dom

I think thats the more likely senario.

phile

Well that's easy, build them both!

AcuraFan

Why not just do both?

I think a $120K Ferrari fighter would rock...but it'll be a while before I could afford one. Until then, I'd love to have a $50K Acura sports car. Right now, Acura has a big whole in their line up...$24K for an RSX-S and $90K for the NSX...but what about everyone in between? Maybe this new airplane project will create more revenue for coupe R&D.

AcuraFan

Damn you! You beat me too it! Why can't I type faster!

TeigerSX

FYI

Honda's financial statements reveal for the 6-month period ending 9/30/03 the following net sales numbers for North America (in millions Yen) (I'm too lazy to calculate $):

Motorcycles 130,534 (6% of total)
Autos 2,015,790 (87%)
Fin Serv 111,193 (5%)
Power Products & Other 52,008 (2%)

These numbers support the earlier view that Honda is mainly a Car company. Granted the profit margins on the small engines MAY be greater, but volume obviously MORE than compensates for that. From the numbers, the Financial Services is actually twice the sales volume as the small engine portion.

You can find more financial info from the "Business Report" which seems like it is the Japanese equivalent of an investors' Annual Report. Don't worry it's not in Japanese.


TEIGER

Colin

Of course but then there would be no money to develop a Jet

AcuraFan

Or maybe it's because of the jet that they'd have the money to make both coupes...

kiteboy

Saab fighters are powered by Volvo engines . I think it's national pride thing. The reality is that the Gripen will likely be severely outclassed by the Eurofighter and F-22.

Still it's very cool that a country that small can design and manufacture decent jet fighters and engines. In Canada, we don't even have a car company, let alone able to build fighters (don't get me started on the Arrow...).

Colin

Both coupes? We need the NSX but please NO MORE COUPES! After suffering with the CL, please NO MORE COUPES! Honda already has enough coupes to go around. Insight, Civic Si, Civic Coupe, Accord Coupe, RSX, S2000, NSX! We should have got the RD-X in time to fight the X3, damn that Jet

d-rock

but the RDX is set to come out tho

acuracxs

Where did you get that info ? Please do not twist the facts to prove a point.

Motorcycles 10.7%
Autos 19.3%
Fin Serv 8.2%
Power Products & Other 36.7%

AcuraFan

I do think more coupes would fill out the Acura lineup. We have a $24K boyracer (which is actually a hatch, not a coupe) and a $90K sports car that very few of us can afford. Why not have something in the middle...why not have a $30K - $40K coupe to compete with the RX8, 350Z, G35 Coupe, and possible upcoming 4 series? This would be a much higher volume car than the NSX and be more prestigious and ego-stroking than an RSX. You listed a ton of 2 and 3 door vehicles but you didn't list many coupes...Insight, Si, and RSX are all cheap hatches...the S2000 is a roadster...the Civic coupe and Accord coupe, while good cars, are still economy coupes...where's the luxury coupe that we can actually afford?

And don't go bashing the CL too badly. It's last generation was a fantistic car, especially with the 6spd. It just suffered from bland styling.

dom

That only adds up to 74.9%. Where is the other 25.1% of Honda sales going?

And are those percentages Honda Sales/Revenues or profits?

dom

Great stuff Teiger, and thanks for backing up what I thought, although I figured 75% was cars.

acuracxs, How can you say he twisted facts. Teiger has at least given a source as to where he got his info, something you did'nt do. Where did you get your numbers?

dom

Yen
(millions)
Six months ended % Six months ended Fiscal year ended
Operating Income September 30, 2003 change September 30, 2002 March 31, 2003

Motorcycle business..........¥ 8,203

Automobile business ................ 248,832

Financial services ........................ 40,756

Other businesses.............................. 4,080

Consolidated.................................. ¥301,871


248,832 / 301,871 = 82.4% of Honda Operating income comes from the Auto division.

TeigerSX

Thanks Domn. I'm confused by acuracxs, too.

If you would like to know where that came from, simply follow the link. It's RIGHT FROM HONDA. They published it.

Twist the facts to prove a point?

I have no idea where you got your numbers either, but please reread my original post. Those are NET SALES NUMBERS, for NORTH AMERICA, for a 6-MONTH PERIOD. Again, all straight from the Honda published report.

It seems pretty straight forward. I was actually surprised by the numbers myself, as I thought Honda's various other small engines contributed more significantly to their sales. It is apparent that is not the case.

TEIGER

dom

Net Sales and Other Operating Revenue

Motorcycle business:
Sales to unaffiliated customers .............. ¥ 475,071

Automobile business:
Sales to unaffiliated customers ...............3,267,258

Financial services:
Sales to unaffiliated customers ...............................................126 ,236

Intersegment sales...................................1,311

Other businesses:
Sales to unaffiliated customers ................156,866

Intersegment sales....................................5,707

Consolidated...................................... ........ ¥4,025,431

Here's what confuses me.

UNIT SALES BREAKDOWN - Units in Thousands

Motorcycles:.................................(4,09 2)

Automobiles:................................1,443

Power Products:............................2,195

To me this means 52.9% of Honda sales are Motorcycles.
18.6% sales are Auto and 28.3% Power Product. But the other charts show that Hondas greatests revenues and profits come ftom the Auto division.

dom

Here we Go.

NET SALES BREAKDOWN in Yen (millions)

Motorcycles................. 475,071

Automobile.................. 3,267,258

Financial Services ........126,236

Power Products & Other ..... 156,866

Total.............................4,025,431

Percentages of Honda Sales

Motorcycles = 11.8%

AutoMobile = 81.16%

Financial Services = 3.13%

Power Products & Other = 3.89%

Do the math, it works. There ai'nt no spin here.

So although in terms of units sold, Motorcycles and Power Products sell more than cars, profits and revenues are definently Automobile dominated.

Guess I was right :P

acuracxs

You would think when you look at a company you would look at it from a golbal point not just here in America.

Okay, you are looking at the North Am erican and I am looking at the Global number. So you can say in America, Honda is a car company, globally it is not. Fair enough ?

AcuraFan

I'd like to see your source on this.

But, considering what domn just said, I wouldn't go so far as to say Honda is a car company in the US. They get higher revenues from autos but sell more motorcycles and small engines. To say Honda is more one type of company over another is being lopsided and ignoring some of the facts. I think Honda considers itself a motor company. It's not a car company that also makes small engines but it's not a small engine company that also makes cars.

dom

The worldwide numbers don't change things much if at all anyway.

My numbers are for worldwide sales. Your numbers I'm now guessing were percetnages of unit sales I think. Which when compared to profits and revenues mean nothing really.

Honda is a car company first and foremost, although they may not market themselves that way, revenues prove otherwise.

acuracxs

I got the source from you guys, the same PDF document previously posted. It is on page 4.

dom

What was that you said a couple of days ago about me pulling numbers out of my ass? :P

j/k, but it looks like I was dead on when it comes to Hondas true cash cow, cars. But you have a valid point. There are more Honda Motorcycles, Lawnmowers, Generators and Boat engines out in the market then there are cars. But the point I've been trying to make all along is, Honda goes as their Car divuison goes. That falters you can forget about your Honda plane, and Snoblower.

They keep the car business strong then everything else falls into place. Lose market share by not offering products alot of people think they should have and there won't be enough extra $$ to make that next Honda Space Shuttle or whatever.

But I'm sure they know what they're doing.

acuracxs

True cars are their cash cow. I did not mean for you to pull the numbers out of your ass, I know you are joking, but it was a misunderstanding you we're looking at the American sales and I was looking at the Global sales.


All is said and done we are all Honda fans.

AcuraFan

Yep...I want facts...not opinions. You say "more revenues from cars", I say prove it. And you did. Props to you.

Yes, cars represent a very large percentage of the company called Honda. But that still doesn't mean Honda is a car company that also makes motorcycles. Honda is a company that makes cars, motorcycles, small engines, etc.

Ooh, a Honda Space Shuttle? Where do I sign up? (and where's my damn Honda toaster??? :P)

dom

No, props to TeigerTSX who found the info I could'nt.

I agree, afterall these numbers have shown that your more likely to see a Honda Lawnmower than a Honda Automobile out on the street. Although I can only think of one or two dealers in my area that carry Honda Power equipment.

Don't hate me but I just bought a MTD snowblower. Its a 4.5HP machine that cost me $497 CAD compared to the Honda 5HP that was $899. I'm a Honda loyalist, but I'm more loyal to the $400 I saved.

AcuraFan

um...you see Lawnmowers out on the street?

And actually, my snowblower is a Toro piece of crap that barely ever runs. lol

dom

You know what I mean.

Actually equivalent Toro's were about $700 to $800, so I'd probly go with the Honda in that case. I hav'nt yet bought a Lawnmower though and I'm hoping to make it a Honda.

AcuraFan

My driveway is really tiny so I picked up a crappy little 2 stroke Toro from a friend for free so beggers can't be choosers I guess. lol

TeigerSX

That PDF is quite revealing about the state of Honda. Glad I could help with the discussion.

LOL about the snowBLOWERS!

Honda is acting like any other healthy business: they know what pays the bills, and they are exploring other possible avenues of making LOOT. They are benchmarking their engine making prowess, and venturing out into previously untested (for them) waters.

I wonder if we will soon be referring to them as Hondajets, instead of Leerjets?

I know I want one.

TEIGER

ClutchPerformer

They need to venture out into the previously untested waters of V-8 engines.

dom

Where you you 3 days ago to help me back up that point. And don't forget about the RWD sedan and sport coupe.

And since we're at it, a smallish SUV ala Escape or Liberty with a V6.

ClutchPerformer

Sorry. I wasn't sure how I felt about this gas turbine stuff yet. But now I am, and my question is this: If they can spend the R&D dollars to develop a completely different kind of engine, then why can't they make a V-8 (different configuration, but still an IC-piston engine)? The cost argument is no longer valid.

We are getting that RDX (small suv) thing. But I'm betting it won't have a V6. Probably another version of the good ol' K24.

dom

Thats been my question as soon as I heard about this plane. And now that we've found out that over 80% of Honda revenues come from their Automobile sales its even more of a wonder as to why they would'nt want more diversity in their lineup. And like you said, you can throw the "its not cost effective" argument out the window, because this jet and engine will cost waaaaay more than it ever would to design a new V8 and RWD platform.

My guess is Honda was sitting on the fence as to wheather they wanted a V8. They sat their too long and have know decided that IMA is the way to go instead.

But RWD is still a must IMO. Not everyone wants AWD.

ClutchPerformer

They're too busy hugging trees to see reality.

phile

Perhaps the part of Honda that is developing the jet does not adhere to the same "limitations" as the part of Honda that develops cars? I mean they make V8 engines for their racing cars too, so for them to say it's not cost effective does seem a little odd. But maybe that's only the case when you're talking about Honda automobiles.

acuracxs

Maybe the race cars have sponsors, so some of the costs are shared ?

ClutchPerformer

Those monies go to the racing teams, not the engine manufacturers.

AcuraFan

It's not just because it's not cost effective. Honda has stated a V8 would hurt their "green" image. Look at Toyota, they have some of the most fuel efficient cars on the market...but they also have some big gas guzzeling V8s. So Honda is percieved as the Earth friendly company.

But the cost effectiveness is nothing to sneeze at. Most likely the team of high priced accountants at Honda looked at the numbers and decided a jet (even though it's expensive to build) was more cost effective than replacing their top selling platform for a RWD one or building a V8 when you can get almost as much power out of a V6 with better economy. It's call "return on investment".

ClutchPerformer

LS430 (4.3L): 290 HP/320lb-ft, 18/25mpg, ULEV
LX470 (4.7L): 235HP/320lb-ft, 13/17mpg, LEV (the TSX is a LEV)

Note that these are the largest/heaviest vehicles these two engines are offered in. Others get better mileage numbers. I don't think those numbers are that bad. I certainly wouldn't call them "big gas guzzling V8s".

Honda would get a great "return on investment" if they made a V-8/RWD RL that competed with Lexus LS430 and Infiniti QX45 in more than just size. Until then, they'll be laughed at in the marketplace. "Almost as much power out of a V-6 (and not nearly as much torque)" might work in Japan, but it won't cut it with US consumers.