I was interested to read this article : http://www.roadtransport.com/Articles/2011/08/17/139359/Road-transport-activity-was-depressed-in-Q2.htm Particularly this paragraph:
“Purchasing activity in the third quarter is expected to be in line with the second, with respondents revealing the HGV market is more buoyant than the van market. In part this is a consequence of delayed purchasing decisions , which can no longer be held off if increasing higher maintenance costs and lengthened downtime for ageing vehicles are to be avoided.”
TRACE have found that many vehicle non-purchasing decisions are being made on purely financial basis, where financial in this case is to do with ‘financing’ rather than total vehicle costs. We see many articles that talk about fuel savings but these don’t encompass the full picture. The fleet management department of many companies rely on global costing to compare this year’s costs with last year’s. A much better way, surely, is to compare vehicle to vehicle, highlighting expensive vehicles and making informed decisions about replacement. The total costs for operating a commercial vehicle need to be brought together in one place. It has been proved that using our TRACE system, informed decisions on makes and models, and even tyre make and model can all add up to major savings and a more efficient fleet. It isn’t always the oldest vehicles that cost the most money. Accountants will place replacement decisions on depreciation but they shouldn’t. Given actual facts, buy or not-to-buy decisions can be based on true figures. We’ve seen recent examples where accident damage and other one-offs have been added together with standard maintenance when looking at fleet costs. Using these kind of figures, leads to wrong decisions.