I dont feel like I should have reiterate myself again to answer this but I will anyway.

They had record sales around the except in the US last year. Sale figures dont lie.

I dont really think you comprehend the lead times necessary for making a car. The left-hand MR's are already being produced. The MR is different than the Evo. That is like saying why would Subaru make the STi because it would undercut the WRX.

They already make left-hand Evo's, so making an MR would not be any different, at least looking at it from a production stand point. There are no changes in the chassis. Just suspension, engine, etc, which are easily shifted.

At this point making left-hand MR's doesn't cost any different than a right-hand MR. I really have no idea where you are getting this stuff from.

Thats easy, and it is because it was so profittable. Let me explain. Up until the Evo VII, the Evo would not pass US crash testing. Crash testing design and then the acutal testing cost money. It was just easier to keep the car in places were it didn't have to meet those standards.

During most of this time, the US market was dead for those kind of cars, but with the release and the outstanding sales of the WRX in the US. The potential money made overwhelmed the cost and so for the Evo VIII, Mitsu made the investment to have it crash tested.

Left-hand drive has nothing to do with it. This is not like the Skyline were the engine design made it near impossible to switch sides. When you can start with a body in white it is pretty easy to make the switch for driving on either side.

I suppose if you want to use conjecture and ignore relavent fact then you can, but you are still wrong. The Evo is a big time money maker for Mitsu. As will be the MR.

You see, I have already covered this last bit, pages ago. Halo cars get axed first because almost all halo cars have a very low profit margin or actually lose money. This is NOT THE CASE with the Evo.

I can repost what I already have put.

Z was ended because it was not profitable, and was at the end of its production life anyway (remember, its first model year was '90, and was first sold in '89). Nissan didn't replace the Z because to do so would have introduced a costly car when they were in financial hard times. They would not be able to overcome the INITIAL investment costs of a whole new platform until after they had introduced the engine that they now use in everything (to save money).

Your argument about the Z and the G series proves my point. They are still recouping money from the original investment, it has a very low profit margin.

The RX-7 is even easier to explain. All rotories have pretty low profit returns just because of the limited nature and interchangability of the parts. So it was not profitable, and on top of that in the US it was costing TON's to replace the engines that were blowing up all the time.

Now the Evo is a profit marker for these exact reasons. Chassis already exists, engine is older than most people on this board, almost everything is already available, and Mitsu has already regained there initial investment on the parts. There are NO development costs anymore, which is unlike the other halo cars.

I am just repeating myself now, either you will choose to understand or choose to be wrong, either way I will have my $5 or watch you streak naked across the forum .

- The Anti-Chicken-Little

 

Too bad in 2003 their sales were up in all markets except the US. And in 2002 they were making a profit. Before that they were definitely having problems, not doubt, we all know that.

I would NEVER say that the Evo would prop up the company, that would be crazy. But they WILL NOT cut a car that they turn a profit on. That would be lunacy.

 

At the time DCAG wanted into the Asia market, so they WANTED to get into Mitsu. It wasn't a bail out back then. They wanted to get a market foothold in Asia and Mitsu was their way in. I dont know why they thought that they could do it in three years, but I think that has more to do with DCAG board revolting against its leadership than anything to do with Mitsu.

 

I'm all for that!

 

Simple, find me the amount profit per Evo sold. Until then, it's just speculation.

Regardless of your point, it's not good buisness sense to have an uber halo car in the wings when you're trying to sell halo cars... this is not the WRX v. STi situation. In this case, its the same buyer... they'll either buy the GSR or MR. It's not two different buyers, as it the case between the WRX and the STi, as reflected in the price structure in Subaru as well.

So we agree on the Z and RX-7... and yes, I knew about the Skyline, hence I didn't mention it... but, it was also the engine couldn't pass emissions, let alone the configuration.

Making an Evo GSR is more than just aftermarket upgrades, it's also manufacturing changes to make an aluminum roof attached to the steel monoframe and the new aluminum crash impact bars... which likely will require redemonstration of crash worthiness. And in Mitsu's case, that it won't fall apart.

The engine is golden and proven, agreed.

Where is there a LEFT-HAND drive MR? Why the delay?

g

Streaking or dragging in drag... choices, choices.

 

That's a joke in the Description line, btw.

MMA is now a flailing, downing company with multi-billion-dollar debt and no leader. The CFO is taking over temporary CEO duty. I wonder who will buy them out and save them or if anyone will even want to touch them.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=4922705

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=4940219

Crazy how things change. Just last year they started a revitalization campaign to try to gain a positive consumer image, but apparently that hasn't happened.

 

Like I said before I dont have access to mistu's balance sheets, but everyone including several car reviews indicate what I am saying as correct.

I will finish by saying this, the Evo is profittable, the MR will be profittable. Neither will be eliminated. No profittable car has even been elminated before the end of its production cycle.

There is no delay as you put it. It takes time to get from saying a car will be available to making it available. Production, transport, etc. That time is the "delay" that for some reason you think exists. Mitsu said the MR would be here in the fall or 4-5 months depending on where you look. It will be here then.

 

well if it goes bankrupt theres always nissan and subaru...

 

Actually, DCX has not yet sold their stake in . However, with the expected bail-out by the rest of the Mitsubishi Keirutsu and the Japan Development Bank, the DCX stake will likely get diluted below controlling stake levels.
is not likely to disappear. There is too much at stake for the Japanese government and for the Mitsubishi group.
will continue, but possibly in a different form than we know them now.
As a long-time enthusiast, this has both good and bad connotations. We should know more in a month.
Well, my hopeless (foolish...?) optimism is starting to fade and I'm eating my own words (as posted elswhere in the Evo MR forums).

 

it doesn't surprise me that he bailed also... i don't even see why mitsu is still going to co-develop products with daimler chrysler anymore... they all bailed on mitsu so why in the world are they still going to work together on anything??

 

Have you considered that "quit" might be a nice term for forced out because he was from the DCAG group?

 

He may have been forced out, but he's lucky to leave...

Here's something to ponder:

http://www.thecarconnection.com/inde...5&article=7076

A highlight for superfan ringthree -

"Daimler will still do business with Mitsubishi, but without management control, it can't dictate strategy.

Daimler began its global strategy by acquiring Chrysler in 1998, followed by buying its stake in Mitsubishi in 2000. But as both companies have struggled and lost billions, Daimler has lost over $40 billion in shareholder value in six years. While Chrysler and Mitsubishi have sucked resources and management attention away from Mercedes-Benz, the only consistently profitable piece of the company, quality has slipped badly at the flagship division, costing the company in warranty expenses and prestige. Daimler's board has rewarded Schrempp for these stellar results with bonuses and contract extensions to 2007."

Like I said, hard to be a captain when someone else is in control of the rudder.

Bailout or not, and we'll see if the Development Bank of Japan or the Industrial Revitalization Corp. of Japan, will come to the rescue.

Oh, and what about Mitsu Holding, Mitsu Corp and Bank of Tokyo? Well, we'll see... they refused Eckrodt 6mnths prior. So yeah, they have tons of money to give their 'brother in need.'

Oh, and if Mitsu sales were so robust elsewhere, why would the U.S. criple them to the point of needing to shut down their Australian plant? Oh, and why have they had declining sales in their homemarket for the last 4yrs... where they sell the most Evos, actually sell the MR, and are still losing money? Very profitable indeed.

Yes, the company definitely has legs when it's the only major Japanese manufacturer to lose home market share.

g

 

First, I happily drive a Toyota. I certainly wouldn't call myself a fan boi, maybe a Toyota fan boi, but certainly not a Mitsu fan boi. I am just being realistic.

And as for your questioning of why the Mitsu conglomerate didn't step in six month's ago, think about the difference between then and now. Control of the company. I wouldn't be surprised at all and this is even hinted at in some of the articles that have been posted that the Mitsu people wanted the DCAG guys out, before they reinvested in the company.

2 last things. 1. You still keep using extranious factors to describe why the Evo is not profittable. Just accept it, you are just wrong on that one. 2. They increased sales in every market except the US in 2003. That information has already been posted.

 

A lot of the money received from DCX was used to improve quality control, establish the joint ventures in Europe for the COLT/Smart and its engine plant and into the Global Engine Alliance. In effect, DCX got a lot of invested equity back in the form of joint ventures.
What really angers me, is that DCX is partly to blame for knowlingly letting MMNA "give away" cars (remember Steven Torok...) and now they're letting shrivel in the heat.

 

Listen, Schrempp doesn't want to let flail, but he has no choice. He can't invest without investor backing and ever since he began to implament his world strategy, Daimler has lost $40billion in market worth, Chrysler has been viewed as a mistake by the board.

The last thing they wanted was to have bring their valuation down further and take more money away from their core industries... Chrysler which they have invested $27billion to date and Mercedes which has been suffering quality issues since the merger.

Will survive. Yes. How will it turn out following the resructuring? Smaller, for sure. There will be dealer closings as well... no doubt.

And I'm still in wait for my MR...

Did Eckrodt get pushed out? No. He left because he didn't get the financial backing he promised and therefore left since he failed the company. It would make no sense for him to get pushed out. needs their shared platforms to succeed. So they won't jeopardize what's left of their relationship with DCX.

I'll agree that the Evo makes higher profits for than say the Lancer. But, regardless of the profits, it's a nich player with minimal market potential which is approaching saturation. So it's a mute point.. they may not kill the Evo, fair, but the Evo won't save MMC.

Mitsu Corp, Mitsu Holdings and Bank of Tokyo aka the Mitsubishi Keirutsu really do not have the resources to invest $6-8billion into MMC. That's why all are anxiously waiting for the Development Bank of Japan and the Industrial Revitalization Corp. of Japan to invest.

The keirutsu maybe able to give $2-4billion, but for MMC to get on its feet it needs at least $6-8billion. Why? To have money to invest in quality.

The second piece of the puzzle and truly the keystone of any future MMC success, leadership... well I really don't know where they'll find it, at least within Japan. I honestly feel they need another foreign investor to take a controlling share and provide the necessary management to turn MMC around.

g