Jump to content

  • Welcome to Auto Parts Forum

    Whether you are a veteran automotive parts guru or just someone looking for some quick auto parts advice, register today and start a new topic in our forum. Registration is free and you can even sign up with social network platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, and LinkedIn. 

     

O’Reilly Automotive, Inc. Reports Fourth Quarter And Full-Year 2023 Results


Recommended Posts

  • Fourth quarter comparable store sales growth of 3.4%, full-year increase of 7.9%
  • 11% increase in fourth quarter diluted earnings per share to $9.26, full-year increase of 15% to $38.47
  • Completed previously announced Leadership Succession Plan

SPRINGFIELD, Mo., Feb. 07, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- O’Reilly Automotive, Inc. (the “Company” or “O’Reilly”) (Nasdaq: ORLY), a leading retailer in the automotive aftermarket industry, today announced record revenue and earnings for its fourth quarter and full-year ended December 31, 2023. The results represent 31 consecutive years of comparable store sales growth and record revenue and operating income for O’Reilly since becoming a public company in April of 1993

link hidden, please login to view

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By AutoZone
      MEMPHIS, Tenn. , Feb. 27, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- AutoZone, Inc. (NYSE: AZO) today reported net sales of $3.9 billion for its second quarter (12 weeks) ended February 10, 2024 , an increase of 4.6% from the second quarter of fiscal 2023 (12 weeks). Same store sales, or sales for our domestic and
      link hidden, please login to view
    • By Counterman
      Genuine Parts Co. (GPC) reported full-year 2023 sales of $23.1 billion, a 4.5% year-over-year increase.
      Net income was $1.3 billion, or $9.33 per diluted share, an increase of 12.3%.
      Full-year net sales in the Automotive Parts Group, which includes NAPA Auto Parts, were $14.25 billion, up from $13.67 billion in 2022.
      Fourth-quarter automotive sales were up nearly 1% to $3.5 billion.
      While GPC’s international automotive businesses posted positive sales growth in local currency, the U.S. automotive segment saw a dip in sales, GPC President and COO Will Stengel noted during the company’s Feb. 15 conference call.
      “In North America, while results fell short of our expectations, we remain focused on our strategic initiatives and continue to make solid progress,” GPC Chairman and CEO Paul Donahue said during the call. “We’ve undertaken a comprehensive review of the NAPA business to identify key issues, and we have taken action to improve the performance at NAPA. We are confident we are focused on the right initiatives to positively impact our performance in the quarters ahead.”
      Coinciding with the release of its full-year and fourth-quarter 2023 financial results, GPC said the company is launching a global restructuring “to better align the company’s assets and further improve the efficiency of the business.”
      The restructuring includes a voluntary retirement offer in the United States, along with “a rationalization and optimization of certain distribution centers, stores and other facilities,” according to the company.  
      Through the restructuring, GPC said it expects to realize approximately $20 million to $40 million of savings in 2024, and approximately $45 million to $90 million on an annualized basis. The company also expects to incur costs of approximately $100 million to $200 million related to the restructuring efforts in 2024 and will report the restructuring costs as a non-recurring expense.
      “The primary objective of the global program is to continue to simplify and streamline our operations consistent with our overall business strategy,” Stengel explained during the conference call. “When we simplify, we increase the speed of local service, deliver operational productivity, improve the efficiency of our teams and reduce our overall cost to serve.”
      Stengel noted that the restructuring initiative “is a similar playbook to our previous GPC program implemented in fall 2019 that delivered positive results.”
      “Aspects of the restructuring are already in flight, and some will take place in the months ahead,” Stengel added.
      Focus on NAPA
      Stengel talked at length about efforts to revitalize GPC’s NAPA Auto Parts business.
      GPC has identified three areas of improvement for NAPA: improving fill rates in key product categories, “operational rigor in our stores” and capitalizing on commercial growth opportunities, Stengel explained.
      Adjustments to “certain key suppliers to improve fill rates” boosted fourth-quarter “category trends,” Stengel said, adding that “we’re encouraged by the positive momentum.”
      “Second, our in-store service levels measured by on-time delivery to customers have significantly improved as a result of increased focused on last-mile operating disciplines,” Stengel said.
      Stengel noted that efforts to improve commercial sales growth are “ongoing.” GPC recently appointed Tom Skov to the newly created role of executive vice president, sales & store operations, North America.
      “He’s an automotive-parts expert and has a deep understanding of our customers field sales and store operations,” Stengel asserted. “We’re excited for the strong leadership Tom will bring to our sales and store operations field teams.”
      The post
      link hidden, please login to view appeared first on link hidden, please login to view.
      link hidden, please login to view
    • By Counterman
      Lumileds has introduced the Philips GoPure GP5611 automotive air purifier, designed to clean air quickly and efficiently to reduce the transmission of airborne viruses, bacteria and allergens.
      Designed to fit in most vehicle cup holders, the USB-powered GP5611 filters the cabin air with three technologies: a Philips SaniFilter Plus filter, a HESAMax filtration cartridge and a powerful UVC light, according to Lumileds.  
      The Philips SaniFilter Plus filter captures bacteria and respiratory viruses as well as airborne allergens including pollen, dust mites, mold spores and pet dander. It features an anti-microbial layer to inhibit the growth of microorganisms inside the device, including mold spores.
      The SaniFilter Plus filter has been tested at IUTA laboratory in Germany and proven to capture 99% of ultra-fine particles, including particles as small as 0.004 microns that can get deep into the lungs and create serious health risks, according to Lumileds.
      The Philips HESAMax cartridge (high-efficiency sorbent agent) removes chemicals, harmful gases and unpleasant odors from the car, including formaldehyde, toluene and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The cartridge contains two types of HESA material: white beads that draw formaldehyde from the air, break it down and safely lock it within the cartridge; and black carbon beads that absorb unpleasant smells.
      For an added layer of protection, bacteria and viruses trapped in the GP5611 filters are killed by exposing them to ultraviolet light, according to Lumileds. UVC light has been used for sterilization in hospitals, hotels and public transportation for decades.
      Lumileds noted that the GoPure GP5611 UVC LED technology emits zero ozone.
      “The GoPure GP5611 is powerful enough to filter all the air in an average passenger vehicle in about 10 minutes, and since it fits in most vehicle cup holders, you can be up and running in less than a minute,” said Aubry Baugh, Lumileds senior manager, aftermarket marketing leader, NA.
      In typical use, the SaniFilter Plus and HESAMax filters only need to be replaced about once a year. The UVC LED module will last for the lifetime of the device, according to the company.
      The post
      link hidden, please login to view appeared first on link hidden, please login to view.
      link hidden, please login to view
    • A-premium Auto Parts:5% OFF with Code GM5.
    • By Counterman
      The fuel system, as a whole, is responsible for delivering fuel from the tank to the engine, then metering it into the combustion chamber. It consists of the tank, the lines, the pump and the metering device. If only it was as simple as it sounds. The challenge lies in the continual changes over the last century, and how the frequency of changes has increased over recent decades.
      The heart and identity of any fuel system is the metering device or system that controls the flow of fuel into an engine. As a counter professional, you’re going to hear it all, and you’ll have to answer it all, so here’s a rundown on the major changes and differences over the years.
      Carburetion Systems
      A carburetor is a basic mechanical device, and the primary metering device used on the earliest automobiles. Carburetors held their ground until the late 1980s, when the last examples were eventually replaced by fuel injection. The job of a carburetor is to not only meter the fuel but also to properly mix it with the air flowing into the engine through the process of atomization.
      As the automotive industry began to migrate to fuel injection, a knee-jerk reaction opposing fuel injection ensued. We were familiar with carburetors, and liked the fact that they were mechanical devices that could be repaired and rebuilt using basic hand tools, and there were no electronics involved. Regardless of who made the carburetor or what style it was, an experienced technician could diagnose and repair a problem without the need for service information, scan tools or electronics.
      Though considered “simple,” carburetors are more complicated than they seem, with multiple different circuits to manage all aspects of engine operation. “Tuning” a carburetor – the art of balancing performance, efficiency and drivability – takes a considerable knowledge of engine operating principles, and the patience and precision to get it right.
      The majority of carbureted vehicles utilize mechanical fuel pumps, driven off the engine. This too adds to the attraction of these vehicles, as again there were no electronics involved. The drawback to carburetors came in their lack of ability for precise fuel control. They simply couldn’t keep up with the tightening noose of emission and fuel-economy standards that was in full force by the 1970s. As the end of their use in production automobiles came near, some electronics were incorporated into them, but ultimately proved ineffective.
      Today, any professional will admit – regardless of complexity – that fuel injection is simply superior and necessary. However, carburetion is still popular on old vehicles, partly because of its relative simplicity, but also due to the popularity of restoring old cars to their original state. While far from commonplace, carburetor rebuild kits aren’t going away anytime soon.
      Fuel-Injection Systems
      The advantage of fuel injection is the ability to precisely control fuel delivery under all operating conditions. Not only is this a necessity for emissions and fuel economy, but it also has a major advantage in drivability – an operational attribute that goes hand in hand with efficiency and performance.
      Attempts at fuel injection are as old as the internal combustion engine itself, but in the early days, too many bugs made it undependable. By the 1950s, substantial engineering efforts were applied to develop fuel injection, both in the United States and Europe. One of the more well-known systems was the original Rochester fuel injection developed by Chevrolet for the 1957 Chevrolet and Corvette.
      The idea behind developing this fuel injection wasn’t in the interest of horsepower or emission control. It was drivability, with the goal to eliminate the undesirable and unavoidable attributes of a carburetor, including fuel slosh in the fuel bowl and the transition between primary and secondary circuits. As you may expect, racers played a substantial part in all this, and the best part is they were very successful, and it unlocked horsepower as well!
      The Rochester fuel-injection system was available from 1957 through 1965, but it ultimately failed for only one reason: cost. It was an expensive option, and with the muscle-car wars in full force and much higher-horsepower carbureted engines available for a fraction of the cost, nobody was buying.
      By the late 1970s, fuel injection was better-developed, and this time emissions and fuel economy played a strong part. It began its rise to the top, and thanks to the advancements in electronic and computer technology, it got there quick. By the early 1990s, carburetion was all but gone from production automobiles.
      Fuel-injection systems can be separated into multiple categories and types, and since you’ll hear multiple terms, here’s how to tell them apart.
      Mechanical Fuel Injection
      Early gasoline fuel-injection systems were mechanical. The pumps were mechanical, and fuel was delivered directly to nozzles located in the intake manifold. The pressure of the fuel caused the fuel injectors to open. A type of air meter was necessary, but early systems relied primarily on vacuum signals or mechanical linkage between the air meter and fuel-distribution meter to determine the proper amount of fuel. Very minimal if any electronics were involved in these systems.
      Early diesel fuel-injection systems were purely mechanical as well, but the difference was the required fuel pressure. It doesn’t require much pressure to inject fuel into an intake manifold, but it requires extremely high pressure to inject fuel directly into a cylinder (such as is necessary for a diesel). Diesel-injection pumps housed a mechanical high-pressure pump to feed the fuel to the injectors.
      One of the most common gasoline fuel-injection systems to become popular beginning in the late 1970s was the Bosch Continuous Injection System (CIS). This, too, was overall a mechanical system, but an electric pump supplied the fuel, and minor electronics played a part in cold-start functions as well as fuel-mixture control.
      Electronic Fuel Injection
      Electronic fuel injection was a terminology that became well-known in the 1980s and was often indicated by the letters “EFI” on the back of a car. It seemed revolutionary at the time, and it indicated that the systems were now completely electronically controlled. It was this point in time when fuel pumps found their way into the gas tank; injectors were basically solenoids that opened the injector upon command from a computer; and the computer – along with a myriad of sensors – controlled everything surrounding the operation of the system.
      Even though EFI was an early term that would now be as redundant as saying you have antilock brakes on a new car, it’s technically still an accurate term. It’s just not used often because it’s assumed – and correctly – that everything on a new car is tied to electronics. EFI is a term that can include many different types of fuel injection.
      Throttle-Body Injection
      Throttle-body injection (TBI) refers to the fuel injector(s) being located in a throttle body that looks almost like a carburetor at a glance. This was done by design, as it was the most efficient and quickest way for auto manufacturers to make the change to fuel injection, while utilizing many of the same components they already had such as the same intake manifolds and air cleaners. TBI was most common in the 1980s and early 1990s.
      We’ve always loved fancy names. Have you ever heard of cross-fire injection? It was two throttle bodies at opposite corners of the intake manifold.
      Port Fuel Injection
      TBI was at a disadvantage because airflow was interrupted by the injector, and port injection was the next advancement in line. Port, or multi-point injection injects fuel into the intake runner just before the intake valve for each cylinder. The advantage is the ability to precisely control the fuel delivery and balance the airflow into each cylinder, leading to increased power output and improved fuel economy.
      Early mechanical fuel-injection systems were port-injection systems, sans electronic control. Seem confusing? Many fuel-injection terms cross over from new to old technology. There are just so many manufacturer-specific names that it can be confusing! Like EFI, port injection was widely advertised as the latest greatest advancement, with tuned port injection topping the performance charts. Port injection still is the most common type of fuel injection used today, but when was the last time you saw it called out? Nobody really says it anymore because it’s not new. But there’s another technology that we’re not done talking about, and that’s direct injection.
      Direct Injection
      Direct means the fuel is injected directly into the combustion chamber. Direct injection has been around for years in the diesel world, but it’s still relatively new for gasoline engines. The challenge with this type of injection is injecting the fuel into the high compression of the combustion chamber. Just like a diesel, it requires extremely high fuel pressure, and gasoline direct injection utilizes a typical electric pump to supply fuel to the rail, plus a mechanically driven high-pressure fuel pump to supply the necessary pressure for injection.
      The primary advantage of direct injection is that there’s less time for the air/fuel mixture to heat up since the fuel isn’t injected in the cylinder until immediately before combustion. This reduces the chance of detonation, or the fuel igniting from the heat and pressure in the cylinder. This allows a direct-injected engine to have higher compression, which itself lends to higher performance.
      There are additional advantages of reduced emissions and better fuel economy, but there also are some now-familiar drawbacks, including carbon buildup on the backs of the intake valves, low speed pre-ignition and limited high-rpm performance. For this reason, many manufacturers are combining both direct- and port-injection systems.
      The post
      link hidden, please login to view appeared first on link hidden, please login to view.
      link hidden, please login to view

×
  • Create New...