2024 Mustang sales lowest in history of Mustang

[Upacurb]

The people who are whining, are the ones who want it but can't afford it. It was a little over budget for me but honestly, still feel it was a good decision.

hmmm Im going to have to disagree with your statement .....

Sponsored

 

[jimbo67]

hmmm Im going to have to disagree with your statement .....

To disagree is acceptable, makes the world go around. I respect your comment.

 

[PBBLASTER]

Not sure why C*vid is missing an 'o'?

Agree fuel costs are an issue for many people and there is a knock on impact on movement of goods. But those fuel costs are included in inflation figures and the US like the UK has falling fuel prices (admittedly from a high point). Wages have risen (above the rate of inflation now) so with time the balance will redress. Maybe things were too good for a while before that with low inflation and higher wage rises making people better off and making them think it would last forever, which it never does.

You should be happy that your fuel costs are as low as they are!

Ford Blue subsidising EV's - well yes because EV development is expensive. Are you suggesting they don't bother and don't develop EV's? Remember Ford operates in a global market, what is happening in the US is not replicated in all markets. If Ford ignore EV's they will be fighting over a smaller and smaller global ICE market until that pie is so small it is of no value, then what? No more Ford!

Once and for all however, if people wanted Mustang's they would buy them, they are still very good value in the overall car market (which has moved up with inflation) so if sales are slow or falling then it tells you very clearly that people do not want cars like the Mustang any more. Not us the Mustang owners - we clearly do want Mustangs, but the others buying the 98% of Ford's that are not Mustangs. They are not wrong to buy what they want, just they have different priorities. You cannot criticise people for buying EV's or trucks or SUV's if that is what they want, and if there are bigger discounts or incentives to buy EV's then that is factor they will consider.

For many people a car is a washing machine (maybe not painted white) which goes from A to B, keeps them dry and warm and costs them as little as possible to run - that is it, nothing more nothing less. They waste their spare time on painting or walking in nature or playing a musical instrument, not enjoying driving their car. It doesn't make them wrong, just different, which I respect.

Total inflation is at least 25% since idiocy took over. Wages have not even come close to catching up with that. That's a big factor for poor sales. Most people are still in the hole.

 

[Katastrophe]

They can't lower the price because inflation. GM and Dodge couldn't make their muscle car offerings profitable so they gave up.

It's either these prices or no mustang.

The whining is getting out of hand.

I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but the Camaro and the Charger/Challenger didn't die from lack of profit...ESPECIALLY the two from Dodge. Those cars were printing CASH.

I also wouldn't correlate "whining" with common sense/constructive criticism; most people WILL NOT pay Lexus/BMW/C8 money for a Mustang. The fact that we can cross shop those based on price alone, is a glaringly obvious mistake with the business model.

I get the soft spot for the Mustang...it's an icon. However, it was an icon that USED to be for the everyman. Fun fact: the 23' Camaro ZL1 was DIRECTLY comparable in price to a 23' Mach 1. If that doesn't make you scratch your head...well...we'll just agree to disagree then.

 

[Katastrophe]

I posted in a thread a while back about the prices that I was concerned that the price increases would do serious damage to the Mustang brand, and it looks like the sales results are backing that up. While I agree with you that people should vote with their wallets, I would hate to see the Mustang go away. But if that happens, Ford have nobody to blame but themselves. They have drastically raised prices of real world builds the last two years on a car that is, for all intents and purposes, a reskinned S550 that's been on sale since late 2014. Meanwhile GM invested billions in the Corvette and are reaping the rewards.

Trust me, I have a soft spot for it, too; we've had 5 in the family over the years.

 

[Mustang1987]

I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but the Camaro and the Charger/Challenger didn't die from lack of profit...ESPECIALLY the two from Dodge. Those cars were printing CASH.

I also wouldn't correlate "whining" with common sense/constructive criticism; most people WILL NOT pay Lexus/BMW/C8 money for a Mustang. The fact that we can cross shop those based on price alone, is a glaringly obvious mistake with the business model.

I get the soft spot for the Mustang...it's an icon. However, it was an icon that USED to be for the everyman. Fun fact: the 23' Camaro ZL1 was DIRECTLY comparable in price to a 23' Mach 1. If that doesn't make you scratch your head...well...we'll just agree to disagree then.

Ah yes, they were all printing so much cash they decided they didn't want anymore cash and ended production.

Also, no, the Camaro zl1 wasn't comparable to the mach1 in price. It was over $10k more. And they don't make the Camaro now because it's not advantageous for GM because the profit isn't there.

There are two options for the mustang, raise price or no mustang.

No other car makers has found the muscle car segment advantageous for them. Ford tries to keep it alive by raising the price a couple grand.

 

[robvas]

Also, no, the Camaro zl1 wasn't comparable to the mach1 in price. It was over $10k more.

It's $10k better as well

 

[robvas]

Mustang Sales, Q4 2024: 7,518 cars sold :(
Camaro Sales, Q4 2023: 6,406 cars sold (look familiar?)
Mustang Sales, Q4, 2023: 13,290 cars sold

 

[Mustang1987]

It's $10k better as well

And how did it work out for GM?

 

[robvas]

Ah yes, they were all printing so much cash they decided they didn't want anymore cash and ended production.

EPA was getting on their ass and Stellantis was moving to 'electrification'

I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but the Camaro and the Charger/Challenger didn't die from lack of profit...ESPECIALLY the two from Dodge. Those cars were printing CASH.

 

[robvas]

And how did it work out for GM?

It's still a better car even if they don't make it anymore.

Is the GT500 suddenly not good since Ford quit making that?

 

[Mustang1987]

It's still a better car even if they don't make it anymore.

Is the GT500 suddenly not good since Ford quit making that?

You're missing the whole point and I'm starting to think it's on purpose.

The Camaro isn't being made because they can't make a profit on it. If they could, they would.

That's why Ford raised prices. So they can continue making it.

 

[Katastrophe]

Ah yes, they were all printing so much cash they decided they didn't want anymore cash and ended production.

Also, no, the Camaro zl1 wasn't comparable to the mach1 in price. It was over $10k more. And they don't make the Camaro now because it's not advantageous for GM because the profit isn't there.

There are two options for the mustang, raise price or no mustang.

No other car makers has found the muscle car segment advantageous for them. Ford tries to keep it alive by raising the price a couple grand.

If you care to know why they stopped production, there are plenty of articles explaining why (for both brands).

As for the ZL1 and M1...in Canada (where I live), they were priced within $2k. Base ZL1 vs Premium M1 with a few options to keep content apples-to-apples. I don't recall USA pricing exactly, but a quick search for an article in Edmunds say they tested an M1 that was $65k. That's only $4k cheaper than a base ZL1 (which has like-for-like content). Those cars should have NEVER been comparable on price.

 

[Mustang1987]

If you care to know why they stopped production, there are plenty of articles explaining why (for both brands).

As for the ZL1 and M1...in Canada (where I live), they were priced within $2k. Base ZL1 vs Premium M1 with a few options to keep content apples-to-apples. I don't recall USA pricing exactly, but a quick search for an article in Edmunds say they tested an M1 that was $65k. That's only $4k cheaper than a base ZL1 (which has like-for-like content). Those cars should have NEVER been comparable on price.

Compare base vs base obviously. You know that.

 

[Dragster]

That's why Ford raised prices. So they can continue making it.

Unfortunately for Ford and Mustang fans everywhere, that strategy doesn’t seem to be working out too well for them, given the title of the thread we’re posting in.

Sponsored