There are few global automakers that aren’t reeling from this or that crises. The French brands are fighting with Chinese ones. The Chinese brands are fighting with one another. The American brands face tariffs and a lot of competition. The German ones are, as usual, losing a war on two fronts. Even the typically solid Japanese automakers are in trouble.
The Morning Dump is often full of woe, and today is no different. It’s being reported that Honda will report its first annual loss since it was in the business of reporting those things. While Toyota is still in the black, it’s less so than expected, for some similar reasons.
Volkswagen’s harvest isn’t going much better, and now it sounds like it’s contemplating letting four of its German plants go fallow. Back here in the US, Ford is having to play catch up to build enough trucks to satiate demand, and now GM is trying to strike while it can.
Honda Releases Statement On Report That It’s Going To Lose Money, Reaffirms It Lost Money

Honda went public in 1957 and has, in the 69 years since, never reported a full-year annual loss. Even when the bubble burst in the ’90s, Honda’s strength outside of Japan was enough to carry the company through. Given its reliance on the US for profits, you might have expected a loss during the GFC, as Toyota did. Nope.
What Honda couldn’t survive, though, is the combination of higher tariffs, elevated energy prices, and outsized EV investments that didn’t result in vehicles that would be competitive in either China or the US. Honda itself outlined this a few weeks ago in a statement to investors:
Setting a goal to realize carbon neutrality for all products and corporate activities Honda is involved in by 2050, Honda has been working to reduce its environmental impact. To realize carbon neutrality for smallsize mobility products, including passenger cars, Honda believed EVs would be the optimal solution from a long-term perspective. Based on this belief, Honda shifted its strategic direction toward the popularization of EVs. Supported by its internal combustion engine (ICE) and hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) business with accumulated technologies and know-how, as well as a stable profit base provided by Motorcycle business and Financial services business with a solid customer base, Honda has been promoting EV adoption. However, the profitability of Honda’s Automobile business is declining primarily due to the impact on the ICE and HEV business caused by the United States government policy shift including the imposition of import tariffs, and a decline in the competitiveness of Honda products in Asia due to the impact of the allocation of more resources to EV development.
In addition, the business environment surrounding Honda is changing dramatically day by day, and the outlook remains uncertain. The United States government policy shifts including the abolition of tax incentives for EV purchases, as well as the easing of fossil fuel regulations have slowed down the EV market. In China and other Asian countries, what customers value more in automobiles is shifting from hardware features such as fuel efficiency and cabin space to software-based features that continuously advance in line with customer preferences. This has intensified competition due to the rapid emergence of newer EV manufacturers that leverage their shorter product development cycle and strengths in the area of software-defined vehicle (SDV) technologies, including advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS).
That is a brutal and reasonable assessment of what happened. Some of this is self-inflicted. Honda could have been earlier to electrification, although that didn’t seem to help Nissan. It could have spent less on EVs trying to catch up and more on hybrids, which definitely would have helped.
Honda attributing its woes to the U.S. government and not to them building cars for which there isn’t enough demand seems like a deflection. They’re not wrong on tariffs/rebates, but those are not the biggest issues when it comes to EV sales. There are demand issues.
Any one of the above issues would have been a challenge, but all of them simultaneously is just too much. It’s a rough spot for Honda, and I’m not sure anything the company’s leadership is going to do is going to be met with a lot of excitement. If the company leaves more of its EV development to its Chinese partners, the pro-EV folks are going to be unhappy and point to it as a sign of Honda’s decline. If the company invests more in EVs, people will wonder to what end.
Either way, the company’s reversal on EVs is going to cost it. A lot. The question is not if Honda is going to report a loss for FY 2026 (which ended March 31st), but how much. Nikkei Asia thinks it knows how much:
Honda Motor recorded an operating loss of approximately 400 billion yen ($2.55 billion) for the fiscal year that ended in March, Nikkei has learned, heavily impacted by problems related to its electric vehicle business.
The operating loss would be the company’s first since going public in 1957. It posted 1.2 trillion yen in operating profit in the previous fiscal year. The company aims to generate profit at the operating level for the current fiscal year ending March 2027, boosted by strong performance in its motorcycle segment.
The size of Honda’s operating loss would be the second largest among Japanese automakers, after Toyota Motor’s 461 billion yen for the fiscal year that ended in March of 2009 during the global financial crisis, although a simple comparison is difficult due to differences in accounting standards.
What’s interesting is that Honda put out a statement basically saying “we didn’t say that” while also reaffirming the previous guidance:
It was reported in the Nikkei online edition on May 8, 2026, that Honda’s consolidated operating loss for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026 would be approximately in the range of 400.0 billion yen. However, our company has not made any announcement concerning this matter. Honda’s consolidated operating loss for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026 is expected to fall within the range of the full-year consolidated earnings forecast announced on March 12, 2026, due to factors such as losses associated with the reassessment of automobile electrification strategy.
It’s an odd response, because the 400 billion yen estimate is at the lower end of Honda’s estimate of 340 to 570 billion yen. If Honda came in at 340, it seems logical that Honda wouldn’t say anything and beat the reported estimate. If it’s a greater loss, well, maybe you’d say something.
All will be known by this time next week.
Toyota Made A Profit, Just A Smaller One Because Of The War In Iran

Toyota has played it about as well as you could these last few years, given all the geopolitical disruptions (which is to say, charitably, a current administration in the US that prioritizes chaos over coherence). It still sucks for the company, though, which has been hit especially hard from the War in Iran.
The stock reversed gains and fell as much as 3.5% on Friday after the Japanese company issued an outlook for ¥3 trillion ($19.1 billion) in operating income for the fiscal year ending March 2027. That was far short of the average consensus estimate for ¥4.6 trillion, as well as ¥3.8 trillion posted in the prior period.
Toyota’s outlook shows how geopolitical shocks are hitting even the industry’s most profitable automaker, threatening margins through higher material, shipping and tariff costs. Suppliers warned last week that they are beginning to see shortages due to the Iran conflict, now in its third month, as Toyota said it would be difficult to offset the resulting ¥670 billion hit to its bottom line from the regional turmoil.
There’s a sense in the article from at least one analyst that Toyota is lowballing its guidance, but if the Iran conflict/war/sideshow doesn’t end quickly they may not be.
Volkswagen Is Reportedly Planning To Let Four German Plants Go

It’s clear that the historical way of doing business at Volkswagen just doesn’t work anymore, and a key complication is how much production is in Germany. The company already made it clear that the historical agreement to not close plants in its home country is no longer in force. Now, per Manager Magazin, it sounds like there’s a rough idea of a plan for at least four German plants:
The fact that four plants are under scrutiny due to excessive costs had already been reported by the Handelsblatt newspaper. These are the VW plants in Emden, Zwickau, and Hanover, as well as the Audi production facility in Neckarsulm. Now, however, Blume and the board members who took office with him have revealed their actual plan: They intend to phase out production once the models currently manufactured there are discontinued. No more cars at all in four factories – that would be a far more drastic cut than previously suspected.
The company stated that plant closures were not discussed in the supervisory board meeting. However, participants reported that the goal of potentially phasing out the plants was presented and apparently explained in the slides shown. The company does not expect a significant increase in sales and, consequently, production figures in the coming years. The phase-out could begin in the early 2030s, according to the company.
It’s possible these plants could transition to munitions factories or, perhaps, be sold to Chinese automakers.
GM Smells Blood In The Water

Ford has said it’ll catch up on F-150 production later this year, assuming the plant where it gets most of its automotive-grade aluminum doesn’t catch on fire for a third time.
Truck buyers are generally loyal, and F-150 buyers especially so. Still, GM seems to think there’s an opening, as Automotive News reports:
General Motors wants to boost inventory of its money-making pickups on U.S. dealer lots after falling short of demand to start the year and as a production snag at rival Ford Motor Co. presents an opportunity to gain market share.
“It’s prudent to be increasing right now just because their inventory is low relative to demand,” said David Whiston, an auto analyst with Morningstar. “But if you’re GM, you want to take advantage of Ford’s weakness.”
GM ended the first quarter with 9 percent fewer pickups on U.S. dealer lots than it did a year earlier, CFO Paul Jacobson said on an April 28 call with analysts. That’s a notable decrease considering the pre-tariff sales rush GM and other automakers saw in the first quarter of 2025.
GM and Stellantis only report quarterly, so it’ll be a couple of months until we know for sure how well GM and Ram (and, maybe, Toyota) did.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
I could only pick one Shania Twain song this morning. That’s hard. There are endless bangers. I do love the music video for “Man! I Feel Like A Woman!” for the throwback to Robert Palmer’s video for “Addicted To Love.”
The Big Question
If you’re buying a half-ton truck tomorrow, what are you getting?
Top photo: Honda









TBQ: I currently have a half-ton, so I guess I’d get another F150 crew cab with the 2.7. My 2020 has been good to me.
The 2.7 is the best truck motor out there right now. I’d personally go 5.0 cause v8 go brr feeds the caveman brain in me
I remember grumblings when the Ecoboost was first put in the F150 but time has shown that it was a good decision. I’ve had 0 issues with the one ecoboost in my fleet even if it’s the 3.5
What were the complaints that you recall? I remember my father-in-law complaining about the turbo running hot to where he would keep it idling for 30 seconds before turning it off if there was vigorous effort right beforehand, ie getting off the highway.
If you’re buying a half-ton truck tomorrow, what are you getting?
As a truck nerd, I consider this question regularly. I would get a blue 2026 F150 XL single cab short bed 4×4 with the XL high equipment group package (103A) and the optional keyless entry keypad.
I really wish I had an excuse to buy this truck, but I already have a Jeep and two F250s, so I won’t be buying it anytime soon.
Are your retirement funds stuffed with too much money? I never understood putting so much money in vehicles that you really don’t use. And frankly I never had enough money to do it if I wanted to.
Yeah, I obviously spend a lot more money than I need to on vehicles. I don’t feel bad because vehicles are my primary interest in life and it isn’t causing me financial harm.
Also, while I own a lot of vehicles, I don’t buy them impulsively. I have two vehicles that are reasonable daily drivers (’21 F250 and a Jeep Wrangler) and three toys (’77 F250, ’76 Beetle, and a ’72 Beetle project), so its not like I have a fleet of late-model Hyundais depreciating away in my yard. I could consolidate the daily drivers into a single vehicle (if I could only have one vehicle I would probably get an extended cab F150), but I’d rather just keep both.
TBQ: Regular cab short bed Silverado with the 2.7 Turbo, steel wheels, and maybe 4wd. Oh and in a good color like the current red they offer too!
TBQ: I wouldn’t, especially with current gas prices that are never coming down any time soon. Seems to be just about the dumbest financial decision I could make right now.
If it causes the manufacturers to put $20k on the hood it would be worth it
Boats and GA planes are right over there. Also you can make even worse financial decisions in Nevada, slot machines and brothels. At least with a truck at the end you still have a truck.
“GA planes“
Don’t tempt me now. I looked into a part 103 ultralight but I don’t really have anywhere to store it, or transport it, or take off from…
TBQ: With my current budget ~$30k, gen 1 SVT Raptor or nicest/newest Aluminum body 5.0 F150 I can find. Slightly more money, 2020 Tundra TRD Pro in Army Green. Unlimited budget, Shelter Green Raptor R
Shelter Green is such a great choice. I’m annoyed that Ford doesn’t have green available through the lineup this year. WTH.
“If you’re buying a half-ton truck tomorrow, what are you getting?”
If I was buying a half-ton pickup truck tomorrow, it was because I had a specific need to tow or haul something. And thus, it would be a low-mileage work-focused truck… probably something with the basic interior and 2wd… like this old ex-municipal truck Ford Superduty wtih low mileage:
https://www.autotrader.ca/offers/ford-f-250-gasoline-black-e670865d-6af8-4075-b376-b1636dfbd889
Or this Dodge Ram 2wd truck:
https://www.autotrader.ca/offers/ram-1500-2wd-reg-cab-140-5-st-others-white-d362a0ee-301a-48a5-bbf2-92c91adc33d5
I would never have a pickup truck as my daily driver… especially with recent fuel prices.
Honda is losing the plot. They make excellent combustion engines. But change is hard. Instead of pulling an IBM to ditch its legacy hardware business for software and helping design the hardware to run it, they’re burying their heads into a bottle of sake. They’ve been tripling down on ICE tech instead of learning how to code and make batteries. Or making an electric vehicle that is just a great vehicle. But electric. There’s a market for that which isn’t being met. They can if they want to. But they have to be serious or else they’ll end up as a Japanese Studebaker.
I love the e, but it was very expensive and with very limited range. Shame because the rest of the car was great.
They responded horribly to the needs of the market, and the consumer.
Honestly it looks like they kinda tried but it didn’t turn out well. They were weeks away from delivering their new EVs, but they weren’t the right product (too premium and thus pricey) so they cancelled. And it looks like they were gonna rely on Sony to develop the advanced software stuff with information and ADAS, with the Afeela project, but at least the production version of that car is now cancelled too (it was gonna be an underwhelming product even at half it’s MSRP). Had the 0 SUV made it to market, I think it would’ve been competent but somewhat underwhelming, like the recent Toyotas but just a bit too pricey. I think Sony’s Afeela infotainment and ADAS development will continue on in private, and there’s good chance we’ll eventually see the results of it in a Honda product in a few years.
Honda’s mistake wasn’t that they didn’t invest in those things, it’s that they developed the wrong product for the wrong market conditions and management failed to act on it by changing the product. They should’ve acted the second Chevy announced the 300mi Equinox EV’s $35k base price on November 1st, 2023, but only took action a full year after the tariffs and tax credit cancelations.
They also were launching the outdoorsy versions of things and milking the post COVID supply shortage. Good tactical moves but still on an outdated strategy.
I bet those decisions were minor enough not to really get management involved
My experience is that it takes about 3 years for anyone in Japan to make a decision, so that response to the Equinox EV would have been coming about 6 months from now. And then in 2029 a decision will be made to redo whatever that decision would have been, and meanwhile the world will have moved on.
I imagine that the Japanese looking west towards China is much like a sloth watching a cracked out cheetah sprinting back and forth
Their gas engines aren’t great, and haven’t been for a while. The “EarthDreams” I4s get oil dilution from gasoline, burn oil, and jump time, plus they’re generally attached to failure-prone CVTs. The V6s have been abominable with the cylinder deletion function, and even with having that disabled still have issues. Not to mention the four-figure timing belt service every 100K miles, and now they’re recommending transmission and differential services every thirty thousand miles, even for “normal” use! F that.
On the other hand their 2-motor hybrids are excellent. Better than Toyota’s.
Those are the ICE powertrains that matter going forward.
I miss Asimo.
So much friendlier than all the headless robot dogs and marathon-running humanoid robots we have today.
Probably an F150 RCSB.
Ram Express 4×4 quad cab with 6’4″ bed.
“Honda could have been earlier to electrification”
Alright, it’s 1999
You say it, 1999
1999
1999
Don’t stop, don’t stop, say it one more time
Two-thousand-zero-zero party over, oops out of time
Yeah, yeah (Tonight I’m gonna)
So tonight we gonna (electrify like it’s 1999)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Insight
The EV Plus would like a word.
It even beat the EV1 to market.
Who?
I dunno if those really count since like the EV1 they were never sold, only leased then destroyed.
EVentually they will get there…
A Chevy Express so I can do everything a half ton can with better visibility 😛
Other than the issues under the hood (of which, there were many) I loved having a full sized van. The promaster fell short on towing capacity (still plenty for what I needed) but having 10ft of interior length, 6ft of height, and a 4,000lb payload made it far more capable than a pickup for my needs.
I’m going with a regular cab short bed 4×4 F150 with the 5 point oh
Looking forward to another round of 10 billion writeoffs when all these companies run do the reversal of the reversal on EVs.
Probably starting next month the way things are going in the Middle East.
Oh, it will happen. But you must be clear on the matter. This is a problem for manufacturers with a presence in the US. It’s also partially self-inflicted. They could have made noise and stood up to the Trump administration. They didn’t. They took the easy way out and will continue producing that which they already do.
Right, the best time to double-down on the Hemi and rage against progress – Stellantis’ American arm, probably.
Half-ton?
Ugh. No.
Give me a hatchback, trailer hitch, and I’ll rent the Uhaul trailer if needed.
I’m sure I can fit a hitch on a CTR or GR-Corolla.
The center exhaust on the CTR and GRC make it a bit difficult to add a hitch. Easier on the GR because there are plenty of aftermarket dual exit exhausts (Including one you can buy from Toyota) that exit on the outer sides.
Driving my old tundra lately is really making me miss my Prius (rip). I regularly pulled a 4×8 trailer from harbor freight that cost 350 bucks and it was pure joy to do so much work with a car so looked down on. Also the whole 50 mpg vs current 14.5 was nice. You can, and should put a hitch on anything.
I’d really like to give the Hurricane powered RAM a go. Their new, longer warranty helps put me at ease. Especially since I personally know a few Stellantis techs that I can make sure do the work on it.
I’ve test-driven an HO RAM at work and it was a very competent thing, it drove like a cohesive package, a high bar for trucks.
Is it just me, or are Japanese companies generally shite in software?
Just ask them Brits.
Super Mario Galaxy was pretty solid!
…the game or the movie?
If only Honda would have partnered with Nintendo on software instead of Sony.
I think they partnered with them on styling. Or was it Toyota that did?
Excellent South Park reference in the lede photo.
TBQ: Probably a Ram; been burnt by Ford and GM, why not make it a trifecta?
A Raptor R.
If that’s cheating, then Toyota by default as the last remaining option to get both a back seat and 8 foot bed in a half ton.
Buying a half-ton? Either a Bricknose or Aeronose Ford or a GMT400.
TBQ: A heavily depreciated 2016 single cab Silverado. New? I guess a 5.0 F-150, but I wouldn’t buy a 1/2 ton. If I needed to do more than what a hybrid Maverick could handle (or our 15 year old Ranger) I’d get a Tacoma.
Wait, is Shania okay?
I think she has a new album out actually
TBQ: Does the Silverado EV count? I’m not really interested in sacrificing my EV for a combustion DD, especially a gas thirsty truck
Probably still a Tundra. I wouldn’t buy a new Ford product at any price, and the engine options in GMs trucks aren’t all that comforting given the choice between heavily boosted 4-cylinder and ticking time-bomb V8s. Ram is made by Stellantis, so no. I know much has been said about the 3.4 TT V6 in the Tundra, but if all three alternatives also have engine issues, I’d at least be able to assume that the Toyota should have fewer issues with everything else on the truck.
Same here, and by a lot
That 6.2l V8 is an utter disaster for GM
We have a couple of the boosted GM 4s in the fleet at my work and so far so good. Not that I would rush out and buy one but so far they have been alright.
It’s a pretty big 4 banger though. Nobody would bat an eye at a 2.7L turbo V6 making 300HP. If anything a 2.7L 4 cyl should be more robust given less complexity.
I heard the Ford 2.7TT is doing pretty good for reliability on the models that don’t have the wet belt.
I’ve also heard that the water pumps are Timing chain driven and have the service life of a typical belt driven water pump, so I’m incredibly suspect of them on principal. While I’m sure they’re plenty fine for the first 100k miles, I just don’t trust anything Ford puts out these days.
TBQ: a ’79 Ford. Modern trucks are too big. Gimme my Bigfoot 1. The Dodge Lil Red Express would be pretty great too.
I had a 79 LRE. It was much fun. And loud. And thirsty.
My first “car” was a ’79 F-100. 10 mpg if I remember correctly.