Now i know that this qustion has been asked alot but does any one think there is any possable way that i could be able to own an evo8 and be able to drive it around with at least kinda legaly??????please help me....???

 

In canada? The next evo is rumored to be coming to canada. Be patient. Otherwise, I'd ask your buds in the forum. The other option is to get a residence in the United States so that you can purchase and title a car in the US. Then you can take the car across the border, no problem, since it will be registered in the US and have US insurance and plates. No customs agent is going to check to see if your car is sold in canada. I drive my evo in canada all the time. I am sure there are other options... driving a USDM car in Canada is much, much easier than a JDM car in north america...

 

Might have already been covered, saw this and just had to reply. But im afraid mitsu is floating on the Evolution Right now. Without it Mitsubishi has no sporty presence in the US and then there will be nothing for customers to consider mitsubishi for anymore.

 

This makes no sense. If Mitsubishi isn't selling the Evo to make money, then why in the hell are they selling it? Mitsu can certainly demonstrate its engineering prowess without selling the Evolution, so why does it waste its time trying to come out with better versions of the Evo? Bottom line is is that Mitsu is a "for-profit" organization and if something doesn't bring in profits then they will cut it from their production line. The Evolution has certainly proven to be a seller for Mitsubishi, but if it doesn't make it money then expect them to discontinue it.

 

Let me remind you that I work for a car company. You'd be surprised how many cars out there do not make money for their parent companies, and I'm not just talking about the evo. There are other revenue streams like financing and parts + service . Let's do some numbers. Let's say Mitsubishi makes $1,000 profit per evo (which is a high estimate, given what I know about per unit profits at my own company). And they sell 5,000 of them a year. That's a net profit of 5 million dollars, which is a drop in the bucket when you consider that that's only 5,000 people servicing their car at mitsubishi dealer (where a lot of the profit comes from), 5,000 people buying parts, and 5,000 potential new finance customers.

There are plenty of strategic reasons for selling a car at a loss. #1, SUV's are currently popular (and very profitable) but if oil prices keep rising, demand for small cars will increase and so will small car volumes and prices. You'd be surprised at how many small cars are sold here at a net loss. #2, develop a technology- toyota reportedly lost about $20K per prius when the first generation car came out. Though this resulted in a loss of millions of dollars for that vehicle line, they got invaluable data from real world customers driving their car around and got a big advantage out of the gate in developing hybrid technology. #3- reputation. If you can build a world class car that gets good press, the value to the company's reputation is invaluable. It's the same reason for having a motorsports program. Car companies spend billions of dollars annually on advertising. Even if Mitsubishi lost $1000 per car, and sold 5,000 cars in 2005, $5 million is less than even a small nationwide tv campaign.

The car industry is really a fashion industry. It is the second most expensive thing most people own, right behind their house. And most people buying a car are buying one because they want a new car, not because their old car is falling apart. It's a tough game to play, because not only do you have to build a quality product, but you have to build a desirable one. In that sense the Lancer Evo is an important part of Mitsubishi's revival, but only if they can get some of that Evo DNA in the rest of the product lineup.

Out of curiosity, what cars does Mitsu sell now that demonstrate that they can build best in class vehicles? Other than the evo, that is.

 

You are 100% right, there are a number of vehicles at each manufacturer that are NOT profitable to produce. If you think that is strange, look at it from a dealership perspective, the average dealer will 5 to 10 times the money in service and parts on a customer than they do selling the vehicle. It is not uncommon for new vehicle departments to lose money or barely break-even while the service and parts departments make the majority of the profits.

 

Certainly there are other streams of revenue for a car manufacturer, but the primary reason the firm exists is to make cars. I would assume that a car manufacturer does sell its cars at a loss, but with the expectation that the car will become a moneymaker later down the road. If it doesn't make that transition, then I wouldn't expect the manufacturer to hold on to the car much longer. I can certainly understand the reasons for selling the car at a loss at the beginning of a car's life cycle, but of course there is the double edged sword effect: 1) If SUVs continue to be moneymakers even with gas prices high (which is the case in the US), then it wouldn't be too wise to switch over to small cars because you're not only cutting into your revenue stream, but also that of other companies as well; 2) If the technology is brand new in the beginning and you're trying to create a market for your product, then it would be smart to price it below market cost. However, if the car does not take off, then don't expect the manufacturer to hold onto it; 3) and it wouldn't be too wise to spend money on a marketing campaign if the car is going to be a loss from the getgo.

As far as other cars that Mitsubishi can concentrate on, they have several including the Galant, the successful Eclipse (no matter what we feel about it), and even the four-banger Lancer. The Evolution is a great car, yes, but I don't think that Mitsubishi should be treating it like it's saving grace. Diversification and continuous R&D is the best thing that Mitsu can do to gain marketshare in the highly competitive marketplace.

Don't assume I'm challenging your expertise since you have more relevant information than I: I'm simply just looking at it from a different perspective. If you don't mind sharing, what car company do you work for?

 

I think then, that we're in agreement. I don't think the Evolution is the company's saving grace; in fact I think it ONLY makes sense if Mitsubishi spends money on the rest of their product line. I was just refuting your point that it 'made no sense' to sell a car without making money on the sale. The industry is fickle, these loss-leading cars are a form of insurance. Companies might lose some money on them (since the US market values a bigger car, and smaller cars are simply not any cheaper to make, we have to sell smaller cars for less money and often at a loss), but the flip side is that if the market turns, the car companies have a product to sell rather than scrambling to make something late to market and behind the curve (anyone remember the chevette and the pinto?). Just as you spend money on car insurance without any expectation of a return on your cash, we spend money on diversifying our product portfolio so that we're prepared for changes in the market. This could range from building sports cars in response to a high tech boom that puts cash in the hands of 20-30 year olds to developing hybrid technology in response to geopolitical events that affect oil prices and thus demand for efficient cars.

Certainly with a high volume product you want to make money in the long run, and if you sell 100K cars a year you can probably amortize your development costs and get away with minor revisions for 5-8 years but not much longer than that. However, the Evo is a car that has many, many unique components which are optimized for performance and not cost. Building a 271 hp awd turbocharged car with a 3 year warranty (now it's 5!?!) that can be driven daily with reasonable maintenance intervals is expensive, and I simply don't see how Mitsubishi can be making that much money on the car, given the lack of platform synergies with other products in the Mitsubishi suite. An Evo is a lancer stripped to a body in white and rebuilt with race ready components, many of which the average consumer can't see. Building the Evo is a tough choice for Mitsubishi to make, but spending lots of money to bring over AYC in addition to all the US evaporative emissions equipment just doesn't make sense, which was the point I was originally trying to make. Also, the maintenance intervals on the AYC unit are far more frequent what the normal American consumer is used to.

As for who I work for, I think it's probably best that I keep that to myself.

 

no, not by 100percent