Consolidation and Rebranding

[DaBear3428]

Tim never stated to stay away from Mahindra. That's putting words in his mouth. He was raising awareness that rebranding in general can cause parts availability issues as the years go by.

not talking about the video you posted, he put out an earlier video where he did exactly that.

with respect I take issue with this and filter anything he puts out, because of that.
lumping Mahindra in with Bobcat, RK and Badboy is silly.

 

[Cahaba Valley Farm]

Then please enlighten me. What do you think was the point of this video.

Tim was trying to communicate the long term parts support risks that can accompany rebranded tractors. Albeit, I think he could have done more due diligence before stating his concern as the owners of those tractor brands are going to expect some smoking guns to back up his opinion.

 

[Cougsfan]

Tim was trying to communicate the long term parts support risks that can accompany rebranded tractors. Albeit, I think he could have done more due diligence before stating his concern as the owners of those tractor brands are going to expect some smoking guns to back up his opinion.

With all due respect, I am not sure what is that different about your assessment and mine of what Tim was saying. I do believe he inferred repeatedly that out sourced components, such as engines, as having the same long term risk as an entire rebranded tractor. I certainly came away with the impression that he strongly feels that the ideal tractor company should make everything on their tractor in-house. To me that idea is idealistic, impractical, and not cost effective. In addition would not necessarily guarantee that parts would be of higher quality or more available in the future.

A major reason that no manufacturer makes everything in house is that it would most certainly increase the cost of the tractor considerably.
If Yanmar makes 200,000 30 hp engines for multiple tractor manufacturers, it will be considerably less expensive overall than John Deere making 20,000 engines for their 30 hp tractor. And parts would likely be more readily available for that out sourced engine down the road.

That doesn't mean the that I think it isn't a problem when a tractor company gets into a situation where they have to constantly change the supplier of outsourced components. I think that happens mostly because of current supply chain issues. They would love to find a dependable, long term, affordable source for components. That is hard to do in today's world. But if Yanmar or whoever can't or won't supply the engines one needs to meet production demand, they are going to be forced to change suppliers if they want to sell tractors. That indeed is not ideal. But that is a very different issue than the feasibility of making or not making components or entire tractors in-house.

 

[DaBear3428]

Tim was trying to communicate the long term parts support risks that can accompany rebranded tractors. Albeit, I think he could have done more due diligence before stating his concern as the owners of those tractor brands are going to expect some smoking guns to back up his opinion.

IMO the question of future parts availability in todays internet connected world is more influenced by how many of the parts were made (sometimes rebranding helps this) and how often they fail. I do not want to have a tractor with parts the fail often but if that is the case more often than not the internet will be full of replacement parts. and as far as service, if the Dealer that sold it is good he will service it even after the manuf. orphans it, if he is not then it does not matter anyway.

 

[Cahaba Valley Farm]

I thought I would share Mike's perspective on this.