects the high level of manufacturing protection, and as this has reduced, our position has again climbed relative to other countries. Maybe a coincidence, maybe not.

John

Some very good info in there John,i understand what your saying as well.But at the end of the day if not being able to own a Land Rover is the price to pay to have Australian people still in work in those closed down factories then i would gladly give them up.

Some BIG mistakes were made by the car makers and the Government and some good and bad has come from it.Australians can buy a brand new car for around the $10,000 mark,but at the cost of many jobs and the loss of skills.

I feel Toyota **** all over the Australian workers when they pulled out,they are the BIGGEST car maker in the world and were very happy to reap millions in profits from this country,but as soon as things got tough they just shut up shop and left.Thanks for the millions Australia catch you later.

[TerryO]

Why blame Toyota? It's not there fault the local car industry is stuffed.

It's not just car plants closing down, so are many of Australia's longest standing icon industry's going the way of the dodo. Why Australians are buying imported goods not locally built product and to be frank that is their decision to make.

How many of you own a Electrolux fridge which was Westinghouse previously and have been made in Orange in country NSW for over 50 plus years? Not many I would say otherwise they to wouldn't be closing down either.

As for not buying a Land Rover if it meant keeping Australians in work and a local industry going, well then I and many others would have to drastically change our lifestyles because that would mean we could not tow a large caravan around because there is no vehicle that is made in Australia that can tow up to a 3.5 ton van.

Holden Colorado's don't count they are built in Thailand. Anyway Discoman this whole car industry meltdown has been obvious in where it was going for at least a decade so you and everyone else more than had a chance in that time To buy a locally built car. It's to late talking about it after the door has closed.

By the way I have brought four brand new Australian built Holden's over the last ten years, the most recent 18 months ago which I still own, so I more than did my bit to support the local industry before anyone asks the question.

[disco man]

How many people who complain about the Australian car industry closing down actually own a recently built Australian car that they purchased new?

The answer is very few, this is a Land Rover forum, most of us have chosen a foreign built vehicle to be our vehicle of choice. Why? Neither Ford nor Holden build the type of vehicle we want and we like Land Rovers. So we buy foreign as does most everyone else, if Australians aren't going to buy local built cars then how can they complain when the businesses become unviable? As far as I can see everyday Australians decided well before the government to stop supporting the local industry, so end of story.

How is a car maker supposed to compete with Indonesia and South Korea's cheap labor rates.People can't support the local guys when the Government opens the flood gates to these cheap cars made in countries were the workers get paid ****all.

I understand struggling families would always take the $10,000 option over the local built $20,000 plus car.Is a great wall wagon a better car than the Territory? hell no but it's cheaper,that doesn't make it the best option.

[TerryO]

Can't have it both ways, extremely high local wages and just about the highest standing of living in the world and then also low cost locally made product.

Several years ago on here there was a very hostile long thread about how expensive locally sold products were including LR parts and ARB stuff and how local business was ripping us all off and how everyone should buy on the Internet and stuff the locals. I argued that our wages were high and the population base was to small for local business to sell things at the same rate as in the USA, yet I was shouted down. I also argued that if more and more people brought OS via the Internet then eventually a lot of people and or their family members whinging about getting ripped off by local sellers would end up losing their jobs as local businesses closed down.

Anyway more and more have brought overseas via the Internet and that has had a big impact on many local businesses. I wonder how many if those whinging about being ripped off by local sellers and advising everyone to buy stuff overseas via the internet have now lost their jobs because the business they are in is no longer viable because of online competition from overseas?

As the old saying goes be careful of what you wish for.

[disco man]

Why blame Toyota? It's not there fault the local car industry is stuffed.

It's not just car plants closing down, so are many of Australia's longest standing icon industry's going the way of the dodo. Why Australians are buying imported goods not locally built product and to be frank that is their decision to make.

How many of you own a Electrolux fridge which was Westinghouse previously and have been made in Orange in country NSW for over 50 plus years? Not many I would say otherwise they to wouldn't be closing down either.

As for not buying a Land Rover if it meant keeping Australians in work and a local industry going, well then I and many others would have to drastically change our lifestyles because that would mean we could not tow a large caravan around because there is no vehicle that is made in Australia that can tow up to a 3.5 ton van.

Holden Colorado's don't count they are built in Thailand. Anyway Discoman this whole car industry meltdown has been obvious in where it was going for at least a decade so you and everyone else more than had a chance in that time To buy a locally built car. It's to late talking about it after the door has closed.

By the way I have brought four brand new Australian built Holden's over the last ten years, the most recent 18 months ago which I still own, so I more than did my bit to support the local industry before anyone asks the question.

Hey before you start saying i didn't do my bit for the industry i have a 2007 GT-P falcon i bought brand new also before i started mining i was a roof plumber and had bought new 2x BA falcon utes and BA fairlane plus a BA falcon wagon.All as part of the growth of work.

The reason i have a go at Toyota is because as the biggest car maker in the world i think they could have done more to ensure the safety of Australian jobs.Why turn your back on the country that gave them so much profit.

[TerryO]

Toyota don't owe Australians anything. If they didn't build vehicles that people want at a price they can afford then they wouldn't be number one in the world. They would end up like Holden and Ford Australia.

Why should Toyota have to stay building cars here when everyone else pulls up stumps and leaves? If they did then they would lose a fortune on every car sold, they are a business not a charity.

I didn't accuse you of anything, I said no locally built vehicle can tow a 3.5 ton van so I for one would have to change my lifestyle if I only could buy locally built. The thing is whether you or I brought locally built or not means little, millions of others didn't so end of story.

[disco man]

Can't have it both ways, extremely high local wages and just about the highest standing of living in the world and then also low cost locally made product.

Several years ago on here there was a very hostile long thread about how expensive locally sold products were including LR parts and ARB stuff and how local business was ripping us all off and how everyone should buy on the Internet and stuff the locals. I argued that our wages were high and the population base was to small for local business to sell things at the same rate as in the USA, yet I was shouted down. I also argued that if more and more people brought OS via the Internet then eventually a lot of people and or their family members whinging about getting ripped off by local sellers would end up losing their jobs as local businesses closed down.

Anyway more and more have brought overseas via the Internet and that has had a big impact on many local businesses. I wonder how many if those whinging about being ripped off by local sellers and advising everyone to buy stuff overseas via the internet have now lost their jobs because the business they are in is no longer viable because of online competition from overseas?

As the old saying goes be careful of what you wish for.

Well said mate,i believe in buying local even if it costs me a bit more.As for internet shopping i like to go into a shop and feel the product and talk to the people in the shop. I recently bought a brand new drum kit from my local music store for about $340 more than if i bought online,but i don't mind as i know it's a local company employing locals.

I think it's very important to shop local,i am not trying to pick a fight with you over this thread i am just annoyed at the loss of yet another industry.

[TerryO]

This is a good discussion with opinions being given from different view points and that is the way it should be, no angst here on my behalf either.

So all is good.

[incisor]

personally i think most have glossed over or simply deny what should have been the biggest focus of the discussion and drivel that proceeded the effectively booting out of the last 3 major players in the auto industry..

what else has been put in place to look after your australians who were dependent on those industries to survive?

no planning put into alternative employment prior

no planning put into how to sustain high level engineering in australia

the subsidy furphy has been shown to be the biggest load of drivel since the trickle down theory...

when combined with the closure of the high level engineering jobs and training infrastructure associated with qantas

the australian people have been well and truly sold a pup... pardon the pun.

and now the ideology behind it is out to punish the victims of poor planning, poor government regulation and all round poor performance of those put in place to manage the long term welfare of the nation.

in my poor uneducated opinion!

[disco man]

personally i think most have glossed over or simply deny what should have been the biggest focus of the discussion and drivel that proceeded the effectively booting out of the last 3 major players in the auto industry..

what else has been put in place to look after your australians who were dependent on those industries to survive?

no planning put into alternative employment prior

no planning put into how to sustain high level engineering in australia

the subsidy furphy has been shown to be the biggest load of drivel since the trickle down theory...

when combined with the closure of the high level engineering jobs and training infrastructure associated with qantas

the australian people have been well and truly sold a pup... pardon the pun.

and now the ideology behind it is out to punish the victims of poor planning, poor government regulation and all round poor performance of those put in place to manage the long term welfare of the nation.

in my poor uneducated opinion!

Very well put mate,said better than what i can do.Besides the loss of jobs the loss of skills is a major failure of the system.

[TerryO]

In general there is seldom just one reason for a industry failing, there is always a myriad of things that over time cause it.

But if its true that unskilled cleaners gets a union negotiated 80k salary per annum at Holden and the wage rates go much farther north as you get onto the production line, which at best is a semi skilled job, then that to adds to the downfall of the local industry. Why should a cleaner at Holden get 80k when cleaners elsewhere only get about 40k?

As I said chances are there is no one reason on its own for the failure of the industry but if Australians don't want to buy locally built cars then no matter how low the wages are or how high government support is or how high import tariffs are then the industry is stuffed.

[Bigbjorn]

The solution was quite simple and should have been applied 20+ years ago. Reduce importers quotas of CBU & SUP vehicles by 10% every year until they build an assembly plant, but do not restrict CKD vehicles for assembly here. If overseas based manufacturers and distributors want to sell here then have to at least assemble here, employ some Australians, and leave some money behind here. Mazda are an example, selling over 100,000 vehicles a year in Australia and only employ 200 Australian staff. When I worked at GM-H the payroll was 26,000. There were 3,000 at Pagewood at its peak assembling 300-320 vehicles a day. Only manufacturing can provide the low level unskilled and semi-skilled jobs to absorb the unemployed and those disability pensioners with a capacity to work.

[disco man]

It's a shame Australians don't buy local cars because there is some very good ones.The eco-boost falcon has done very well in all the motoring magazines and as stated earlier the Territory more than holds its own in a very crowded SUV market and HSV is making cars that rival anything from AMG and M division.

But i guess the bogan image of a Holden just doesn't cut it in the corporate world most executives would buy a A8 or 7 series or S class over a Statesman.There is a lot of badge snobbery going on.

There is many cheap nasty ****boxes on Australian roads Foton,Great wall,Cherry,Proton, but at the price they just can't be ignored.But at the end of the day the are rubbish cars.

[PAT303]

All the people using lower wages as an excuse,can you explain how Land Rover,I'll use Land Rover as an example as this is a Land Rover Forum can produce vehicles in England and export them all over the world and sell every vehicle it makes,open a brand new engine plant,have the biggest vehicle alloy body factory in the world,have all its production lines refurbished or built new ones because it's revamping it's entire vehicle line yet do all this while paying UK wages and conditions against all those nasty third world countries swamping poor old Fud and 'olden?.People can make any excuse they want,I worked in the industry for 8 years and saw first hand how they worked,the industry died because they made vehicles they wanted to make,not what the consumer wanted to buy. Pat

[PAT303]

It's a shame Australians don't buy local cars because there is some very good ones.The eco-boost falcon has done very well in all the motoring magazines and as stated earlier the Territory more than holds its own in a very crowded SUV market and HSV is making cars that rival anything from AMG and M division.

But i guess the bogan image of a Holden just doesn't cut it in the corporate world most executives would buy a A8 or 7 series or S class over a Statesman.There is a lot of badge snobbery going on.

There is many cheap nasty ****boxes on Australian roads Foton,Great wall,Cherry,Proton, but at the price they just can't be ignored.But at the end of the day the are rubbish cars.

What experience do you have with these rubbish cars?,Great Walls are very common in the Pilbara,yes the first ones weren't the best but they have improved completely from 5 years ago,the one I had for 6 months did 40K without any issue at all,none narda.The only thing was they were too low geared for the highway,the same as a $70,000 Land cruiser,and I got it because my Land Cruiser **** itself;). Pat

[disco man]

All the people using lower wages as an excuse,can you explain how Land Rover,I'll use Land Rover as an example as this is a Land Rover Forum can produce vehicles in England and export them all over the world and sell every vehicle it makes,open a brand new engine plant,have the biggest vehicle alloy body factory in the world,have all its production lines refurbished or built new ones because it's revamping it's entire vehicle line yet do all this while paying UK wages and conditions against all those nasty third world countries swamping poor old Fud and 'olden?.People can make any excuse they want,I worked in the industry for 8 years and saw first hand how they worked,the industry died because they made vehicles they wanted to make,not what the consumer wanted to buy. Pat

Would you say the Government opening the flood gates had nothing to do with it?Would you also say the products that replaced the locals are a better product?

Land Rover is not a stand alone product and also enjoys massive backing,if you removed Jaguar and Tata's backing would they be able to go it alone?

[disco man]

What experience do you have with these rubbish cars?,Great Walls are very common in the Pilbara,yes the first ones weren't the best but they have improved completely from 5 years ago,the one I had for 6 months did 40K without any issue at all,none narda.The only thing was they were too low geared for the highway,the same as a $70,000 Land cruiser,and I got it because my Land Cruiser **** itself;). Pat

If they are so good why do they rate down the bottom in 4wd magazine tests? We had a trial great wall at the mine site i work at in the exploration department and it lasted 3 months the electrics don't like dust the suspention can't cope with rutted roads and the cooling system can't cop long periods in low range in 40 degree plus heat.Interior trim is filled with cheap rubbish plastics that broke.

Other than that they are a great car.

[TerryO]

Forty years ago everyone said Toyota and Honda cars were junk as well, that soon changed as it will with the Chinese made vehicles. I remember in the 80's when everyone laughed at Allan Bond for importing those heaps of rubbish Hyundai Korean cars. Who laughs at Hyundai now?

As for how can Land Rover survive in a high wage environment when Holden and Ford can't? Land Rover build very niche design luxury vehicles that at present are what enough people around the world want. If it came down to LR surviving on their cooking class Defender's for their financial survival then LR would be gone as well.

Everyone builds four door passenger cars of varying shapes and sizes so having a high wage environment in that market place just makes things even harder.

[JDNSW]

You missed quite a few steps in the history, John......

Jeff

:rocket:

Yes, the post was long enough anyway! Covered the overall thrust of history. One coud comment that the unions only got the power because the Chifley government wanted their votes! (That is hardly the full story, but is about as sensible as your comment.)

John

[JDNSW]

......

Land Rover is not a stand alone product and also enjoys massive backing,if you removed Jaguar and Tata's backing would they be able to go it alone?

Tata is providing capital to Landrover, certainly, but it should be pointed out that Landrover is the jewel in Tata's crown! It is profitable, which is rather doubtful for the rest of Tata's car business. And Jaguar is a pale shadow compared to Landrover; I suspect the only reason Tata bought it was that it came along with Landrover.

The burden of regulation in the last forty years has made life almost impossible for a small car manufacturer without a really big backer.

Further to some of the above comments - while I have never bought a new car, both the Landrovers I own are Australian assembled and are models developed in Australia and only built in Australia.

John

[disco man]

Tata is providing capital to Landrover, certainly, but it should be pointed out that Landrover is the jewel in Tata's crown! It is profitable, which is rather doubtful for the rest of Tata's car business. And Jaguar is a pale shadow compared to Landrover; I suspect the only reason Tata bought it was that it came along with Landrover.

The burden of regulation in the last forty years has made life almost impossible for a small car manufacturer without a really big backer.

Further to some of the above comments - while I have never bought a new car, both the Landrovers I own are Australian assembled and are models developed in Australia and only built in Australia.

John

For sure no arguments on that point,i only mention Jaguar because it's part of the company make up.

[TerryO]

As I said earlier there is nearly always more than one reasons for an industry to fail.

A bloke who was 2IC in a company that is in a related industry to mine which I had several meetings with about fifteen years ago and who managed to extract both directly and indirectly many many tens of millions out of the Australian motor industry told me at our first meeting that the reason Holden and Ford spent so much on racing was not primarily to sell new cars rather if they won then the bragging rights usually meant that second hand values were higher for the marque that won that year.

Higher trade in values meant that it gave buyers of the winning brand more retained value in the cars they owned and made it less expensive to then buy a new car of the same brand.

If you look at the Australian car market today and at the extremely low trade in values and the high depreciation levels for Australian cars then its fair to say that small part of it has probably also contributed to the local industry shrinking to the point its not viable.

[disco man]

Forty years ago everyone said Toyota and Honda cars were junk as well, that soon changed as it will with the Chinese made vehicles. I remember in the 80's when everyone laughed at Allan Bond for importing those heaps of rubbish Hyundai Korean cars. Who laughs at Hyundai now?

As for how can Land Rover survive in a high wage environment when Holden and Ford can't? Land Rover build very niche design luxury vehicles that at present are what enough people around the world want. If it came down to LR surviving on their cooking class Defender's for their financial survival then LR would be gone as well.

Everyone builds four door passenger cars of varying shapes and sizes so having a high wage environment in that market place just makes things even harder.

You make a very good point about Hyundai,Great wall will improve as will most Chinese cars i am stating that at the minute there are not a great car.

[frantic]

In general there is seldom just one reason for a industry failing, there is always a myriad of things that over time cause it.

But if its true that unskilled cleaners gets a union negotiated 80k salary per annum at Holden and the wage rates go much farther north as you get onto the production line, which at best is a semi skilled job, then that to adds to the downfall of the local industry. Why should a cleaner at Holden get 80k when cleaners elsewhere only get about 40k?

As I said chances are there is no one reason on its own for the failure of the industry but if Australians don't want to buy locally built cars then no matter how low the wages are or how high government support is or how high import tariffs are then the industry is stuffed.



GMH said $55k average for a production worker across plant?
Ohhh you "swallowed" a Murdoch line of $80k for cleaners. Do us all a favour look up the link to the EBA and post it with page number like I did last time.;)
Ohh here you go I know you would rather believe a headline than a legal document. And its from a Murdoch web site!:o Now why would they put up a headline like $80k cleaners when they have a copy of the EBA on their own files that shows it is false?
http://resources.news.com.au/files/2013/12/11/1226780/877147-aus-news-file-holden-eba-2011.pdf
Page 45: pay goes from $45,000 to $67,000 for a person who is occasionally(n33 job description) filling in for the section manager. Now if you did a LOT of overtime you could double your wage, but the only way to be able to do that is have the extra shifts available and that requires 2 things, production (which is not there as they are shutting because not selling enough) or vacancies either through sickies which under their EBA all bar 2 require a doc cert. OR through the company not filling all vacancies. This is common in larger companies and means there is always a level of overtime available and you would call them slack if they didn't do it.


Heres an interesting article, basically we subsidised by around $18 per person the aussie car industry. The germans pay $96 a person and the good old USA $256.
Is supporting the car industry so expensive, compared to our heavily subsidised lives? (http://theconversation.com/is-supporting-the-car-industry-so-expensive-compared-to-our-heavily-subsidised-lives-13386)

[disco man]

Wow that makes for very interesting reading,$18 per person is a very small price to pay to have kept all those people employed and their families fed.And yet we pay so much more to keep those mongrel banks going then cop stupid fees in return.

[TerryO]

Actually Frantic I don't read Murdoch papers and I actually said 'if its true' then that would add dramatically to build costs of local cars.

I was actually told this by a gentleman who runs a business in Adelaide that provides a number of services to GMH and has done for a long time, so from what your telling me he also must have no idea either, which is possible I guess.

[chuck]

Well now we aren't subsidising the car makers we should stop the rest.

Starting with the mining industry:
1. They can start paying full price for fuel like the rest of us.
2. Remote area income tax subsidies should be stopped.

Perhaps we should stop pensions and the like as well.

Remember if people don't earn good money they have nothing to spend.
If they don't spend the economy goes into recession.

[PAT303]

If they are so good why do they rate down the bottom in 4wd magazine tests? We had a trial great wall at the mine site i work at in the exploration department and it lasted 3 months the electrics don't like dust the suspention can't cope with rutted roads and the cooling system can't cop long periods in low range in 40 degree plus heat.Interior trim is filled with cheap rubbish plastics that broke.

Other than that they are a great car.

So we rate cars on magazine tests,sorry,trying not to laugh.Since when has Toyota suspension coped with rutted tracks,or not had cooling issue's,or had electrics that didn't leave you stranded and have you seen the plastic in the LC?,it's made from recycled milk bottles. Pat

[PAT303]

Would you say the Government opening the flood gates had nothing to do with it?Would you also say the products that replaced the locals are a better product?

Land Rover is not a stand alone product and also enjoys massive backing,if you removed Jaguar and Tata's backing would they be able to go it alone?

You might try reading the News on this forum,LR borrowed huge amounts of money from the British taxpayer,not from Tata,that money was used to hire british workers to supply material and labour to build their new factories,LR created thousands of jobs and all the money stayed in the economy,thats before any vehicles were sold,LR not only thinks ahead but is smart about it. Pat

[TerryO]

Well now we aren't subsidising the car makers we should stop the rest.

Starting with the mining industry:
1. They can start paying full price for fuel like the rest of us.
2. Remote area income tax subsidies should be stopped.




From what I have read the mining industry get a rebate on the portion of the fuel tax that is meant to go towards public road up keep.

Reason they don't wear out public roads because their machinery doesn't drive on public roads and that being the case then that sounds reasonable to me. The Greens rave on about the mining industry getting subsidised fuel when that is not actually true, not once have I heard them admit why the mining industry gets fuel rebates which would shoot down their argument if it was widely known I reckon.

I would guess that is the same for those in the maritime related industries that use diesel in boats. ... Is it?

[disco man]

So we rate cars on magazine tests,sorry,trying not to laugh.Since when has Toyota suspension coped with rutted tracks,or not had cooling issue's,or had electrics that didn't leave you stranded and have you seen the plastic in the LC?,it's made from recycled milk bottles. Pat

Ok fair enough,do you think magazine tests have no relevance at all and are a complete waste of time and prove nothing?.I get your point about Toyota but the Toyota's used by exploration even the new ones cope a lot better.

And yes the Land Bruiser interior is woeful and no better than a Proton Jumbuck.

[PAT303]

Forty years ago everyone said Toyota and Honda cars were junk as well, that soon changed as it will with the Chinese made vehicles. I remember in the 80's when everyone laughed at Allan Bond for importing those heaps of rubbish Hyundai Korean cars. Who laughs at Hyundai now?

As for how can Land Rover survive in a high wage environment when Holden and Ford can't? Land Rover build very niche design luxury vehicles that at present are what enough people around the world want. If it came down to LR surviving on their cooking class Defender's for their financial survival then LR would be gone as well.

Everyone builds four door passenger cars of varying shapes and sizes so having a high wage environment in that market place just makes things even harder.

Land Rover doesn't just make defenders,it makes a whole range of vehicles so your argument doesn't stand up,again GMH and Ford could have made the same range of vehicles but no,instead they make 6 and 8 cylinder petrol sedans no one wants. Pat

[TerryO]

Pat I never said Land Rover only makes Defenders, believe it or not I actually understand this point given that I own Disco's, which last time I checked were also made by LR.

[disco man]

You might try reading the News on this forum,LR borrowed huge amounts of money from the British taxpayer,not from Tata,that money was used to hire british workers to supply material and labour to build their new factories,LR created thousands of jobs and all the money stayed in the economy,thats before any vehicles were sold,LR not only thinks ahead but is smart about it. Pat

Very good points in there Pat,When i am on site for 14 days i don't get to catch up on what's posted on the forum and as a result i do miss a lot of news.

I am not trying to say that Toyota,Holden,Ford are blameless far from it.I feel the workers deserve better,and the loss of this industry is huge mistake that should not have happened.I bet there are blokes on this forum who remember how proud they were when they bought their first Australian Falcon or Kingswood.

Now that feeling will be lost.

[PAT303]

Ok fair enough,do you think magazine tests have no relevance at all and are a complete waste of time and prove nothing?.I get your point about Toyota but the Toyota's used by exploration even the new ones cope a lot better.

And yes the Land Bruiser interior is woeful and no better than a Proton Jumbuck.

They gave the FJ cruiser 4wd of the year,ever driven one?,it doesn't say much for Toyota when the best vehicle they make is a 10 year old Prado chassis with a stupid body. Pat

[PAT303]

When it comes down to it I'm fed up with people in Australia whinging about cheap imports,people like Jerry Harvey,he wants imports taxed so he can continue to rip us off.I'm still waiting for someone to explain how I can buy parts from the UK for a tenth of what we pay here,how the hell can we make a diff lock in Melbourne,ship it to America,buy it,ship it back to Australia cheaper than buying it here?,how does that work?. Pat

[disco man]

They gave the FJ cruiser 4wd of the year,ever driven one?,it doesn't say much for Toyota when the best vehicle they make is a 10 year old Prado chassis with a stupid body. Pat

I get your point,they ain't always right.But at the same time the D3 and D4 and Range Rover have come out on top in many magazine tests.Land Rover the worlds most awarded 4x4 must have come from somewhere.

[ramblingboy42]

So we rate cars on magazine tests,sorry,trying not to laugh.Since when has Toyota suspension coped with rutted tracks,or not had cooling issue's,or had electrics that didn't leave you stranded and have you seen the plastic in the LC?,it's made from recycled milk bottles. Pat

ummm Pat....sorry to tell you this but I just spent two weeks in the SA remote areas in company with 2 LC200s and those barges coped better with the roads...which I brought up in a previous thread....than my disco.

I'm not ashamed to admit it.....in fact I was very impressed with the LC200s.

I think the only time I bettered them was in real hard rutted creek climb outs and definitely on fuel consumption.

[UncleHo]

Way back at the start of this thread there was mention of one Senator John Button and his grand plans, one was to reduce the then 4 vehicle manufacturers to 3, Goodbye Leyland! and with it the only truly Australian designed and built vehicle,the Leyland P76, yeah! the P38,only half the car they thought it would be :D what let it down was the over-management and the lack of quality control and the unskilled Ethnic labour force, Leyland UK was having issues with funds and Union bastardry, so that signalled the death knell for the UK company, which John Button took advantage of.

[Bigbjorn]

Way back at the start of this thread there was mention of one Senator John Button and his grand plans, one was to reduce the then 4 vehicle manufacturers to 3, Goodbye Leyland! and with it the only truly Australian designed and built vehicle,the Leyland P76, yeah! the P38,only half the car they thought it would be :D what let it down was the over-management and the lack of quality control and the unskilled Ethnic labour force, Leyland UK was having issues with funds and Union bastardry, so that signalled the death knell for the UK company, which John Button took advantage of.

Uncle, all Australian manufacturers and assemblers used an unskilled ethnic labour force. Australian cars were not built by Australians but by Italians, Greeks, Turks, Lebanese, Egyptians, Iraqis, Maltese, Vietnamese, Poms. BMC seemed to have a higher proportion of Poms working there than we had down the road at GM-H Pagewood. There were hardly any Aussies on the line at Pagewood. Those that were had been there a short time and only wanted a job to give them a grubstake to look for a better one, or had been there 20 years and were happy to have a monotonous low paid job. Assemblers were about the lowest paid industrial workers in the country.

[BMKal]

Well now we aren't subsidising the car makers we should stop the rest.

Starting with the mining industry:
1. They can start paying full price for fuel like the rest of us.
2. Remote area income tax subsidies should be stopped.

Perhaps we should stop pensions and the like as well.

Remember if people don't earn good money they have nothing to spend.
If they don't spend the economy goes into recession.


From what I have read the mining industry get a rebate on the portion of the fuel tax that is meant to go towards public road up keep.

Reason they don't wear out public roads because their machinery doesn't drive on public roads and that being the case then that sounds reasonable to me. The Greens rave on about the mining industry getting subsidised fuel when that is not actually true, not once have I heard them admit why the mining industry gets fuel rebates which would shoot down their argument if it was widely known I reckon.

I would guess that is the same for those in the maritime related industries that use diesel in boats. ... Is it?

Pretty much on the money Terry.

The mining industry actually DO pay the full price for their diesel fuel, including the tax (which was introduced as a levy to be directed towards the upkeep of roads). They then claim a "diesel fuel rebate", which is in effect a refund of the tax on that component of their fuel which is used in machines that do not travel on public roads (mining equipment, power generation etc).

Same applies for marine industries, farming industry - and believe it or not, railway trains - they don't use the roads either.

It never ceases to amaze me when people come up with this recycled drivel promoted by the greens, based on them telling only half the story (the half that they believe the gullible will swallow).

And as for removing remote area income tax subsidies - wow - that is the response of a typical city dweller who has no knowledge of what is involved in living and working outside of their sheltered environment. Sure - if the cost of living in remote areas was the same as that in the cities, and the same services and infrastructure was provided to people in remote areas that are available to the city dwellers, then remove the tax breaks. Until then, suck it up princess. If it wasn't for the people prepared to live and work in the remote areas, you'd find that there wouldn't be any money to pay for the luxuries you take for granted.

[UncleHo]

G'day Brian :)

Yeah! I was a production line section head at Pagewood in 69,in the body underproofing section,the reason I got the job was that I spoke and could read English :D and would have to take over the other workers when they needed a P break,I had Croats, the section opposite has Turks, and they were forever at each others throats,NO WAY would I work the night shift,they used to have an Ambulance and Police car parked out front :o

[BMKal]

G'day Brian :)

Yeah! I was a production line section head at Pagewood in 69,in the body underproofing section,the reason I got the job was that I spoke and could read English :D and would have to take over the other workers when they needed a P break,I had Croats, the section opposite has Turks, and they were forever at each others throats,NO WAY would I work the night shift,they used to have an Ambulance and Police car parked out front :o

My Father in Law worked at Elizabeth for over 30 years Uncle. He used to tell me similar stories. He was a Polish refugee when he first arrived in Adelaide & started initially in the old GMH works on Port Road before moving to the "new" factory at Elizabeth.

Even though he would tell me some pretty worrying stories - he would never buy any car other than a Holden (though he did like driving an XW GTHO that I used to have when I first started dating his daughter). He only ever had the one employer in Australia, right up to his retirement.

[disco man]

Way back at the start of this thread there was mention of one Senator John Button and his grand plans, one was to reduce the then 4 vehicle manufacturers to 3, Goodbye Leyland! and with it the only truly Australian designed and built vehicle,the Leyland P76, yeah! the P38,only half the car they thought it would be :D what let it down was the over-management and the lack of quality control and the unskilled Ethnic labour force, Leyland UK was having issues with funds and Union bastardry, so that signalled the death knell for the UK company, which John Button took advantage of.

The Leyland P76 seems to get a bad rap,but a article i read showed that the ones that were built properly(i know not many) were quite a good car and had many firsts for a Australian car.Does anyone here have a bit of ownership knowledge?

[UncleHo]

Yes, when put together properly they were a nice vehicle,the 6's were lack lustre, but the V8 (Rangie 3.5 bored/stroked to 4.4) was brilliant,but there were Monday and Friday cars (thrown together) the Wednesday vehicles were the pick :) I regret not buying one when they were closing the line.
Both were a very nice vehicle to drive.

[chuck]

My comments were made to stir the pot and it worked.

It seems it is ok to subsidise some industries and not others.

By the logic implied here on should not have to pay diesel excise when I am on a tollway as the government does not pay to maintain them.

BTW - I did 7 years of working away from home in remote locations but it was before FIFO, tax subsidies & the conditions enjoyed now.

I live near the Ford Factory & my wife teaches the kids whose parents work there, they are not looking at a great future at the moment.

Do not forget it was not the employees fault that these factories are shutting down.

It was basically the change in Government will that delivered the final blow just as the mining industry was going to go broke if the previous government applied the mining tax.

[disco man]

Yes, when put together properly they were a nice vehicle,the 6's were lack lustre, but the V8 (Rangie 3.5 bored/stroked to 4.4) was brilliant,but there were Monday and Friday cars (thrown together) the Wednesday vehicles were the pick :) I regret not buying one when they were closing the line.
Both were a very nice vehicle to drive.

I could be wrong but i think the P76 was the only car at that time that could be optioned with 3 engines 4,6,8, cylinder. Targa Flario models have gone for decent many lately.

And the article in a round about way was saying that the Government did not want the P76 or Leyland?

[Bigbjorn]

Yes, when put together properly they were a nice vehicle,the 6's were lack lustre, but the V8 (Rangie 3.5 bored/stroked to 4.4) was brilliant,but there were Monday and Friday cars (thrown together) the Wednesday vehicles were the pick :) I regret not buying one when they were closing the line.
Both were a very nice vehicle to drive.

We had them as company cars at Leyland Truck and Bus. The only model that was worth a knob of goat**** was the V8 with 4 speed manual trans. The six was a dog. The V8 was a mismatch to the auto trans it was blighted with. The big boot was an advertising feature. The publicity stunt of putting a 44 gallon in there was ridiculous. Who carries empty 44's around in their boot? If the drum was full, the bum would have dragged on the ground. We got the rejects that were too badly finished to sell to a dealer. Gaps in the body panels you could stick your fingers through. Don't **** in my pocket about the old legend of Monday and Friday cars. It took several days to pass a vehicle through the build process.

Disco Man, there was not a four cylinder in the line-up.

[frantic]

Actually Frantic I don't read Murdoch papers and I actually said 'if its true' then that would add dramatically to build costs of local cars.

I was actually told this by a gentleman who runs a business in Adelaide that provides a number of services to GMH and has done for a long time, so from what your telling me he also must have no idea either, which is possible I guess.

I'm providing the link.:D not telling you anything.
The 80k cleaner line was a headline from a Murdoch paper. The GMH oz manager after that went on both TV and paper to state average pay was 55k.
The issue is Abbot only told the first line of the equation 3-400 million subsidies.
He neglected to mention all the other losses from letting gm and toymota leave. Which are around 6 billion extra imports and another 2 billion lost in income, taxes and paid out in welfare.
Make you feel good to watch it unfold doesn't it? :mad:

[disco man]

We had them as company cars at Leyland Truck and Bus. The only model that was worth a knob of goat**** was the V8 with 4 speed manual trans. The six was a dog. The V8 was a mismatch to the auto trans it was blighted with. The big boot was an advertising feature. The publicity stunt of putting a 44 gallon in there was ridiculous. Who carries empty 44's around in their boot? If the drum was full, the bum would have dragged on the ground. We got the rejects that were too badly finished to sell to a dealer. Gaps in the body panels you could stick your fingers through. Don't **** in my pocket about the old legend of Monday and Friday cars. It took several days to pass a vehicle through the build process.

Disco Man, there was not a four cylinder in the line-up.

Sorry about the 4cyl, I read that article a few years ago thanks for pointing that out.

[PAT303]

ummm Pat....sorry to tell you this but I just spent two weeks in the SA remote areas in company with 2 LC200s and those barges coped better with the roads...which I brought up in a previous thread....than my disco.

I'm not ashamed to admit it.....in fact I was very impressed with the LC200s.

I think the only time I bettered them was in real hard rutted creek climb outs and definitely on fuel consumption.

There's a whole industry just in replacing genuine Toyota suspension,there isn't one for Land Rover,wonder why?. Pat

[rangie ute on 38'']

I must admit, I'm sick of hearing Australians cry poor, we earn good wages and have good lifestyles on a whole and can afford our Australian products, people will end up with better products instead of Chinese crap and if they cost more then they might look after them more and not use the Oww well its a 10 k chery il throw it away and buy another one next year attitude. Australians can afford aussie products but the cheap carrot dangling infront of them is convincing them otherwise

As for government subsidies being a leech to tax payers, you must live in a box,
You watch qantas become our next home grown company go down unless they receive government assistance, because u can bet your bottom dollar the other international airline's are heavily subsides by their government and are out competing us,
You must stop believing that subsidising is automatically a loss to our economy

[Dougal]

You lot can talk about subsidies all you like. I had a falcon xr6 for a rental a few weeks ago. Never have I seen a car so big with a boot so small.
Given the choice we would have taken a mondeo or camry every time.

There is your basic problem. The product was completely out of touch.

[bee utey]

We had them as company cars at Leyland Truck and Bus. The only model that was worth a knob of goat**** was the V8 with 4 speed manual trans. The six was a dog. The V8 was a mismatch to the auto trans it was blighted with. The big boot was an advertising feature. The publicity stunt of putting a 44 gallon in there was ridiculous. Who carries empty 44's around in their boot? If the drum was full, the bum would have dragged on the ground. We got the rejects that were too badly finished to sell to a dealer. Gaps in the body panels you could stick your fingers through. Don't **** in my pocket about the old legend of Monday and Friday cars. It took several days to pass a vehicle through the build process.

Disco Man, there was not a four cylinder in the line-up.

Gotta admit the V8 4 speed was the pick of the bunch but the auto wasn't that bad. The wife happily put 400,000km on her Super auto V8 before it got retired. Mind you the last P76 I drove as a daily got a GM TH700 4 speed auto which is an excellent match for the V8 engine. Lockup 4th with a 2.92 diff at 110km/h didn't phase it at all. And all the P76's I ever had all got h/d springs in the back, then a 1/4 ton boot load wasn't a problem...
:angel:
Oh and Disco Man, the 4-6-8 engine option was first seen in Australia with the LH Torana, then discontinued after the VH Commodore.

[rick130]

You lot can talk about subsidies all you like. I had a falcon xr6 for a rental a few weeks ago. Never have I seen a car so big with a boot so small.
Given the choice we would have taken a mondeo or camry every time.

There is your basic problem. The product was completely out of touch.
And therein lay the problem.

Wasn't it Rangieman that worked at Holden for years until about eighteen months ago ?

I seem to recall him saying that sales and engineering here wanted a diesel in the Commodore for years but Detroit wouldn't approve it.

And that happened with most of the line, Detroit dictated what was to be produced far more than people realise, and so often it wasn't what the market wanted, so it could be argued the death of local manufacturing was as much or more a management problem as any other single reason.

[JDNSW]

And therein lay the problem.

....
I seem to recall him saying that sales and engineering here wanted a diesel in the Commodore for years but Detroit wouldn't approve it.

And that happened with most of the line, Detroit dictated what was to be produced far more than people realise, and so often it wasn't what the market wanted, so it could be argued the death of local manufacturing was as much or more a management problem as any other single reason.

As I commented much earlier in this thread, perhaps the major, fundamental problem with Australian car manufacture is that there has never been a successful Australian car manufacturer. This means that in all cases decisions such as 'what to build', or whether to export and where, have generally been made somewhere else. Examples include the influence of Leyland influencing decisions in Leyland Australia, restrictions on Ford and Holden exports etc, but perhaps the most telling as to how basic this is, was the way that General Motors removed L. Hartnett as head of GMH in 1947 because his outlook was 'too Australian'.

As to why there has never been a successful Australian manufacturer - Australians in general have never supported successful businesses or people; generally known as the tall poppy syndrome, and governments of all stripes, certainly from Chiffley to Hawke, perhaps a little less so since, have structured motor industry assistance and regulations to favour the multinationals in preference to any would-be upstart locals.

And today, worldwide regulations and red tape make it so expensive to set up to make a car that it is impossible for any except the very largest companies to even contemplate it. And it needs to be borne in mind that probably at any time in the last thirty (or even forty) years there are unlikely to be more than two or three car manufacturers worldwide actually operating at a profit - even with subsidies and protection! For that matter, if you look at the history of the motor industry worldwide, the principal result of most manufacturers has been to destroy shareholders' (and often lenders') capital! The manufacturers who have been really successful have not been the ones that do what everyone else does, but (a very few of) the ones that do something new.

John

[BMKal]

I could be wrong but i think the P76 was the only car at that time that could be optioned with 3 engines 4,6,8, cylinder. Targa Flario models have gone for decent many lately.

And the article in a round about way was saying that the Government did not want the P76 or Leyland?

Was looking at this one a couple of weeks ago at a car show just around the corner from where I'm staying in Perth. Very nice example of the V8.

I almost bought a 6 cylinder one a few years back. From what I've since heard, glad I didn't. Bought a VC Valiant V8 instead. ;)

I've never heard of these being offered with a 4 cylinder engine ................

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/09/1316.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/09/1317.jpg

[mikehzz]

When it comes down to it I'm fed up with people in Australia whinging about cheap imports,people like Jerry Harvey,he wants imports taxed so he can continue to rip us off.I'm still waiting for someone to explain how I can buy parts from the UK for a tenth of what we pay here,how the hell can we make a diff lock in Melbourne,ship it to America,buy it,ship it back to Australia cheaper than buying it here?,how does that work?. Pat

It's very simple Pat. The price you sell things for is determined by your turnover and your fixed overheads. If your turnover is significantly higher then you can drop your selling price and still cover the overheads. If the Australian stores sold diff locks at the same price as the US stores they wouldn't cover overheads and would have to close down. People buying them online just increases the turnover of the US stores and keeps the price higher here.

[disco man]

Was looking at this one a couple of weeks ago at a car show just around the corner from where I'm staying in Perth. Very nice example of the V8.

I almost bought a 6 cylinder one a few years back. From what I've since heard, glad I didn't. Bought a VC Valiant V8 instead. ;)

I've never heard of these being offered with a 4 cylinder engine ................

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/09/1316.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/09/1317.jpg

My mistake in mentioning the 4 cylinder there never was one.Sorry guys.
But the P76 in the pictures looks very nice.

[TerryO]

It's very simple Pat. The price you sell things for is determined by your turnover and your fixed overheads. If your turnover is significantly higher then you can drop your selling price and still cover the overheads. If the Australian stores sold diff locks at the same price as the US stores they wouldn't cover overheads and would have to close down. People buying them online just increases the turnover of the US stores and keeps the price higher here.

Plus the Yanks often get paid much less than what an Australian does for the same job, plus real estate prices here are some of the most expensive in the world. As I said earlier you can't have it both ways, high local wages and cheaply sold goods locally, add in economy of scale advantage that the US and most large Euro country's have and that is why the same item that is made in Australia costs less to reimport from America than buy here.

Plus add in transport costs, Australia is the sixth largest country in the world, it has approximately 0.035% of the worlds population living within its borders and out of 242 countries listed it has a population density that sees it ranked at 234, only countries like the Falklands Islands, Pitcairn Island and Western Sahara, Mongolia and Namibia have less people living in them per sq kilometre of land mass. Meaning there is stuff all people living here and as we all know they live all over the place not just in one tiny corner that is why it costs so much to transport stuff around the country, no economy of scale and main population centres far away from each other.

Add in high Australian taxes compared to many western countries again because of a small population base and again because of high infrastructure costs because of the size of the place and it all adds up.

Every time you buy something OS via the Internet you lessen the profitability and turn over of local retail suppliers here and that means they have to try and increase margins to cover the lost volume of sales which forces prices up even more and by all means that is your choice, no one is saying you shouldn't, but maybe consider a few of these things before complaining about local retailers.

Do you get it now Pat?

[Redback]

I must admit, I'm sick of hearing Australians cry poor, we earn good wages and have good lifestyles on a whole and can afford our Australian products, people will end up with better products instead of Chinese crap and if they cost more then they might look after them more and not use the Oww well its a 10 k chery il throw it away and buy another one next year attitude. Australians can afford aussie products but the cheap carrot dangling infront of them is convincing them otherwise

As for government subsidies being a leech to tax payers, you must live in a box,
You watch qantas become our next home grown company go down unless they receive government assistance, because u can bet your bottom dollar the other international airline's are heavily subsides by their government and are out competing us,
You must stop believing that subsidising is automatically a loss to our economy

Never assume most people can afford the Australian product, I would hazard a guess people buy the cheaper import, because that's all they can afford, if you're living in the western suburbs of Sydney (as an excample) paying a morgage, single income, couple of kids and commuting to work because the trains are just not viable(ie) 2 trains and a bus or visa versa) why would you buy a Falcon or commodore to commute, common sense tells you a cheap economical Chinese/Koreon car would make more sense.

Not everyone can afford a $40,000 car, if we didn't have a dual income, no way I could afford what we have, the average wage is $57k a year, I earn $53k.

IMHO

The Australian car industry, is it's own worst enemy, show me a cheap economical small Australian car, even Holden and Ford relied on imports to fill that gap, I'm pretty sure the parent companies of Ford and GM-H just couldn't justify the costs of having these plants in Australia, wouldn't supprise me if we get the Holden Commodore back as a Pontiac imported from the States:(

Baz.

[disco man]

Never assume most people can afford the Australian product, I would hazard a guess people buy the cheaper import, because that's all they can afford, if you're living in the western suburbs of Sydney (as an excample) paying a morgage, single income, couple of kids and commuting to work because the trains are just not viable(ie) 2 trains and a bus or visa versa) why would you buy a Falcon or commodore to commute, common sense tells you a cheap economical Chinese/Koreon car would make more sense.

Not everyone can afford a $40,000 car, if we didn't have a dual income, no way I could afford what we have, the average wage is $57k a year, I earn $53k.

IMHO

The Australian car industry, is it's own worst enemy, show me a cheap economical small Australian car, even Holden and Ford relied on imports to fill that gap, I'm pretty sure the parent companies of Ford and GM-H just couldn't justify the costs of having these plants in Australia, wouldn't supprise me if we get the Holden Commodore back as a Pontiac imported from the States:(

Baz.

I think the next Commodore is coming from Opel in Germany,It seems the next Commodore is coming from the place the very first VB Commodore came from.Whether or not Holden will call it a Commodore is still up in the air.

[Dougal]

Never assume most people can afford the Australian product, I would hazard a guess people buy the cheaper import, because that's all they can afford, if you're living in the western suburbs of Sydney (as an excample) paying a morgage, single income, couple of kids and commuting to work because the trains are just not viable(ie) 2 trains and a bus or visa versa) why would you buy a Falcon or commodore to commute, common sense tells you a cheap economical Chinese/Koreon car would make more sense.

It's not buying the australian product. It's filling the bloody things up that hurts.

In NZ you can buy a brand new falcodore and put more in the tank over 300,000km than the car costs to buy new.

[TerryO]

Based on Kiwi fuel prices you would be a fool to buy any petrol engined car over there compared to a diesel. The Australian car industry was never going to grow or fail based on how many (few) cars they have ever sold across the ditch and that is no different now to what it was 40 years ago.

[Dougal]

Based on Kiwi fuel prices you would be a fool to buy any petrol engined car over there compared to a diesel.

Nope. Pretty much any car that burns less than a falcodore is good to go and selling well. Regardless of petrol vs diesel.


The Australian car industry was never going to grow or fail based on how many (few) cars they have ever sold across the ditch and that is no different now to what it was 40 years ago.

You sound like Ford/GMH management.

[frantic]

As has been mentioned engine choice and the cars produced here where not determined by anyone here.
The ford territory/falcon should have had the 2.7tdv6 in 2004-5 the same year the ford owned LR introduced it with Peugeot. Instead it took almost 8 years to get into the territory. :mad:
We used to build the corolla and pulsar here. My sisters corolla, last of the oz built ones, is a 1.8 and has done 400,000 km. The pulsar production in Australia was having fewer faults than the parents Japanese line.
Both shut and moved .
The other biggest issue is export. Ford never tried or allowed oz built to export, and it's territory looks just like the next gen disco. It would have sold well in uk/eu/usa with a tdv6 and turbo petrol from 2005. Both the falcon and commodore would have sold in china but not allowed. And ford could have replaced it's crown Victoria(35 year old design with rwd solid axle low power v8, mainly sold to police) in the us anytime over the last decade with a much higher performance falcon turbo 6 or v8 but chose not to.
The difference between us and UK is the uk Govt sat down with the manufacturing sector and said how can we help you build and export more. So are now on the path to building more cars than ever,1972 was their peak, with half being exports.

[disco man]

As has been mentioned engine choice and the cars produced here where not determined by anyone here.
The ford territory/falcon should have had the 2.7tdv6 in 2004-5 the same year the ford owned LR introduced it with Peugeot. Instead it took almost 8 years to get into the territory. :mad:
We used to build the corolla and pulsar here. My sisters corolla, last of the oz built ones, is a 1.8 and has done 400,000 km. The pulsar production in Australia was having fewer faults than the parents Japanese line.
Both shut and moved .
The other biggest issue is export. Ford never tried or allowed oz built to export, and it's territory looks just like the next gen disco. It would have sold well in uk/eu/usa with a tdv6 and turbo petrol from 2005. Both the falcon and commodore would have sold in china but not allowed. And ford could have replaced it's crown Victoria(35 year old design with rwd solid axle low power v8, mainly sold to police) in the us anytime over the last decade with a much higher performance falcon turbo 6 or v8 but chose not to.
The difference between us and UK is the uk Govt sat down with the manufacturing sector and said how can we help you build and export more. So are now on the path to building more cars than ever,1972 was their peak, with half being exports.

Same can be said about the Eco-boost falcon, fantastic car but built to late.And what were Ford thinking in the 80's with the rubbish Capri project which was meant to be a export design.

I would have thought the XR8 or XR6 turbo would have been perfect for the American market.Same as the V8 ute from both makers.

[frantic]

Capri was a perfect example of management ignorance. One of the several factors that killed the Capri was fwd and Mx-5. Ford owned Mazda so must have known about rwd mx5 yet let Capri, which was a laser/323 in bling, fwd be designed and built. A smarter approach would have done the ranger bt50 thing, what they did with the laser/323 and put our suspension and body on . It took Mazda years to put a turbo on the mx5, whereas the Capri had it in from day one. Those 2 simple points may have turned the sales around.

[DiscoMick]

The fact is that protection works, that's why all the big car-making countries protect their industries. This is a unpopular political and economic theory in Australia, but taken for granted in most of the world.


Obama nationalized GM and Chrysler to save them, and then sold them off, while Japan and Germany offer huge hidden subsidies to their vehicle industries. Thailand has built the biggest vehicle manufacturing industry in the region by imposing massive tariffs on imports. The countries that tried to reduce protection have seen their vehicle industries shut down or be sold overseas.


Of course, to succeed you need a lot more than protection. You need world competitive cars made at acceptable costs which meet the actual needs of consumers. Our industry mostly either made the wrong cars, failed to adjust to changing buyer preferences and failed to develop export markets. Part of the reason for that is that multinational companies are always going to shift the bulk of their manufacturing costs to low-cost countries and be reluctant to invest in high-cost factories.


So, sadly, I think our industry has been doomed for about 20 years. That doom was hastened when the current government pulled the plug on about $300 million or so in assistance. Apparently, it would prefer to pay the dole to many of those workers than to support them to have real jobs. Strange thinking...




.

[disco man]

Capri was a perfect example of management ignorance. One of the several factors that killed the Capri was fwd and Mx-5. Ford owned Mazda so must have known about rwd mx5 yet let Capri, which was a laser/323 in bling, fwd be designed and built. A smarter approach would have done the ranger bt50 thing, what they did with the laser/323 and put our suspension and body on . It took Mazda years to put a turbo on the mx5, whereas the Capri had it in from day one. Those 2 simple points may have turned the sales around.

When you look at the sales of the MX5 worldwide it was a smash hit,I am not saying the capri would have been better than the MX5 but at least it would of had a rival.Little car with a turbo and rear wheel drive 2plus2 drop top would have been a winner.

When ford gave up on the LTD and Fairlane they turned their back on a segment that used to be important to them.I know the Statesman and Caprice were outselling them in a big way,so instead of improving the design they just gave up.

When Ford stopped making the ESP how much ground did they give Holden and Brock with their V8 commodores,a hell of a lot.

[Dougal]

The fact is that protection works, that's why all the big car-making countries protect their industries. This is a unpopular political and economic theory in Australia, but taken for granted in most of the world.

Does it work or does it just create lazy industries dependent on corporate welfar delivering lack of choice for their customers?

East German cars vs West German cars etc.

Quantas (in the poo) vs Air NZ (record profits).

[JDNSW]

The fact is that protection works, that's why all the big car-making countries protect their industries. This is a unpopular political and economic theory in Australia, but taken for granted in most of the world.

.....

.

At least partly because the so-called Australian car industry has never really been Australian. Australians see the subsidies propping up foreign companies to make life more expensive for the 95+% of those who do not work in the car manufacturing industry. And if you are going to prop up foreign owned car manufacturers, how about the truly Australian manufacturers (like ARB as an example)? Or in a totally different area - my stand alone power system has major electronic components Australian made - but do they get the same sort of assistance as these foreign companies?

John

[Lionel]

Starting with the mining industry:
1. They can start paying full price for fuel like the rest of us.


Hang on, the diesel fuel rebate is paid for the fueling of non-public road going vehicles & other machinery. The same applies to non-road farm machinery, so farmers benefit from the rebate as well.

It would be unfair to charge road fuel taxes for fuel which is not used on the road.

The way the diesel fuel rebate works is often misunderstood.

Cheers,

Lionel

[DiscoMick]

And for fishing boats, which certainly never go on the road.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

[BMKal]

The fact is that protection works, that's why all the big car-making countries protect their industries. This is a unpopular political and economic theory in Australia, but taken for granted in most of the world.


Obama nationalized GM and Chrysler to save them, and then sold them off, while Japan and Germany offer huge hidden subsidies to their vehicle industries. Thailand has built the biggest vehicle manufacturing industry in the region by imposing massive tariffs on imports. The countries that tried to reduce protection have seen their vehicle industries shut down or be sold overseas.


Of course, to succeed you need a lot more than protection. You need world competitive cars made at acceptable costs which meet the actual needs of consumers. Our industry mostly either made the wrong cars, failed to adjust to changing buyer preferences and failed to develop export markets. Part of the reason for that is that multinational companies are always going to shift the bulk of their manufacturing costs to low-cost countries and be reluctant to invest in high-cost factories.


So, sadly, I think our industry has been doomed for about 20 years. That doom was hastened when the current government pulled the plug on about $300 million or so in assistance. Apparently, it would prefer to pay the dole to many of those workers than to support them to have real jobs. Strange thinking...

.

I don't really think that the actions of the current guvmint on their own had much if any impact on the demise of the industry at all.

After all, Ford announced that they were shutting up shop before there was even an election to elect this guvmint, let alone any announcement regarding whether assistance was to be removed or not. Holden have also stated on the record that the ongoing presence, or lack of, any further guvmint assistance, had no impact on their decision to close up shop.

The current guvmint has announced the end of assistance to the industry AFTER members of the industry started advising that they were going to pack up and leave. Makes sense to me - why would you keep pouring taxpayer money into an industry that has already told you that they were going to pack up and go home. ;)

They were both going to shut up shop and leave in any case, regardless of who was in guvmint - their decisions were taken well before there was an election. I don't imagine that Toyota would be any different. The mainstay of their Australian production line (Camry) is soon to be replaced - and the hybrid version of it that was supposed to be the "salvation" of Toyota in Australia has proven to be a sales flop.

While I'm not a fan of much of what the present guvmint is doing, I have to have a little chuckle at those who swallow the line that "it's all the current guvmint's fault".

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

Back in 1969 Australian designers at Holden produced this vehicle Accessed April 30, 2016 from, 1969 Holden Hurricane Concept Restored (http://www.themotorreport.com.au/52692/holden-hurricane-concept-car-re-born)

If a new Australian car manufacturer had government support it could assisted to start designing an Australian car. It would need to be a vehicle that had international appeal at the luxury or high value performance end of the market. This could only work if they were not beholden to a foreign owner who would get precious about not having their "own" people design and produce the vehicle. If these factors fell into line we could have a car industry again.

A kick start, despite it involving foreign ownership/licence, could be getting the rights to build a Defender basic shape. From that starting point we could then let innovative Australian minds overhaul the design and trick it up to be even a better vehicle. That way the Adelaide Plant might not revert back to being an empty paddock.

Another article about the Holden Hurricane - accessed April 30, 2016 from, http://www.motoring.com.au/inside-the-holden-hurricane-27555/ we could have taken on the likes of Aston Martins, E-Types, Corvettes and Ferraris back in the late 1960s. There was also a prototype for a Torana that never made it into production that could have stepped up to a similar market- accessed April 30, 2016 from http://www.gregwapling.com/hotrod/prototypes/torana-gtr-x/index.html Are we too incapable to do it now?
My two cents worth anyway :soapbox:

Kind Regards
Lionel

[DiscoMick]

I don't really think that the actions of the current guvmint on their own had much if any impact on the demise of the industry at all.

After all, Ford announced that they were shutting up shop before there was even an election to elect this guvmint, let alone any announcement regarding whether assistance was to be removed or not. Holden have also stated on the record that the ongoing presence, or lack of, any further guvmint assistance, had no impact on their decision to close up shop.

The current guvmint has announced the end of assistance to the industry AFTER members of the industry started advising that they were going to pack up and leave. Makes sense to me - why would you keep pouring taxpayer money into an industry that has already told you that they were going to pack up and go home. ;)

They were both going to shut up shop and leave in any case, regardless of who was in guvmint - their decisions were taken well before there was an election. I don't imagine that Toyota would be any different. The mainstay of their Australian production line (Camry) is soon to be replaced - and the hybrid version of it that was supposed to be the "salvation" of Toyota in Australia has proven to be a sales flop.

While I'm not a fan of much of what the present guvmint is doing, I have to have a little chuckle at those who swallow the line that "it's all the current guvmint's fault".
The Territory and the Cruze, both sales successes, happened because the previous government gave some innovation grants to support the business case for building them. This government axed that support. The companies then announced they would not continue building them or introduce new models.
Of course there are other factors at play, but sometimes it is lineball and a little nudge can keep something going or, if it's withdrawn, cause it to be cancelled.

[Pickles2]

The Territory and the Cruze, both sales successes, happened because the previous government gave some innovation grants to support the business case for building them. This government axed that support. The companies then announced they would not continue building them or introduce new models.
Of course there are other factors at play, but sometimes it is lineball and a little nudge can keep something going or, if it's withdrawn, cause it to be cancelled.
BMKal is spot on.
Cruze,.."A sales success"?...Mate, check your figures, it's been a disaster from day 1,.....jeez, and have a look at how it's "selling" now!
Territory, yep, a great vehicle, but its sales were nowhere near enough to keep Ford going in this Country.....why wasn't it exported?...covered elsewhere.....but look at Ford U.S. if you like.
This issue has been covered before in great lengths,...I will remind you,...have a look at the "support" & directives from the parent companies of both Holden & Ford (in the U.S.), who were quite happy to reap their harvests when times were good, but strangely, of a slightly different view, when they were not.
Pickles.