Car Wars The US automotive product pipeline

Transcription

1 Industry Overview Equity United States Autos/Car Manufacturers & Auto Parts 15 July 2009 Car Wars In-depth study of the U.S. automotive product pipeline Car Wars is an annual proprietary study that assesses the relative strength of automakers product pipeline in the U.S. The purpose is to quantify industry product trends and then relate our findings to investment decisions. Product pipelines more difficult to predict than ever before Given the current tenuous state of the U.S. auto industry, forecasting the future product pipeline is more difficult than ever, but it is critical to understanding the industry so we will once again take our best shot. Macro demand meltdown a game changer The severe downturn in demand in 2008 and 2009 has dramatically altered our conclusions from last year s study. We believe that the impact will be long lasting and put GM and Chrysler at a larger disadvantage relative to Ford. Car Wars thesis and investment relevance We believe the replacement rate drives showroom age, which drives market share, which in turn drives capacity utilization, profitability, and stock and bond prices. OEMs with the highest replacement rate and youngest relative showroom age have gained market share from (Table 1). We expect this relationship to remain over our forecast period of MY (Charts 1 & 2). Five key findings of our study 1) Replacement rate & showroom age are major determinants of market share. 2) Product activity is sporadic among OEMs and relative gaps are opening again. 3) GM s market share will likely drop below the targeted range of 18%-19%. 4) Ford s market share gains should continue driving upside in estimates. 5) Chrysler s product pipeline is dubious and likely to drive market share losses. Investment implications: GM: Product cycle downshifts GM s market share losses are likely to be greater than expected and more severe in CY2009 and CY2010 while easing in later years. We believe that GM s 18%- 19% market share target is optimistic and a more realistic range is 15%-16%. Ford: Relative position should continue to improve Ford s market share gains in 1H:09 should continue due to the relative strength of its product replacement rate over the next four years. This appears to be a result of planning as well as the fortuitous stress at its two major competitors. Parts/Dealers: Exposure to strong OEMs as important as ever Exposure to profitable and growing OEMs is important for profitability and returns. All else equal, exposure to OEMs with the highest replacement rates and lowest average age is a key to the success of both suppliers and dealers. John Murphy, CFA Research Analyst MLPF&S john_murphy@ml.com See Team Page for Full List of Contributors Table 1: Replacement Rate, Showroom Age, Market Share ( ) Avg. Replacement Rate Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) U.S. Market Share D [1] GM 14% % Chrysler 14% % Ford 15% % GM-Stub 16% (0.7) 0.2% European 17% (0.3) 3.3% Toyota 19% (0.7) 7.3% Nissan 2 (1.0) 3.4% Honda 19% (0.9) 4.7% Korean 22% (1.1) 5.6% [1] Market Share is based on Calendar Years Chart 1: Product Replacement Rate 2010e-2013e Korean Ford Honda Industry Toyota Nissan European GM-Stub GM Chrysler 33% 72% 68% 67% 63% 53% 45% 108% 99% 97% Chart 2: Average Showroom Age 2010e-2013e GM European Industry Chrysler Nissan Toyota Korean Ford Honda Average 2.0 Merrill Lynch does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports. As a result, investors should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report. Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. Customers of MLPF&S and BAS in the US can receive independent, third-party research on companies covered in this report, at no cost to them, if such research is available. Customers can access this independent research at or can call to request a copy of this research. Refer to important disclosures on page 48 to 50. Analyst Certification on Page 46. Price Objective Basis/Risk on page

2 Contents Executive summary 3 Car Wars background 5 Investment implications 9 Industry & manufacturer trends 13 Company analysis 21 Conclusions 37 Appendix 41 Team Page 51 2

3 15 July 2009 The purpose of our Car Wars study is to quantify industry product trends and relate our findings to investment decisions. Executive summary Car Wars is a proprietary study we conduct every year to assess the relative strength of automakers product pipeline in the U.S. The study is based on numerous primary and secondary sources, including industry contacts, auto show visits, trade publications, enthusiast magazines, supply chain relationships, and our general knowledge of platform strategies, and product cycle planning. The purpose is to quantify industry product trends and then relate our findings to investment decisions. Replacement rate and relative showroom age are two of the main drivers of market share gains or losses (Table 2 & 3). The key metrics that we use are replacement rate, the estimated percentage of an OEM s sales volume to be replaced with new models or next generation models; average showroom age, the number of years on the market, for the average design in an OEM s showroom; and new model volume mix, the mix of new models by segment during the forecast period for each OEM. Car Wars thesis We believe that the replacement rate drives showroom age, which drives market share, which drives capacity utilization, which in turn drives profitability and ultimately stock and bond prices. Table 2 shows the average annual replacement rate, relative showroom age, and market share change of the largest OEMs between MY99 and MY09. OEMs with the youngest showroom age relative to the industry have gained market share. Table 2: Historical Replacement Rate, Showroom Age, Market Share ( ) Avg. Replacement Rate Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) U.S. Market Share D [1] GM 14% % Chrysler 14% % Ford 15% % GM-Stub 16% (0.7) 0.2% European 17% (0.3) 3.3% Toyota 19% (0.7) 7.3% Nissan 2 (1.0) 3.4% Honda 19% (0.9) 4.7% Korean 22% (1.1) 5.6% [1] Volume weighted average age variance [2] Market Share is Based on Calendar Years Although other factors, including mix, pricing, execution, distribution, and brand power impact market share, we think this data strongly supports our thesis that successful new products drive higher market shares. Table 3 summarizes our forecasts of these key metrics for MY10 to MY13 and subsequent estimates of market share shifts. Table 3: Forecast Replacement Rate, Showroom Age, Market Share (2010e-2013e) Replacement Rate [1] Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) U.S. Market Share D [2] Korean 27% (0.2) 3.5% Ford 25% (0.2) 3. Honda 24% (0.6) 3. Toyota 17% (0.2) 1. Nissan 17% (0.0) 0.5% European 16% GM-Stub 13% GM 11% Chrysler 8% (0.0) -6. [1] Volume weighted average age variance [2] Market share forecast is for calendar years

4 1. Replacement rate and showroom age drive market share gains and losses. 2. Product activity slowed, but should re-accelerate in MY11-MY Intros more focused on cars and CUVs than ever before. 4. Gaps in relative performance are beginning to open again 5. GM s market share losses are likely to be greater than targeted. 6. Ford s market share gains in 1H:09 should continue through the next four years. 7. Chrysler is likely to be half its current size in a few years due to a lack of product. 8. The lead Japanese OEMs have maintained for years is shrinking. 9. Korean OEMs are accelerating product intros, which should drive significant market share gains. 10. Suppliers & Dealers success should be correlated to their exposure to OEMs with high replacement rates. Ten key findings Our measures of replacement rate and showroom age are the major driver of market share gains and losses. Historically, Detroit has replaced its line-up every seven years while the competition has done so every four to five years we believe this is one of the main reasons that Ford, GM, and Chrysler have lost share. Product activity slowed, but is re-accelerating in MY11-MY13. This suggests that all-else equal the pricing environment should ease through MY10, but become more difficult in MY11 through MY13 unless demand also recovers. New product activity is focused on Car and Crossover segments. At the same time Light Truck (body-on-frame) intros are slowing. Gaps in relative performance are beginning to open again. We estimate that an increasing level of disparity in replacement rates will result in larger shifts in market share similar to those that have begun to emerge in 1H:09. GM s market share losses are likely to be greater than targeted. We believe that GM s 18%-19% market share target is optimistic and a more realistic range is 15%-16%. GM s replacement rate averages just 11% over the next four years, below its historical average of 14%, and well below the industry average of 18%. The positive reversal of Ford s market share in 1H:09 should continue. We believe this will be driven by the relative strength of its product replacement rate of 25% over the next four years, above its historical average of 14% and well better than the industry average of 18%. We believe Chrysler is likely to be half its current size in a few years due to a lack of product. Chrysler severely lags the industry on a number of key metrics, which is an ominous sign for market share. In our view, this is a result of a lack of investment by previous owners and the dubious potential for Fiat products in the U.S. market. The lead Japanese OEMs have maintained for years is shrinking. Toyota and Nissan s metrics are converging closer to the industry averages while Honda remains significantly better than average, which should in combination slow their trend of market share gains. Korean OEMs are picking up the pace after hitting a dry patch in MY08 & MY09. Therefore, we expect Hyundai and Kia to gain significant market share, about 3.5% over the next four years. Suppliers & Dealers success should be correlated to their exposure to OEMs with high replacement rates. We believe this bodes well for BorgWarner, a supplier, and the following dealers: PAG, Asbury, Sonic, and Group 1. It continues to be an ominous sign for many suppliers. 4

5 Car Wars background The purpose of Car Wars 7 An independent view 7 Car Wars thesis 8 5

6 6

7 Purpose of report: quantify industry product trends, market share shifts and then relate conclusions to investment decisions. The purpose of Car Wars Background and purpose Car Wars is a proprietary study we conduct every year to assess the relative strength of automakers product pipeline in the U.S. The study is based on numerous primary and secondary sources, including industry contacts, auto show visits, trade publications, enthusiast magazines, supply chain relationships, and our general knowledge of platform strategies, product cycle planning, and management behavior. The purpose is to quantify industry product trends and then relate findings to investment decisions. Key metrics The key metrics that we use include the following: Replacement rate, average showroom age and new model volume mix are the key metrics we calculate to analyze the OEMs product pipeline. Replacement rate: One of the simplest and most important ways to measure the strength of an automaker s product plan: the estimated percentage of its sales volume to be replaced with entirely new models or next generations of existing models. Average showroom age: The number of years on the market, for the average model in an OEM s showroom (measured on a stand-alone basis and relative to the industry). New model volume mix: The mix of new models by market during the forecast period for each OEM. Our process of data collection is continuous, and we have developed a comprehensive database of U.S. product activity going back to 1987 through two cycle peaks and now almost two troughs. Once a year, we summarize our findings in a report and on a color poster. This year s study forecasts activity for the model years. An independent view Relative performance is what counts Car Wars represents our independent view of automakers competitiveness, so it doesn t necessarily agree with the views of the car companies. It is likely we are missing information on all OEMs. Therefore, despite differences of opinion on any one OEM s pipeline forecast, we believe that we have an accurate view of its relative position in the market, and that s what we believe matters when forecasting market share. All-new versus new and improved Readers may find that our data might differ from the pronouncements OEMs make occasionally about the number of products they plan to launch. This is because our definition of what a new product is may differ from that of automakers. (New product definitions even vary from company to company.) In Car Wars, we include only products we judge to be all-new or next generation vehicles what the industry typically calls a major. We don t include mid-cycle enhancements where only modest changes are made to the vehicle, typically called a minor. Furthermore, we forecast volume based on what we think the average annual volume will be for the product over its entire model life. We do not use company sales targets or peak volumes, which could distort results. 7

8 Replacement rate Showroom age Market share Capacity utilization Profitability Share/bond price Car Wars thesis Our thesis is that an OEM s product replacement rate drives showroom age, which drives market share, which drives capacity utilization, which in turn drives profitability and stock and bond prices. Table 4 shows the average annual replacement rate, relative showroom age, and market share change of the largest OEMs between MY1999 and The table shows how the OEMs with the youngest showroom age relative to the industry have gained market share. Although other factors, including mix, pricing, execution, distribution, and brand power impact market share, we think this data strongly supports our thesis that successful new products drive higher market shares. Table 4: Historical Replacement Rate, Showroom Age, Market Share ( ) Avg. Volume Replacement Rate [1] Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) Industry Avg. U.S. Market Share Δ [2] GM 13.9% % Chrysler 14.4% % Ford 15.5% % GM-Stub 16. (0.7) 0.2% European 16.8% (0.3) 3.3% Toyota 18.6% (0.7) 7.3% Nissan 20.2% (1.0) 3.4% Honda 19.2% (0.9) 4.7% Korean 21.9% (1.1) 5.6% [1] Volume weighted average age variance [2] Market Share is Based on Calendar Years Based on the relative strength of this historical relationship, and taking mix and strategy into account, we have forecasted market share shifts for the major automakers in the U.S. market, which is summarized in Table 5. We will discus the implications of these shifts in the following sections. Table 5: Forecast Replacement Rate, Showroom Age, Market Share (2010e-2013e) Avg. Volume Replacement Rate [1] Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) Industry Avg. Estimated U.S. Market Share D [2] Korean 27. (0.2) 3.5% Ford 24.8% (0.2) 3. Honda 24.2% (0.6) 3. Toyota 16.9% (0.2) 1. Nissan 16.9% (0.0) 0.5% European 15.8% GM-Stub 13.2% GM 11.2% Chrysler 8.3% (0.0) -6. [1] Volume weighted average age variance [2] Market share forecast is for calendar years

9 Investment implications Investment implications for Ford 11 Implications for GM 11 Implications for Chrysler 11 Investment implications for suppliers 12 Investment implications for dealers 12 9

10 10

11 We expect the positive market share momentum that Ford has built in 1H:09 to continue through the end of 2012 based on a relatively strong replacement rate and lower average showroom age. This should drive upside relative to current expectations. GM s replacement rate and average showroom age point to a slight acceleration of market share losses. This puts the market share target of 18%-19% at jeopardy, which means that further restructuring actions may be necessary. We believe a more reasonable target would be 15%-16%. Investment implications for Ford We expect the positive market share momentum that Ford has built in 1H:09 to continue through the end of 2012 based on a relatively strong replacement rate and lower average showroom age. This should drive upside relative to current expectations. Specifically, we believe that based on strong market share gains that Ford may post better than break-even EPS in 2010 and possibly $1.00 in Table 6: Ford's replacement rate, showroom age, market share vs. 2010e-2013e Avg. Volume Replacement Rate Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) Industry Avg. U.S. Market Share Δ % % 2010e e 25% (0.2) 3. Implications for GM GM s replacement rate and average showroom age point to a slight acceleration of market share losses. This puts the company s market share target of 18%- 19% in jeopardy, which means that further restructuring actions could be necessary. We believe a more reasonable target would be 15%-16%. At a trend rate of US demand of 14mm units, the discrepancy of 3% market would equate to close to 500k fewer units for North America or about two fewer assembly facilities. Table 7: GM's replacement rate, showroom age, market share vs. 2010e-2013e Avg. Volume Replacement Rate Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) Industry Avg. U.S. Market Share Δ % % 2010e e 11% Chrysler s product pipeline is dubious and likely to drive significant market share losses. We anticipate that Chrysler will be roughly half its current size in a few years. Implications for Chrysler Chrysler s product pipeline is dubious and likely to drive significant market share losses. We anticipate that Chrysler will be roughly half its current size in a few years creating room for other automakers to gain market share. Table 8: Chrysler's replacement rate, showroom age, market share vs. 2010e-2013e Avg. Volume Replacement Rate Avg. Showroom Age O/(U) Industry Avg. U.S. Market Share Δ % % 2010e e 8% (0.0)

12 Proprietary technology trumps all for suppliers in our view, though exposure to profitable and growing OEMs is extremely important for their growth, profitability, and returns. Investment implications for suppliers Proprietary technology trumps all for suppliers in our view, though exposure to profitable and growing OEMs is extremely important for their growth, profitability, and returns. Therefore, assuming all else equal, suppliers most exposed to OEMs with the highest replacement rates and lowest average age are best off. At the highest level this is a positive sign for BorgWarner and a tough sign for many NA focused suppliers (Chart 3). Chart 3: Supplier Exposure to OEMs AXL LEA MGA TRW JCI GNTX BWA ARM Big Three GM F Chrysler VW BMW Toyota Honda Nissan Hy undai Other Source: Company Filings Similar to suppliers and assuming all else equal, dealers that are most exposed to the OEMs with the highest replacement rates and lowest average age are best off. Investment implications for dealers Similar to suppliers and assuming all else equal, dealers that are most exposed to the OEMs with the highest replacement rates and lowest average age are best off, in our view. This should translate into better new car sales and earnings growth in the short term and importantly feed into the recurring parts and service profit stream in the long term as units in operation grow. The following chart summarizes the public groups' new vehicle exposure by brand. Chart 4: Dealer 2008 new vehicle sales by brand LAD AN SAH GPI ABG PAG Big Three GM F Chrysler VW Mercedes BMW Toyota Honda Nissan Other Source: Company Filings 12

13 Industry & manufacturer trends Industry trends New model launches 15 Replacement rate 16 Average showroom age 16 New models by segment 17 Manufacturer trends Average showroom age 18 Relative freshness of product lines 18 Cumulative replacement rates 19 13

14 14

15 Industry trends This section details product trends for the U.S. auto market. The size, homogeneity, relatively rich mix, and ultimately the profitability of the U.S. market continue to attract new investments from overseas automakers. However, what has been an accelerating boom of new model launches in recent years will likely slow slightly as the industry works its way through a rationalization phase we refer to as the Big Bang. New model launch activity slows ever so slightly As shown in Chart 5, we expect OEMs to launch 166 new models during our forecast period ( ), or an average of 42 per year. This rate is about 12% above the average number of models launched per year between 1989 and 2009, underscoring how intensely competitive the industry still is. Chart 5: New model launches 2010e-2013e New model launches hit a relative lull in MY09 which we expect to continue in MY10, but pick up significantly in MY11 through the end of our forecast period in MY Av erage = 37, E 2011E 2012E 2013E There are many factors contributing to the acceleration in product, including OEMs rush to enter new vehicles segments (CUVs, hybrids, ultra-luxury, youth, etc.), an aggressive push by some OEMs to expand product line-ups (for example, the Korean OEMs), as well as the relative richness and size of the U.S. vehicle market. Stricter CAFE standards and higher gasoline prices are also raising the profile of the CUV and car segments, which represent an increasing share of new product launches (Chart 6). Chart 6: 2010e-2013e new vehicle launch mix vs % 29% 18% 9% 26% 17% 1 22% 32% 13% Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover Lt. Truck 15

16 Replacement rate eases in MY10 and then accelerates The replacement rate mirrors the trend in new model launches to a large degree. On average, between 1992 and 2009, the industry replaced about 13% of its volume each year with new models. At this rate, the industry turns over its entire model line about every 7.7 years. Over the next four years, we expect the annual replacement rate will remain higher at close to 18%, which means that the industry will turn over in less than 6 years. MY09 was particularly important for trucks, at about 4 of new volume, driven by Ford s new F-150 and a new Dodge Ram. However, new volume mix is moving significantly away from trucks towards cars and CUVs that we estimate will account for an unprecedented 87% of new volume launched from MY10 to MY13. In our opinion, the continued strong pace of product activity can be linked to the intensely competitive industry environment. As with all industries, auto companies can compete through cost leadership, superior product, or product differentiation. For most OEMs, the first strategy has been unachievable, and with the reorganized and restructured Detroit Three it is even tougher to differentiate on cost. On the second strategy, there has been extreme convergence in quality as all automakers have improved to a relatively common level. That leaves almost all trying to compete by differentiating their product. This has resulted in the continued strong pace of new models introductions. Chart 7: Replacement rate Industry replacement rate over the forecast period will remain well above the 13% historical average, spiking to an average of 2 for MY11 through MY13. 25% 2 15% 1 5% Av erage = 13% 21% 2 19% 17% 17% 18% 18% 15% 13% 14% 14% 15% 12% 11% 12% 12% % E 2011E 2012E 2013E Replacement Rate Average showroom age likely remains low The age of vehicles on sale in showrooms across the U.S. (Chart 16) has been on a steady decline since the early 1990s, as automakers replace their products more frequently. We attribute this trend to intensifying competition in part from new entrants and product line expansion by car companies that have introduced numerous new nameplates. We expect that the industry s average showroom age will trend lower averaging about 2.6 years for MY10 MY13, a noticeable tick down from an average age of 2.8 years for the last decade. 16

17 15 July 2009 Excess supply, competitive pressure, new entrants, etc. will continue to drive down product cycle times. Chart 8: Average showroom age [1] E 2011E 2012E 2013E [1] Average is volume weighted, in past reports this has been a simple average, the results vary only slightly Intensified competition and the resulting new products are, of course, fabulous for consumers, who will enjoy the choice of new cars and trucks. All of this new product, however, comes at a high cost to the OEMs, which will need to become increasingly efficient with R&D and capital spending. New model segment shift continues towards CUVs and Cars Chart 9 shows the U.S. market s evolving market shift, based on the number of new models, not volumes, from traditional small, midsize, and large cars to light trucks, luxury cars, and crossovers. Since the MY1997 launch of the Toyota RAV4 and the Honda CRV, crossovers have been the next big thing and they still are. Forty-eight of the 166 new models we forecast for , or 29% will be crossovers. The segment has been dominated by Japanese OEMs, but the Detroit Three are making a big push with Ford introducing 10, GM 5, and Chrysler 2 new crossover models in the next four model years. Chart 9: New models by segment 10 New model emphasis is still on crossovers. However, Small and Mid/Large car launches are picking up significantly accounting for 60 launches over the next four years, or about 36% over the next four years Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover Light Truck E 2011E 2012E 2013E, not volume weighted In addition to the continuation of the crossover boom, which is the largest in any single category, Small and Mid/Large car launches are picking up significantly accounting for 60 launches over the next four years, or about 36% over the next four years. At the same time there is an almost 6 decline in body-on-frame truck introductions over the next four years versus the last decade. 17

18 Manufacturer trends Average showroom age still converging around 2.6 years Average showroom age is one way to quantify how intensely competitive the U.S. market has become in the last two decades (see Chart 10). For some time, there has been a convergence in the average showroom age. In the late 1980s through the late 1990s, there were large gaps in competitiveness where the domestic companies and Europeans had product that was five to six years old while the Japanese OEMs had products that averaged about two years old. Since the late 1980s, the domestic and European OEMs have become much more competitive. Their average showroom age is now about 2.6 years, while the Japanese product cycles have stabilized between 2 and 2.5 years. We believe that the Japanese OEMs came to realize that it wasn t worth replacing some of their low-margin smaller cars so frequently to drive average age below 2 years. In addition, as the Japanese have developed more full line product offerings it is difficult to maintain an abnormally low average age. However, at the end of the next four model years there will be some divergence as GM s all important GMT900 product ages (this should improve shortly after MY13) and Chrysler s portfolio just flat out ages while Toyota, Honda, Nissan, and Hyundai keep their product fresh at around 2 years and Ford is not far behind at 2.4 years. It should be noted that Ford s average age improves dramatically as we anticipate the end of a few extremely old products such at the Econoline vans, Crown Victoria, and Grand Marquis. Chart 10: Average showroom age by OEM We expect Ford s average showroom age to drop drastically to an average of just 2.4 years for MY10-MY13 as it cancels older products such as the Econoline and introduces new replacement product such as the Transit. Years General Motors Chrysler European Korean E 2011E 2012E 2013E Ford Industry Japanese Relative freshness of product lines remains low As competition further intensifies, even small differences in showroom age can impact OEMs performance. Chart 11 shows the relative freshness of product lines by manufacturer over the next four model years. The companies are relatively closely clustered except for GM (average showroom age 3.3 years). GM s average showroom age is notably above average weighted up by the aging GMT900 product line up. We expect Ford s average showroom age to drop drastically to an average of just 2.4 years for MY10-MY13 as it cancels older products such as the Econoline and introduces new replacement product such as the Transit. 18

19 Chart 11: Relative freshness of product line by manufacturer 2010e-2013e Ford will likely have one of the fresher lineups as it cancels older product such as the Econoline and begins to leverage its global product to drive a lower average age. GM s product ages largely because of the aging of the GMT900 vehicles, but this should improve upon the new models sometime beyond MY GM European Industry Average Chrysler Nissan Toyota Korean Ford Honda 2.0 Cumulative replacement rates appear to drive market share Comparing cumulative replacement rates is one of the simplest and most effective ways in which we measure the strength of product plan. The replacement rate is the estimated percentage of sales volume to be replaced with entirely new models or next generation of existing models during the period. Over the next four years, the industry will replace 72% of its volume, with the disparity among the major manufacturers widening again. We believe that the increasing deltas in replacement rates between OEMs will result in larger shifts in market share similar to those that have begun to emerge in 1H:09. Chart 12: Cumulative replacement rates, % of 2008 CY volume replaced in MY 2010e-2013e We estimate that an increasing level of disparity in replacement rates will result in larger shifts in market share similar to those that have begun to emerge in 1H:09. Chrysler is the extreme outlier on the low-end due to the lack of investment of its last two owners and the dubious potential for Fiat products in the U.S. market. Korean Ford Honda Industry Toyota Nissan Europea GM-Stub GM Chrysler 33% 45% 53% 72% 68% 67% 63% 99% 97% 108%

20 This page intentionally left blank. 20

21 Company analysis General Motors Corp 23 Ford Motor Co 25 Chrysler 27 Japanese OEMs 29 European OEMs 32 Korean OEMs 34 21

22 22

23 General Motors Corporation Conclusion: GM s market share losses are likely to be greater than expected and more severe in CY2009 and CY2010 while easing in later years. We believe that GM s 18%-19% market share target is optimistic and a more realistic range is 15%-16%. Chart 13: GM replacement rate vs. industry GM s replacement rate averages 11% over the next four years, below its historical average of 13% and well below the industry average of 18% % 6% GM GM Av g. Industry 26% Chart 14: New model volume mix 3% 26% % 13% 6% 116% 15% % Replacement Rate 11% 5% 9% 12%12%12% E 2011E 2012E 2013E 10 GM s mix is positively skewed toward Mid/Large Cars over the forecast horizon. CUVs and Small Cars are a focus for GM, but it appears to be under introducing relative to the industry and more specifically the competition % 26% 1 22% 13% 38% 24% 16% 17% 4% Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover Lt. Truck Industry General Motors Chart 15: Average showroom age (years) Relative showroom age improved dramatically with the intro of the GMT900 product line-up driving an average age of about 2.2 years in MY08&09, but as those trucks are aging so is GM s average age (1) (2) Av erage Show room Age (Years) Relativ e to Industry : Older Younger E 2011E 2012E 2013E 23

24 Table 9: General Motors U.S. product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Chevrolet Equinox - Small CUV Chevrolet Orlando - Minivan Cadillac BTS - Sedan & Coupe GMC Acadia - Mid CUV GMC Terrain - Small CUV Cadillac DTS - Sedan Chevrolet Impala - Sedan Buick Enclave - Midsize CUV Cadillac SRX - Luxury CUV Chevrolet Aveo - Sedan & Hatchback Buick Lucerne - Sedan Chevrolet Malibu - Sedan Chevrolet Camaro - Coupe & Convertible Chevrolet Cruze - Coupe & Sedan Chevrolet Spark - Hatchback Chevrolet Corvette - Coupe & Convertible Buick La Crosse - Sedan Chevrolet Volt - Hatchback (plug in) Cadillac CTS - Sedan & Coupe % of volume replaced : 9% % of volume replaced : 12% % of volume replaced : 12% % of volume replaced : 12% Table 10: GM-Stub U.S. product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Saab 9-4X - Mid Lux CUV Saab Sedan, Wagon & Convertible Saturn Outlook - Mid CUV Saturn Aura - Sedan Saab Sedan & Wagon % of volume replaced : 11% % of volume replaced : 6% % of volume replaced : 11% % of volume replaced : 25% Chart 16: 2010 Cadillac SRX Chart 17: 2010 Buick LaCrosse Source: GM Corp Source: GM Corp Chart 18: 2011 Chevy Cruze Chart 19: 2010 GMC Terrain Source: GM Corp Source: GM Corp 24

25 Ford s replacement rate for MY 2010 to 2013 is 25%, above its historical average of 15% and well better than the industry average of 18%. Therefore its positive momentum should continue driving an increase in market share of about 3% to close to 18%. Ford Motor Company Conclusion: Ford s market share gains in 1H:09 should continue due to the relative strength of its product replacement rate over the next four years. This appears to be a result of planning as well as the fortuitous stress at its two main competitors. Chart 20: Replacement rate % 15% Ford Ford Av g. Industry 27% 21% 11%11% 12%12% 3% Chart 21: New model volume mix 12% 18%1 5% 7% 8% 9% % Replacement Rate 48% 15% E 2011E 329% 25% 2012E 2013E Ford appears to remain slightly overweight truck introductions, but is also overweight Crossovers. Notably, Ford lags in passenger car introductions over the next four years despite the 2010 Taurus and 2011 Fiesta and Focus % 2 21% 26% 8% 1 32% 22% 13% 19% Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover Lt. Truck Industry Ford Chart 22: Average showroom age (years) Ford s average showroom age should drop dramatically through MY13 as it cancels a few older models such as the Econoline that will likely be replaced with all new product (1) (2) 6.5 Av erage Show room Age (Years) Relativ e to Industry : Older Younger E 2010E 2011E 2012E 2013E 25

26 Table 11: Ford U.S. product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Lincoln MKT - Lux CUV Ford Explorer - Large CUV Ford Escape - Mid CUV Ford Edge - Mid CUV Volvo XC60 - Small CUV Lincoln Aviator - Large CUV Ford C-Max - Small CUV Lincoln MKX - Mid Lux CUV Ford Transit Connnect - Van Volvo S60/V70 - Sedan & Wagon Mercury Mariner - Small CUV Ford Mustang - Coupe & Convertible Ford Taurus - Sedan Ford Focus - Hatchback, Sedan & Wagon Volvo XC90 - Mid CUV Lincoln MKZ - Sedan Ford Fiesta - Sedan & Hatchback Ford F Small Pickup Ford Fusion - Sedan Mercury Fiesta Based - Sedan & Hatchback Ford Expedition - Large SUV Mercury Milan - Sedan Ford Transit - Van Lincoln Navigator - Large SUV % of volume replaced : 15% % of volume replaced : 3 % of volume replaced : 29% % of volume replaced : 25% Chart 23: 2010 Ford Taurus Chart 24: 2011 Ford Explorer Source: Ford Motor Co Source: Ford Motor Co Chart 25: 2011 Ford Fiesta Chart 26: 2012 Ford Escape likely to be based on Kuga, shown Source: Motor Trend Source: Motor Trend 26

27 Chrysler Conclusion: Chrysler s product pipeline severely lags the industry on a number of key metrics, which is an ominous sign for its market share. This is a result of a lack of investment by Chrysler s last two owners and the dubious potential for Fiat products in the U.S. market. Chart 27: Replacement rate Chrysler s average replacement rate of just 8% over the next four model years is well below its historical 16% and the industry average of 18%. The extreme underperformance leads us to believe that Chrysler will be about half of its current size within the next few years % 23% 16% 19% 1 14%13% Chrysler Chry sler Av g. Industry Chart 28: New model volume mix 5% 33% 27% % 27%27% 2 15% 8% 7% Replacement Rate 5% 9% 3% 16% E 2011E 2012E 2013E 10 Chrysler s mix is skewed towards the Mid/Large Car and Truck segments. The company lags in CUVs and Small Car intros, which in combination with the truck concentration should lead to an extreme decline in market share % 48% 26% 21% 1 22% 16% Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover Lt. Truck 13% 16% Industry Chry sler Chart 29: Average showroom age (years) Chrysler s average showroom age drops well below the industry average in MY09 through MY12 driven by several relatively young products like the Ram pickup and minivans, but that fades quickly in MY (1) (2) Relativ e to Industry 2.5 : 2.9 Older Younger 4.2 Av erage Show room Age (Years) E 2010E 2011E 2012E 2013E 27

28 Table 12: Chrysler U.S. product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Dodge Charger - Sedan Jeep Grand Cherokee - Mid SUV Jeep (Fiat) Panda - Small CUV Jeep Patriot - Small CUV Chrysler Sedan Chrysler (Fiat) Hatchback Chrysler Sebring - Sedan, Coupe & Convertible Dodge Avenger - Sedan Chrysler (Fiat) Grande Punto - Hatchback % of volume replaced : 5% % of volume replaced : 9% % of volume replaced : 3% % of volume replaced : 16% Chart 30: 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee Chart 31: 2010 Dodge Charger Source: Chrysler Media Source: Chrysler Media Chart 32: 2012 Jeep Small CUV likely to be based on Fiat Panda, shown Chart 33: 2012 Chrysler Hatchback likely to be based on Fiat 500, shown Source: Edmunds Source: Edmunds 28

29 Japanese OEMs Conclusion: The lead Japanese OEMs have maintained for years is shrinking. Toyota and Nissan s metrics are converging closer to the industry averages while Honda remains significantly better than average (Charts & 62-67), which should in combination slow their trend of market share gains. Chart 34: Replacement rate The lead is shrinking - the Japanese OEMs have a strong stable of products launching over the next four years, with a replacement rate averaging 21%. In aggregate the replacement rate over the next four model years is just 1% above their historical average and 3% above the industry average Total Japanese Total Japanese Av g. Industry 34% 23% 24% 24% 15%24%3 29% 29% 21%16% 15% 13% 17% 22% 19% 17%19% 14%12% 15% 17% Chart 35: New model volume mix E 2011E 2012E 2013E 10 Model introduction mix is close to the industry mix, with a slight over emphasis on Mid/Large Cars and Light Trucks and under on Crossovers % 32% 26% 27% 1 8% Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover 2 22% 17% Lt. Truck 13% 16% Industry Japanese Chart 36: Average showroom age (years) Showroom age remains below average through MY13, but creeps close to the industry average in MY10 MY11 for the first time ever. This is not just a function of increased competition, but also a function of Toyota, Honda, and Nissan s broader product lineup (1) (2) (3) Av erage Show room Age (Years) Relativ e to Industry : 1.3 Older Younger E 2010E 2011E 2012E 2013E 29

30 Table 13: Toyota OEM product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Lexus RX - Mid CUV Toyota RAV4 - Small CUV Toyota 4Runner - Mid SUV Toyota Tacoma - Small Pickup Lexus HS - Sedan Lexus LF-X - Small CUV Lexus ES - Sedan Lexus LS - Sedan Toyota Prius - Hatchback Toyota Sienna - Minivan Lexus GS - Sedan Toyota Scion xb - Hatchback Lexus GX - Mid SUV Toyota Camry - Sedan Toyota Scion xd - Hatchback Lexus IS - Coupe, Sedan & Convertible Toyota Yaris - Hatchback & Sedan Lexus LF-A - Lux Coupe Toyota Avalon - Sedan Toyota Scion tc - Coupe Toyota iq - Hatchback % of volume replaced : 11% % of volume replaced : 19% % of volume replaced : 27% % of volume replaced : 1 Table 14: Honda OEM product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Honda Accord Cross - Mid CUV Honda Element - Small CUV Honda CRV - Small CUV Acura RDX - Small CUV Acura ZDX - Mid CUV Honda Odyssey - Minivan Honda Ridgeline - SUP Honda Accord - Coupe & Sedan Honda CRZ - Hatchback Acura RL - Sedan Acura MDX - Mid CUV Honda Insight - Hatchback Honda Civic - Hatchback, Coupe & Sedan Honda Fit - Hatchback % of volume replaced : 15% % of volume replaced : 34% % of volume replaced : 21% % of volume replaced : 25% Table 15: Nissan OEM product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Nissan 350Z - Coupe & Convertible Nissan Titan - Pickup Nissan Frontier - Small Pickup Infiniti EX - Small CUV Nissan Cube - Hatchback Nissan Xterra - Mid SUV Nissan Pathfinder - Mid SUV Infiniti G35 - Coupe & Sedan Infiniti M - Sedan Nissan Sentra - Sedan Nissan Altima - Sedan & Coupe Nissan Versa - Hatchback % of volume replaced : 2% % of volume replaced : 7% % of volume replaced : 42% % of volume replaced : 16% Table 16: Other Japanese OEM product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Subaru Legacy - Sedan & Wagon Subaru B9 Tribeca - Mid CUV Mitsubishi Endeavor - Mid CUV Mazda CX-7 - Midsize CUV Subaru Outback - Sedan & Wagon Mitsubishi Galant - Sedan Mazda RX-8 - Coupe Subaru Impreza - Coupe, Sedan & Wagon Mazda2 - Hatchback Suzuki Swift - Hatchback Mazda5 - Wagon Mazda3 - Sedan & Hatchback Suzuki Equator - Pickup 30

31 Chart 37: 2010 Lexus RX Chart 38: 2010 Lexus HS Source: Toyota Motor Co Chart 39: 2011 Toyota Sienna Source: Toyota Motor Co Chart 40: 2010 Honda Accord Cross Source: Edmunds Chart 41: 2010 Acura ZDX Source: Edmunds Chart 42: 2010 Nissan Cube Source: Honda Media Chart 43: 2010 Honda CRZ Source: Nissan Chart 44: 2010 Subaru Outback Source: Edmunds Source: Edmunds 31

32 European OEMs Conclusion: European OEMs replacement rates are below the industry average and their historical rate, and average age remains relatively stable below the industry average. We don t expect any meaningful shift in market share over the next four years, but there could be slight erosion. Chart 45: Replacement rate European OEM average replacement rates are about 16%, below the industry average of 18% and their historical average also of 18% over the next four model years. This may result in small market share erosion over the next four years % 2% 43% 27% 21% 16% 12% Chart 46: New model volume mix 44% 28% 27% 25% 16% 13% 17% 16% 14% 1 8% 11% 8% 7% 6% Replacement Rate European European Av g. Industry E 2011E 2012E 2013E 10 With the brands of BMW, Audi, Porsche, and Mercedes it is no surprise that the Europeans are overweight Luxury cars. However, it is worth noting that like most other makers, the Europeans are over introducing more Small Cars, by our estimation % 1 23% 13% 26% 43% 21% 5% Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover Lt. Truck Industry European Chart 47: Average showroom age (years) European OEMs have an average showroom age of about 3.1 years over the next four model years which is about half a year older than the industry average (1) (2) 6.2 Av erage Show room Age (Years) Relativ e to Industry : Older Younger E 2010E 2011E 2012E 2013E 32

33 Table 17: European OEM product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Audi Q5 - Mid CUV VW Touareg - Mid CUV Mercedes R-Class - MPV Audi Q7 - Mid CUV Mercedes GLK-Class - Small SUV Audi Q3 - Small CUV Land Rover LRX - Small SUV Mercedes M-Class - Mid CUV Audi A7 - Sedan BMW X1 - Small CUV Mercedes CLS-Class - Sedan Range Rover - Large SUV Mercedes E-Class - Sedan & Wagon BMW X3 - Small CUV BMW 6 Series - Coupe & Convertible VW Scirocco - Hatchback BMW Z4 - Coupe & Convertible Porsche Cayenne - Mid CUV VW Polo - Hatchback BMW 3 Series - Coupe, Sedan & Convertible Porsche Panamera - Sedan Audi A6 - Sedan & Wagon Audi A3 - Hatchback Porsche Boxster - Convertible Audi A8 - Sedan Porsche Cayman - Coupe BMW 5 Series - Sedan & Wagon VW Passat - Sedan Jaguar XJ - Sedan VW Rabbit - Hatchback Porsche Coupe & Convertibe VW Jetta - Sedan % of volume replaced : 9% % of volume replaced : 24% % of volume replaced : 6% % of volume replaced : 24% Chart 48: 2010 Audi Q5 Chart 49: 2010 Mercedes E-Class Source: Motor Trend Chart 50: 2010 Porsche Panamera Source: Edmunds Chart 51: 2011 BMW X1 Source: Porsche Media Source: BMW 33

34 Korean OEMs Conclusion: Korean OEMs are picking up the pace after hitting a dry patch in MY08 & MY09. Therefore, we expect Hyundai and Kia to gain significant market share. Although the pattern of Hyundai and Kia s product intros has been volatile some stability is emerging. Chart 52: Replacement rate The average replacement rate of 27% over the next four model years is well ahead of the industry average of 18% their historical average of 24%. This should drive significant market share gains % 16% 57% Source: Banc of America Securites-Merrill Lynch Chart 53: New model volume mix 53% 46% 37% 38% 33% Korean Korean Av g. Industry Replacement Rate 47% 41% 34% 24% 9% 13%13% 16% 6% 6% 6% 15% E 2011E 2012E 2013E 10 The mix of introductions for Korean OEMs is heavily overweight Small Cars and CUVs which also bodes well for market share % 24% 37% 1 3% 23% 32% 13% Mid/Large Car Small Car Lux ury & Sporty Car Crossover Lt. Truck Industry Korean Chart 54: Average showroom age (years) Average showroom age trends peeks above the industry average in MY11, but otherwise remains below average, which should also help drive market share gains (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Av erage Show room Age (Years) Older Relativ e to Industry : Younger E 2010E 2011E 2012E 2013E 34

35 Table 18: Korean OEMs U.S. product pipeline 2010e-2013e 2010e 2011e 2012e 2013e Kia Forte - Sedan & Coupe Hyundai Tucson - Small CUV Hyundai Azera - Sedan Hyundai Santa Fe - Midsize CUV Kia Soul - Hatchback Kia Sorento - Small CUV Kia Amanti - Sedan Hyundai Veracruz - Large CUV Kia Sportage - Small CUV Hyundai Accent - Hatchback & Sedan Kia Rondo - Small CUV Hyundai Equus - Sedan Kia Rio - Hatchback & Sedan Hyundai Elantra - Sedan Hyundai Sonata - Sedan Kia Optima - Sedan % of volume replaced : 15% % of volume replaced : 44% % of volume replaced : 16% % of volume replaced : 34% Chart 55: 2010 Kia Forte Chart 56: 2010 Kia Soul Source: Edmunds Source: Kia Motors Chart 57: 2011 Hyundai Equus Chart 58: 2011 Hyundai Sonata Source: Car and Driver Source: Hyundai 35

36 This page intentionally left blank. 36

37 Conclusions 37

38 38

39 1. Replacement rate and showroom age drive market share gains and losses. 2. Product activity slowed, but should re-accelerate in MY11-MY Intros more focused on cars and CUVs than ever before. 4. Gaps in relative performance are beginning to open again 5. GM s market share losses are likely to be greater than targeted. 6. Ford s market share gains in 1H:09 should continue through the next four years. 7. Chrysler is likely to be half its current size in a few years due to a lack of product. 8. The lead Japanese OEMs have maintained for years is shrinking. 9. Korean OEMs are accelerating product intros, which should drive significant market share gains. 10. Suppliers & Dealers success should be correlated to their exposure to OEMs with high replacement rates. Conclusions We believe our measures of replacement rate and showroom age are the major driver of market share gains and losses. Historically, Detroit has replaced its line-up every seven years while the competition has done so every four to five years one of the main reasons that Ford, GM, and Chrysler have lost share, in our view. Product activity slowed, but is re-accelerating in MY11-MY13. This suggests that all-else equal the pricing environment should ease through MY10, but become more difficult in MY11 through MY13 unless demand also recovers. New product activity is focused on Car and Crossover segments. At the same time Light Truck (body-on-frame) intros are slowing. Gaps in relative performance are beginning to open again. We estimate that an increasing level of disparity in replacement rates will result in larger shifts in market share similar to those that have begun to emerge in 1H:09. GM s market share losses are likely to be greater than targeted. We believe that GM s 18%-19% market share target is optimistic and a more realistic range is 15%-16%. GM s replacement rate averages just 11% over the next four years, below its historical average of 14%, and well below the industry average of 18%. The positive reversal of Ford s market share in 1H:09 should continue. We believe this will be driven by the relative strength of its product replacement rate of 25% over the next four years, above its historical average of 14% and well better than the industry average of 18%. We believe Chrysler is likely to be half its current size in a few years due to a lack of product. Chrysler severely lags the industry on a number of key metrics, which is an ominous sign for market share. This is a result of a lack of investment by previous owners and the dubious potential for Fiat products in the U.S. market. The lead Japanese OEMs have maintained for years is shrinking. Toyota and Nissan s metrics are converging closer to the industry averages while Honda remains significantly better than average, which should in combination slow their trend of market share gains. Korean OEMs are picking up the pace after hitting a dry patch in MY08 & MY09. Therefore, we expect Hyundai and Kia to gain significant market share, about 3.5% over the next four years. Suppliers & Dealers success should be correlated to their exposure to OEMs with high replacement rates. We believe this bodes well for BorgWarner, a supplier, and the following dealers: PAG, Asbury, Sonic, and Group 1. It continues to be an ominous sign for many suppliers. 39