522 sold in Aug 07 vs 1,134 in Aug 06, 54% decline

The Honda Odyssey sold about 3,000 more units this month (19,324) than then entire Acura division (16,436).

"American Honda Motor Co., Inc., posted all-time record monthly sales of 158,342 Honda and Acura vehicles in August, up 4.7 percent while breaking the previous record of 156,173 set in August 2005, the company announced today. American Honda year-to-date sales totaled 1,066,320, up 1.6 percent on a daily selling rate basis*."

"Acura Division posted sales of 16,436 with new August records set for the MDX and RDX, resulting in Acura light truck sales increasing by 35.8 percent. Sales of the Acura MDX increased 35.5 percent to 5,816. Acura RDX sales increased 36.7 percent to 1,860. August sales of the TL luxury performance sedan totaled 4,992; the TSX sports sedan totaled 3,245."

http://www.hondanews.com/categories/1097/releases/4133

 

Good news for my Honda stock in this tough economy.

 

I know there's about 4000 Honda dealers in teh country. I wonder how many Acura dealers there are? anyone know?

 

I gotta tell you Kirby, the entire Honda division doesn't look very good either. Keep an eye on that stock.

Looks like the Accord is basically saving this company right now. They better hope this new Accord gets accepted well because its 30% of the entire corporations sales this year (Acura and Honda combined)

 

They better not mess up the next TSX & TL bc those sales #s are going to look even worse. They are both in their final years so I understand the decline in sales but the RL is a lost cause, the RDX is selling half of what Acura wanted (but on par w/ the BMW X3) & I would have hoped for a higher increase w/ the new MDX. Also, Acura has not announced any future vehicles either - just rumors of the next NSX, TSX coupe etc etc etc

Will an 8 cylinder & RWD be enough to turn this company around? w/ direct competitors offering RWD w/ over 300hp, I am not sure what Acura is going to do if they want to stay in their current course.

 

No one loves the RL! *snif* It's been a lost cause for 1 1/2 years now. It's also a tough market, true, but in tough markets people stay with the Germans due to that prestige, as someone said (I think correctly) in another thread.

Acura's SUVs (OK, the MDX anyway) are doing OK and will have to carry the division for the next year as the cars are being finalized.

I hope that Acura brings out the 3G RL early (next MY). If not, I wonder if Acura would end sales of the RL in the US since no one's buying it anyway.

Spicy, at last check there were 226 Acura dealers in the U.S. as of last year.

 

Maybe the car will be the same mechanically but Honda will just bump the horsepower and really jazz up the exterior like with a new hood, trunk, bumpers, wheels... make it look very different and add some cool stuff from the Japanese-market RL like the front sensors and stuff as a la carte options. This wouldn't cost as much as doing a brand new RL.

 

Bizarre tastes these Americans have. Now that global warming is accepted as a near certainty and the anti-SUV backlash in is in full high dudgeon, Acura's best-selling vehicle is a stinkin' SUV. Pathetic.

What we need to readjust everyone's attitude is $6 a gallon gas, right now. Also a few more drivers with the discerning taste of my fellow members...

 

I don't think Acura has any say-so regarding the RL. If HMC in Japan wants Acura to sell it, they will sell it. HMC might not be selling that many RLs worldwide relative to, say the Lexus GS, but I'm sure they are making more profit per unit because: 1) the RL shares a platform with every other mid-sized Honda while the GS only shares a platform with the IS (although it did share a V8 engine with the LS), 2) the cost of the gadgets in the RL should be decreasing while the cost of the car stays the same, which fattens the margin.

Personally, I don't think HMC cares that much about the RL. They just wanted a way to put SH-AWD into production. And I think Acura resents the fact that the RL's sheet metal is based on a design that they rejected in the first place.

Finally, I think Infiniti is the luxury brand to watch, not Acura. Infiniti is after the performance/luxury market with the upcoming G37 coupe and their other RWD cars, while Acura is busy milking existing platforms.

 

but only on the performance parts, honda has always focused on reliability and being green (TL gets 20MPG city, g35 gets like 16). As well, in my opinion, honda has always done a better job with it's interior styling and it's bold cues with exterior styling. Honda though has to get off the J series train and move on to large motors and features.

 

Not to go too far off topic (and to hope for some Mod leeway) I don't think anything has been accepted as a near certainty, especially when less than half of all published scientists endorse the global warming theory.

And I don't think the MDX and RDX being the best selling Acuras has anything to do with American's 'bizarre tastes' as those are the two newest products Acura has while the others are 3 years old or more. If you witness the fall of SUV sales in general you are drawing a conclusion based upon a false premise.

We live in a free market economy and people will choose what they please. Only 500 and some chose an RL...

And as far as gasoline costs go there was a good article in Investor's Business Daily about that where it was concluded:

"Now let's put the recent price increase in terms of real outlays. The average household is spending $136 more on gasoline every month than it was in 1998 and $114 per month more than it were spending in 2002. But, believe it or not, real (inflation-adjusted) disposable income per household has increased even faster than have pump prices; by $800 a month since 1998 and $279 a month since 2002. Accordingly, Americans are still, on average, economically ahead of the game.

No one likes high gasoline prices. But they are not as bad as most people think. Keep that in mind the next time some politician or media populist starts handing out the pitchforks."

 

Personally, I think Honda cares more about fuel-cell vehicles, robots, and airplanes than they do about Acura. I believe Acura's sole purpose, in HMC's eyes, is to extend their platforms.

 

Gas prices aside, we Americans have a unique love for SUVs. I don't think they sell nearly as well anywhere else as they do here.

 

Don't forget Caddy. The General has put lots of money into improving Cadillac's image and quality. Their recent cars are no longer forgettable. Not Acura quality yet, but they're getting there. Next time I buy, I'll be looking at Infiniti and Cadillac more closely than anyone else.

And I don't totally count Acura out yet, though with their recent "WTF?" moves, I have to wonder how they manage to stay in business. As much as I gripe about the 2G RL's marketing and sales numbers, they are at a point where it's time to replace their car line anyway, and it's no longer fresh. Let's see what they've got in the pipeline next year. If it's good, they'll survive. For this year, though, no one has a compelling reason to buy an Acura sedan because of the new Accord, unless they simply like the styling.

 

Take a look at Cadillac quality problems. wow, their drivetrane is not lasting past 30,000 miles on the v8.

 

That's probably because on avg there are more fat americans and you guys have this "go big or go home" mentality as if everything needs to be some FOS (feat of strength) to show how big or bad ol Yanks are...that is until something happens that could be stopped (ie 3 guys with simple utility knives taking over a plane with 50-100 people...hello, overpower the guys since you outnumber them huge) then most Americans cower in fear. IMO, most Americans act like a typical bully- talk tough to try and intimidate but if faced they become pussies.

Anyway, Honda could get BMW to create their next RL and people would not buy it. It's a brand prestige thing and nothing more.

BTW I think the Americans on this board are great so not trying to trash anyone here and two of my best friends are Americans who btw feel the exact same about the country. I am just being honest about the country as a whole.

 

That's not the first time you've launched some jab at the U.S. What's up with this stuff Rob? As can be said about most prejudice statements; you are grossly over generalizing things.

Be careful. Americans have a word for people who talks like that; Ignoranus - ignorant AND an asshole.

 

Rob, you sound very angry, but you are wrong when you say most Americans are bullies. Most are not.
Bush barely won the election, (maybe he didn't) and he and his bushies are the bullies. It feels kinda like China here, if you disagree too much with the govt you are seen as unpatriotic. We are bullied here too.

A co-worker of mine got his pic in the paper for protesting the war and he got bullied and harrassed with anonymous notes put on his locker.

 

You're "brand prestige thing and nothing more" argument falls completely apart when Infiniti is brought into the argument. How does Infiniti, which does not have the "brand prestige" of Lexus or BMW, and at one time even lower brand prestige than Acura, sell the M so much better than Acura sells the RL, and at times sell even better than Lexus sells the GS, which has a higher brand prestige?

You are always quick to point out "brand prestige" as the end-all problem, but that is very shortsighted view of the problem. A brand can make up for "prestige" by developing a PRODUCT that 1) fits nicely into the segment in which it competes, and 2) directly takes aim at the what most people consider the current benchmark. The RL does neither.

"Brand prestige" (or lack thereof) isn't the RL's real problem...it is merely a symptom of the RL's real problem.

 

I agree MrDenno. Although, some people buy based on prestige, Acura never had those buyers to begin with. I think most are open minded enough to consider the package for what it's worth. I looked at many options and, in the end, chose the RL as the best for me. Obviously, I'm not representative of the majority of mid-size upscale sedan buyers.

Acura needs to figure out if they want to compete in this segment and make the necessary adjustments. For now, I'm happy driving a car that fully meets my needs and very few others drive. I hope they don't mess with it too much.

Regardless, it won't matter too much to Honda's bottom line either way. Sell 500, sell 3000. Big deal. Their attention is on the Accord and Civic, where it should be. It's 50% of HMC's revenue!

 

I agree with Rob L's statement about brand prestige. For example, the Infiniti G is superior to the Acura TL when it comes to RWD, skidpad numbers, etc. However, the TL outsells it, while the stodgy Camry-based Lexus ES outsells both the G and the TL. Also, the Infiniti M is superior to the Lexus GS based on every comparative car review I've ever read, yet the GS outsells the M. Brand prestige is VERY important; it is why most people in this price range buy (or rather lease) cars.

 

FYI...year to date (July 07), the M is outselling the GS.

1. 5 - Series - 23,807
2. E - Class - 22,246
3. M - 11,701
4. GS - 11,168
5. STS - 9,509
6. S80 - 6,164
7. A6 - 6,014
8. RL - 3,482
9. 9-5 -2,266

now what were you saying about "brand prestige"?

 

GS just passed M in August for YTD sales...

M 15,033
GS 15,422

 

I've lived in Europe Rob L. and a lot of what you say about Americans is true enough - but we still don't like to hear it from a 'furiner' very much. I disagree that most Americans are bullies. I don't know how you project yourself but most Americans are extremely kind and giving and as a country we lead the world in donations to charity. Rebuilding countries like Germany and Japan and, although some would say misguidedly - Iraq - does not come from a 'bully' country.

People loving SUVs and being fat are not connected. American cars have always been huge going back to the 50s and people were not 'fat' then, were they? SUVs are simply the next big car... first coupes and sedans then wagons then vans then trucks.

But you should analyze your biases a little more carefully.

And speaking of Infiniti what do they really have but the G and the FX. You can't build a division around that.

 

OK guys, stay on topic, please, and keep it civil. I refer specifically to the back-and-forth about Americans and ignoramuses and such.

 

Americans buy SUV's because of TV commercials, especially those commercials that make it look like it's embarrassing to drive a mini-van.

 

I stand corrected, although the two cars with the most brand prestige have the top sales.

 

The brand prestige of BMW and MB are head and shoulders above every other brands, that to these brands, it is MOSTLY about brand prestige, but the product also is competitive enough to not drag the brand prestige down (ie brand prestige and product go hand in hand...one does not exist without the other like some of you keep claiming).

But to the other brands, the brand prestige isn't anywhere near as big a factor, which means that the product is a big factor.

If it's "all brand prestige", then the A6 and GS would far outsell the M35/45, and M35/45 sales would be similar to the RL. I'm still waiting for those who keep screaming "brand prestige" to answer how the M35/45 sells so well.

 

Oo! Oo! Brand prestige!

Seriously, the M's marketing seems the same as the RL's--nonexistent, and yet it sells FAR more copies than the RL. The M35x is certainly no better than the RL, IMHO, in terms of overall features--they are roughly equivalent outside of better low-end torque in the M. My guess at the factors:

--Consumer Reports recommendation--no matter how you feel about CR, there is no doubt that it is exceptionally influential.
--better leases? We spent lots of time in another thread discussing the influence of leases on mid-luxury cars such as the 5, M, RL, and GS.

 

I think the reason m35/m45 sells more than the RL is it's looks. Stock M vs the Stock RL the M looks more sporty and aggressive.

 

This goes along with what I've been saying...that it's more product than "brand prestige". Otherwise, MB and BMW would always have the top rated cars by CR...but this is not the case as CR rates a "brand prestige-less" M35/45 highly.


But leases are based on residual estimates which are based on how well the car sells new, which influences how it is expected to sell used. A car with poor new sales will be expected to have poor used sales, and therefore residuals are expected to be lower and this raises the lease price, making it unfavorable to lease.

Acura can pump up sales by giving the RL better residual estimates, but they know it would be "false" sales because in the end when the cars come off lease, they'd have a bunch of used cars with inflated price tags that no one would want to buy.


I still think that "brand prestige" is a symptom, not a problem. It is a symptom of products that both hit or miss their intended targets. BMW would not have the brand prestige it has if its products missed their intended targets. MB would not have the brand prestige it has if its products missed their intended targets. Acura has a near-luxury brand prestige because only its near-luxury offerings hit their intended targets, the midsize luxury offering misses its intended target...but what do you expect when you bring a knife to a gunfight, which is clearly what Acura did with the RL?

 

I think it's a lot more than looks...otherwise the A6 would be selling like hotcakes.

 

Funny, I think the RL still looks better then the M in stock form. The wider stance and slopping frontend makes it more agressive to me. Add an underbody spoiler (even the OEM one) and it gets tough looking real fast. Change the wheels and lower the suspension (like you did) and you got one hot looking ride.

The M is just to skinny to be taken seriously as a tough guy (no matter what you do to it).

 

i never took the M as 'skinny'. It is not as low as the RL (and therefore doesn't appear as wide), but I describing it as "skinny" is a major exaggeration.

 

Well, it's a personal thing. It's definitely narrower then the RL. That's just a fact. Not sure what others think about it's length/width ratio

 

The RL is only 1.4" wider than the M.

But regardless, a LOT more people take the "skinny" M more seriously than the "fatter" RL...just look at the sales figures between the 2.

 

Dude, your getting stuck on an off the cuff comment I made regarding Touge's thoughts on why they sell more M's. It was my personal view on the looks of the M. I don't like the M's look. It looks too skinny. But that's me. Obviously, I don't represent the majority of sedan buyers. I bought an RL, right

 

its sells more since it isn't pre-stuck with only with AWD.

 

I think looks is one of the most important buying factors for a large majority of buyers. The looks are what first attracts people to a car and then if the performance is up to par they buy it. Most won't buy a car that looks good but doesn't perform and they also won't buy a car that performs but doesn't look good. Again, I'm talking about the majority.

I think the RL is head and shoulders above the "M" in looks. I think the "M" is kind of ugly personally. It was okay when it first came-out but it never grew on me.

I'm starting to see more and more RL's lately (a lot of '07's) and, the more I see it, the more I realize how nice looking this car is.

 

You have a point there. Even though SH-AWD is supposed to enhance "ALL" weather handling, most people seem to feel that they don't need it if they don't get snow.

I guess I understand that, but the problem with the RL is that if you removed the "AWD" piece, than it would essentially be a FWD car since that is how it was designed, which again puts it at a disadvantage.

Remember that SH-AWD was intended to bring more neutrality to the handling of this car since it is FWD biased.