Honda CEO acknowledges Acura issues
12-28-2006, 10:53 PM
#121
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Which brings us yet again to the biggest question of all: How does Acura grow its market outside of people like me (e.g. multiple Honda/Acura buyers, and very astute buyers who know a good value when they see one)?
Sounds like from this thread they need to:
a) define themselves and stick to that definition
b) be everywhere possible (e.g. be like Lexus and sell cars)
c) at least give people the option of the greasiest, fattest burger possible even though they are more likely to buy the leaner burger or even a salad.
Sounds simple enough to me, though Acura is enough in the hole with the RL that one wonders whether it can be saved at this point. I'm sure with enough effort, it can be.
Sounds like from this thread they need to:
a) define themselves and stick to that definition
b) be everywhere possible (e.g. be like Lexus and sell cars)
c) at least give people the option of the greasiest, fattest burger possible even though they are more likely to buy the leaner burger or even a salad.
Sounds simple enough to me, though Acura is enough in the hole with the RL that one wonders whether it can be saved at this point. I'm sure with enough effort, it can be.
12-28-2006, 11:49 PM
#122
Three Wheelin'
Please allow me to play devil's advocate.
Is it worth it to Honda to let Acura sell the "greasy burgers" at a loss, or to let the greasy burgers just sit there? If you think the RL is selling poorly, imaging how poorly a V8 version would sell with a $55K price tag. Let's put it this way: Lexus sold 196 of the GS 430/450h in November (-50.5% from last November, by the way). Acura would sell even fewer units of a similar car, plus your typical Acura driver would complain that the car costs too much, even though it would probably cost slightly less than its competitors. In the grand scheme of things, would it be worth it to Honda Motor Corporation to develop a V8 engine that could fit into the RL to sell maybe 90 more cars per month? Can they afford that, considering that selling so few cars would make economy of scale impossible?
Is it worth it to Honda to let Acura sell the "greasy burgers" at a loss, or to let the greasy burgers just sit there? If you think the RL is selling poorly, imaging how poorly a V8 version would sell with a $55K price tag. Let's put it this way: Lexus sold 196 of the GS 430/450h in November (-50.5% from last November, by the way). Acura would sell even fewer units of a similar car, plus your typical Acura driver would complain that the car costs too much, even though it would probably cost slightly less than its competitors. In the grand scheme of things, would it be worth it to Honda Motor Corporation to develop a V8 engine that could fit into the RL to sell maybe 90 more cars per month? Can they afford that, considering that selling so few cars would make economy of scale impossible?
12-29-2006, 12:02 AM
#123
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by neuronbob
Which brings us yet again to the biggest question of all: How does Acura grow its market outside of people like me (e.g. multiple Honda/Acura buyers, and very astute buyers who know a good value when they see one)?
Sounds like from this thread they need to:
a) define themselves and stick to that definition
b) be everywhere possible (e.g. be like Lexus and sell cars)
c) at least give people the option of the greasiest, fattest burger possible even though they are more likely to buy the leaner burger or even a salad.
Sounds simple enough to me, though Acura is enough in the hole with the RL that one wonders whether it can be saved at this point. I'm sure with enough effort, it can be.
Sounds like from this thread they need to:
a) define themselves and stick to that definition
b) be everywhere possible (e.g. be like Lexus and sell cars)
c) at least give people the option of the greasiest, fattest burger possible even though they are more likely to buy the leaner burger or even a salad.
Sounds simple enough to me, though Acura is enough in the hole with the RL that one wonders whether it can be saved at this point. I'm sure with enough effort, it can be.
If they decide to define themselves as a salad store, then they wouldn't need to sell fatty burgers with the all the toppings. They would just sell salads as they have defined themselves as salad makers.
So if they decide to be the "value" minded luxury company, then they should produce the models they produce now, full of value, and price it right (ie no models over $40k base, $45k optioned out).
If they decide to define themselves as the "fuel efficient" luxury alternative, then they should design cars that BEAT all the cars in the same segment. The RDX should not have similar mileage to the X3, it should DOMINATE it when it comes to MPG.
If they decide to define themselves as a "performance" luxury brand, then they would have to drop this FWD crap and go with RWD and/or AWD only, higher HP outputs and more powerful engine options, etc.
If they decide to define themselves as a "tech" luxury brand, then all their models should have a monopoly of at least several years on high tech features. Claiming to be high tech because your car is the first to have NavTraffic is great...until like 2 months until Caddy releases it right after you do.
Bottom line, I have no idea what Acura is supposed to be at this point. I know what it isn't supposed to be, which is a "regular" brand like Honda or Toyota. But besides that I don't know what they are with all the conflicting signals they send.
12-29-2006, 12:09 AM
#124
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
Please allow me to play devil's advocate.
Is it worth it to Honda to let Acura sell the "greasy burgers" at a loss, or to let the greasy burgers just sit there? If you think the RL is selling poorly, imaging how poorly a V8 version would sell with a $55K price tag. Let's put it this way: Lexus sold 196 of the GS 430/450h in November (-50.5% from last November, by the way). Acura would sell even fewer units of a similar car, plus your typical Acura driver would complain that the car costs too much, even though it would probably cost slightly less than its competitors. In the grand scheme of things, would it be worth it to Honda Motor Corporation to develop a V8 engine that could fit into the RL to sell maybe 90 more cars per month? Can they afford that, considering that selling so few cars would make economy of scale impossible?
Is it worth it to Honda to let Acura sell the "greasy burgers" at a loss, or to let the greasy burgers just sit there? If you think the RL is selling poorly, imaging how poorly a V8 version would sell with a $55K price tag. Let's put it this way: Lexus sold 196 of the GS 430/450h in November (-50.5% from last November, by the way). Acura would sell even fewer units of a similar car, plus your typical Acura driver would complain that the car costs too much, even though it would probably cost slightly less than its competitors. In the grand scheme of things, would it be worth it to Honda Motor Corporation to develop a V8 engine that could fit into the RL to sell maybe 90 more cars per month? Can they afford that, considering that selling so few cars would make economy of scale impossible?
I guess money is better spent to develop an even LOWER volume platform and engine for a car that'll sell in MUCH lower numbers, and at a MUCH bigger loss per unit sold (talking about the NSX successor)
At least a "normal" RWD platform and V8 can be used in other models, bettering the chances of not losing money and recovering the investment. an "exotic" platform isn't going to be used in any other model except what it was planned for and will most likely sell at a loss just for brand image, such as the last NSX.
If acura sold a V8 model priced at the upper V6 level of its competitors, it would sell very well.
Instead, they are selling a V6 model priced at the lower V8 level of its competitors.
12-29-2006, 12:42 AM
#125
Three Wheelin'
Well, Acura's new slogan is "Acura Advance." I'm assuming they are going to use that to hype up advanced technology. However, the most advanced technology they have SH-AWD, is something that I doubt the majority of luxury buyers want or care about.
Speaking of SH-AWD, the RL's price is actually competitive with other V6 AWD mid-sized cars. The problem is that people generally don't see the value of SH-AWD unless you really explain it to them. From a marketing standpoint, Honda might have been better off just skipping AWD altogether and just making RWD cars.
Speaking of SH-AWD, the RL's price is actually competitive with other V6 AWD mid-sized cars. The problem is that people generally don't see the value of SH-AWD unless you really explain it to them. From a marketing standpoint, Honda might have been better off just skipping AWD altogether and just making RWD cars.
12-29-2006, 01:59 AM
#126
My only car is a Bus
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
You bother calling it an RSX because people know what that is and many owned one so, natually when it's time to get a new car, they will look to 'upgrade.' I can't tell you how many people owned an RL and, when the new one came out, wanted to look at the new RL. They were turned off and bought another brand or TL, but they looked. The same would have happened to the RSX.
Acura cannot establish itself until it tells Japan to F-off when they try to pawn a Legend off on us. Acura won't even call the RL a 'flagship.' And already I've had people tell me that for less money they can get an MDX which they consider to be 'more car' and nicer than the RL.
When the RL came out Acura pounded into our heads how much, on paper, the RL was a 5-series BMW. We even had these stupid charts with both models side-by-side and they highlighted all the places the RL was the same or better than the 5-series! Guess what, it's still not a 5-series beater! And then people tell me they drive the M45 and it blows the doors of the RL for power and fun to drive qualities. People will notice all the annoying things about the M45 only after they've bought one. And you can tell me how the M45 is more than the RL but, once people drive it, they forget the difference. I swear!
I hope Acura keeps raising prices so it pushes all those stupid mooches who compare us to the Pilot and Accord out of our showrooms. I can't tell you how annoying it is to have someone say: "How is the MDX different from the Pilot?"
Acura cannot establish itself until it tells Japan to F-off when they try to pawn a Legend off on us. Acura won't even call the RL a 'flagship.' And already I've had people tell me that for less money they can get an MDX which they consider to be 'more car' and nicer than the RL.
When the RL came out Acura pounded into our heads how much, on paper, the RL was a 5-series BMW. We even had these stupid charts with both models side-by-side and they highlighted all the places the RL was the same or better than the 5-series! Guess what, it's still not a 5-series beater! And then people tell me they drive the M45 and it blows the doors of the RL for power and fun to drive qualities. People will notice all the annoying things about the M45 only after they've bought one. And you can tell me how the M45 is more than the RL but, once people drive it, they forget the difference. I swear!
I hope Acura keeps raising prices so it pushes all those stupid mooches who compare us to the Pilot and Accord out of our showrooms. I can't tell you how annoying it is to have someone say: "How is the MDX different from the Pilot?"
12-29-2006, 08:10 AM
#127
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
i have an M45 sport. I don't notice anything annoying about it and would still pay the $10k extra for it again over the RL.
Granted I'll end up getting a used RL for the value when my lease runs out, but still, there is nothing that is annoying with the M45.
Granted I'll end up getting a used RL for the value when my lease runs out, but still, there is nothing that is annoying with the M45.
12-29-2006, 08:49 AM
#128
Pro
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: gotham, new york
Age: 60
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I hope Acura keeps raising prices so it pushes all those stupid mooches who compare us to the Pilot and Accord out of our showrooms. I can't tell you how annoying it is to have someone say: "How is the MDX different from the Pilot?"[/QUOTE]
Customer behavior may sometimes be difficult to predict, but Acura can take a look at past history of Toyota/Lexus and Nissan/Infiniti as a reference. For example, the ES has been said many times that it looks a lot like a Camry XLE with nice make up, and the I30/35 has been repeatedly referred to as a glorified Maxima. Yet, the ES sells well despite its similarities to the Camry, but the I30/35 has been killed off.
Reason - in addition to the branding theory - Lexus puts sufficiently more upscale luxury and technology in the ES and provides much better dealer service, while Infiniti did little to distinguish the I30/35 from the Maxima and its dealer service is spotty. But Nissan/Infiniti made the right move. Kill the I30/35 and come up with a NEW G35, which is TOTALLY different. So far, the G is a success and is selling well.
Now, the TL and MDX are selling well despite their "similarities" to the Accord and Pilot because Honda/Acura knows how to make these cars sufficiently different so that customers (even though they are value-minded) can tell the difference and are willing to pay the higher price. On the other hand, the RL, which is MSRP at some $15k above the TL, is not sufficiently distinct from its little sister to warrant the extra money, given that the TL itself is a very competent car with most of RL's techno gadgets (sans SH-AWD). Since RL does not compare well with the prestigous nameplates (for the reasons we already discussed), the only way to sell the RL is to slash its price, which was exactly what Acura did.
If history is any guidance, Acura should take heed and put more money into R&D into developing its flagship and improve its image and dealership service.
Customer behavior may sometimes be difficult to predict, but Acura can take a look at past history of Toyota/Lexus and Nissan/Infiniti as a reference. For example, the ES has been said many times that it looks a lot like a Camry XLE with nice make up, and the I30/35 has been repeatedly referred to as a glorified Maxima. Yet, the ES sells well despite its similarities to the Camry, but the I30/35 has been killed off.
Reason - in addition to the branding theory - Lexus puts sufficiently more upscale luxury and technology in the ES and provides much better dealer service, while Infiniti did little to distinguish the I30/35 from the Maxima and its dealer service is spotty. But Nissan/Infiniti made the right move. Kill the I30/35 and come up with a NEW G35, which is TOTALLY different. So far, the G is a success and is selling well.
Now, the TL and MDX are selling well despite their "similarities" to the Accord and Pilot because Honda/Acura knows how to make these cars sufficiently different so that customers (even though they are value-minded) can tell the difference and are willing to pay the higher price. On the other hand, the RL, which is MSRP at some $15k above the TL, is not sufficiently distinct from its little sister to warrant the extra money, given that the TL itself is a very competent car with most of RL's techno gadgets (sans SH-AWD). Since RL does not compare well with the prestigous nameplates (for the reasons we already discussed), the only way to sell the RL is to slash its price, which was exactly what Acura did.
If history is any guidance, Acura should take heed and put more money into R&D into developing its flagship and improve its image and dealership service.
12-29-2006, 08:52 AM
#129
How come Honda/Acura does not "go back to the drawing board" with its cars during a model run? Infinit's G35 sedan for example, has been tinkered with almost every year to make it better or to keep pace with the competition. It appears that Infiniti listens to their customers to some extent.
While reading this great thread, I am wondering why did I buy my Accord EX 5spd coupe rather than the Integra GS and what was I looking for in a car. Honestly, I wanted the most for my dollar. I wanted a dependable, rock solid car that had room and that looked pretty good too. The integra was smaller and also more to insure than the Accord.
Now that I am in the market again, I want the same things as before plus a little extra; more sport, better technology, safety and dependability. The question is how much is this stuff worth to me? Am I willing to pay 50K for a new RL? No! Even though I really like the car, it is not worth 10K+ more than a TL. A new RL FORCES you to look at other brands in the same price range whether you want to or not. If this car was $37K - $40K, it would sell like the TL.
While reading this great thread, I am wondering why did I buy my Accord EX 5spd coupe rather than the Integra GS and what was I looking for in a car. Honestly, I wanted the most for my dollar. I wanted a dependable, rock solid car that had room and that looked pretty good too. The integra was smaller and also more to insure than the Accord.
Now that I am in the market again, I want the same things as before plus a little extra; more sport, better technology, safety and dependability. The question is how much is this stuff worth to me? Am I willing to pay 50K for a new RL? No! Even though I really like the car, it is not worth 10K+ more than a TL. A new RL FORCES you to look at other brands in the same price range whether you want to or not. If this car was $37K - $40K, it would sell like the TL.
12-29-2006, 09:30 AM
#130
Originally Posted by allykahn
If this car was $37K - $40K, it would sell like the TL.
I don't know how anyone cannot see the difference between the quality of material in the RL and the TL - that alone tells you why the RL costs more.
12-29-2006, 09:31 AM
#131
Pro
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: gotham, new york
Age: 60
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know what happened to Infiniti's poor selling Q45? Looks like Infiniti might have killed its flagship. If that is the case, what a BOLD move!! I don't think the RL is in the same position as the Q. With sufficient improvement and upgrade, it can still compete.
12-29-2006, 09:51 AM
#132
I agree. $45K does seem about right.
I understand your reply, but how many people actually look at the difference in build quality? The majority of buyers look at price first, style, features and then quality of material if at all.
Originally Posted by phile
I don't know how anyone cannot see the difference between the quality of material in the RL and the TL - that alone tells you why the RL costs more.
12-29-2006, 10:00 AM
#134
AcurAdmirer
Originally Posted by CL6
I can't tell you how annoying it is to have someone say: "How is the MDX different from the Pilot?"
??? Excuse me, but as someone who has been in high-level sales all my life, I see this is nothing but an opportunity, not an annoyance. They're in your showroom, arent they? That's half the battle right there.
When someone asks that, you should say, "Excellent question. Here, let me show you what you get with my car that the Pilot doesn' t offer."
And as long as you view potential customers as "stupid mooches", you'll continue to "sell only 2 or 3 RL's a year."
.
.
12-29-2006, 10:00 AM
#135
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
The RL is hardly in the same position as the Q-ship, thankfully. It can still be saved from oblivion.
I agree that $45k is about right. Acura saw this too but chose to put a decontented base model at that price level.
Let me tell you as one who has owned the TL and RL....the build quality alone justifies the premium in price. Most others who moved up from the TL on this board will say similarly.
By the way....this thread rocks, as do all of you.
I agree that $45k is about right. Acura saw this too but chose to put a decontented base model at that price level.
Let me tell you as one who has owned the TL and RL....the build quality alone justifies the premium in price. Most others who moved up from the TL on this board will say similarly.
By the way....this thread rocks, as do all of you.
12-29-2006, 11:21 AM
#136
Burning Brakes
Originally Posted by CL6
I hope Acura keeps raising prices so it pushes all those stupid mooches who compare us to the Pilot and Accord out of our showrooms. I can't tell you how annoying it is to have someone say: "How is the MDX different from the Pilot?"
12-29-2006, 11:41 AM
#137
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes
on
519 Posts
Like some of us have said, Honda/Acura needs more promotion. Not just the RL, but I think its SH-AWD , too. Honda spent so much money and time to develope this system, but not many people seem to know what it does, let alone how it works. If the consumers don't see the benefits of this system, then it's hard to convince people to look at the RL.
Also, I think that if Honda is a larger company (ie, with more money and resources), they would have developed an even better RL. Remember, Honda is one of the few Japanese brands that are not being controlled/owned by other companies, I think the only other one would be Toyota. Toyota, as we all know, is such a large company that it can invest a lot more just for one car. And it is also easy for them to build luxury/sporty sedans since they already have a few RWD platforms. For example, they can build the GS with the Toyota Crown platform. As for Infiniti/Nissan, they get some of there support from Renault, and Nissan, just like Toyota, is a larger company than Honda. They also have more experience in making RWD cars too. But as for Honda, they are still on there own, and they don't have that much experience building RWD sedans (do they even have any?). It's not a big problem for Honda to build RWD cars like the S2000 and NSX, since they are mainly for image building, rather than being successful in terms of sales. However, if Honda were to build a RWD platform all of a sudden, it would take a lot of resources from it. And success is not even guaranteed. It might be too risky for them. For now, I believe their main focus is still on developing green technologies and new diesel engines. Perhaps time will tell what Honda is going to do for their next gen Acura sedans. But one thing for sure, they can't rely on FWD for its TL anymore unless they want to market the TL something similar to the Lexus ES350.
Also, I think that if Honda is a larger company (ie, with more money and resources), they would have developed an even better RL. Remember, Honda is one of the few Japanese brands that are not being controlled/owned by other companies, I think the only other one would be Toyota. Toyota, as we all know, is such a large company that it can invest a lot more just for one car. And it is also easy for them to build luxury/sporty sedans since they already have a few RWD platforms. For example, they can build the GS with the Toyota Crown platform. As for Infiniti/Nissan, they get some of there support from Renault, and Nissan, just like Toyota, is a larger company than Honda. They also have more experience in making RWD cars too. But as for Honda, they are still on there own, and they don't have that much experience building RWD sedans (do they even have any?). It's not a big problem for Honda to build RWD cars like the S2000 and NSX, since they are mainly for image building, rather than being successful in terms of sales. However, if Honda were to build a RWD platform all of a sudden, it would take a lot of resources from it. And success is not even guaranteed. It might be too risky for them. For now, I believe their main focus is still on developing green technologies and new diesel engines. Perhaps time will tell what Honda is going to do for their next gen Acura sedans. But one thing for sure, they can't rely on FWD for its TL anymore unless they want to market the TL something similar to the Lexus ES350.
12-29-2006, 12:13 PM
#138
My only car is a Bus
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Yeah that's real nice when you read the sales books but in practice it gets a little tiring particularly when those people really should be driving Hondas anyway.
You don't hear that about the Camry and the ES, do you? And maybe that was my point...
I do okay though, but thanks for your advice.
And I did not say I viewed all customers as 'stupid mooches.' If you're going to quote me... get it right.
Nobody sells RLs... that's why there's 4 grand back on them, eh?
You don't hear that about the Camry and the ES, do you? And maybe that was my point...
I do okay though, but thanks for your advice.
And I did not say I viewed all customers as 'stupid mooches.' If you're going to quote me... get it right.
Nobody sells RLs... that's why there's 4 grand back on them, eh?
Originally Posted by Mike_TX
??? Excuse me, but as someone who has been in high-level sales all my life, I see this is nothing but an opportunity, not an annoyance. They're in your showroom, arent they? That's half the battle right there.
When someone asks that, you should say, "Excellent question. Here, let me show you what you get with my car that the Pilot doesn' t offer."
And as long as you view potential customers as "stupid mooches", you'll continue to "sell only 2 or 3 RL's a year."
.
.
When someone asks that, you should say, "Excellent question. Here, let me show you what you get with my car that the Pilot doesn' t offer."
And as long as you view potential customers as "stupid mooches", you'll continue to "sell only 2 or 3 RL's a year."
.
.
12-29-2006, 12:59 PM
#139
Three Wheelin'
As usual, CL6 makes good points. Have you considered working for another dealership, one that doesn't sell Acuras? Sounds like morale at your dealership could be a little low.
Now, back to some other interesting points. To really understand why Honda/Acura customers can't see the price difference between the RL and TL, you have to understand the psychology of the Honda/Acura fan. As I mentioned, your average driver of a Honda or Acura is VERY price sensitive (yes, I mean cheap). For example, I've met people who drive Honda Accords because they thing the Toyota Camry is over priced. Honda fans and Acura fans want as many obvious features as possible for the price. Because of this, they are willing to give up other aspects of the car. For example, your average Acura driver would rather have blatantly fake wood for "free" (standard in the car) than to pay extra for real wood. That's why most Acuras don't even give you the option of real wood from the factory. So when the RL comes along with real wood (the ONLY Acura currently available with real wood), people don't appreciate it. Lexus drivers, on the other hand, are more than willing to pay extra for real wood. Another example would be leather. Leather is an option on some Lexus cars, but people willingly pay for it. Why? Because it is a good quality of leather. Acura drivers, on the other hand, expect leather to be standard equipment, even if the leather is only one step above "pleather" or "leatherette." When you try to give an Acura driver a better quality of leather, and raise the price accordingly, Acura drivers will resist.
Basically, here's where Acura drivers IN GENERAL differ from drivers of "real" luxury brands: 1) we want as many standard features for the money as possible, 2) we don't (or can't) recognize subtle luxury features such as real wood and plush leather and therefore aren't willing to pay for it. The current Acura customers, many who are cross-shopping with Honda brand cars, are one reason why Acura is going to have a hard time being taken seriously as a "true" luxury brand. If they try to really go upscale with the luxury similar to Lexus, Mercedes, and Cadillac, the customers will resist.
There are plenty of reasons why the RL is more expensive than the TL outside of SH-AWD. It's just that your typical Acura driver can't or won't see the differences. If they did have that level of sophistication or if they were less price sensitive, they might not be driving Acuras at all.
Now, back to some other interesting points. To really understand why Honda/Acura customers can't see the price difference between the RL and TL, you have to understand the psychology of the Honda/Acura fan. As I mentioned, your average driver of a Honda or Acura is VERY price sensitive (yes, I mean cheap). For example, I've met people who drive Honda Accords because they thing the Toyota Camry is over priced. Honda fans and Acura fans want as many obvious features as possible for the price. Because of this, they are willing to give up other aspects of the car. For example, your average Acura driver would rather have blatantly fake wood for "free" (standard in the car) than to pay extra for real wood. That's why most Acuras don't even give you the option of real wood from the factory. So when the RL comes along with real wood (the ONLY Acura currently available with real wood), people don't appreciate it. Lexus drivers, on the other hand, are more than willing to pay extra for real wood. Another example would be leather. Leather is an option on some Lexus cars, but people willingly pay for it. Why? Because it is a good quality of leather. Acura drivers, on the other hand, expect leather to be standard equipment, even if the leather is only one step above "pleather" or "leatherette." When you try to give an Acura driver a better quality of leather, and raise the price accordingly, Acura drivers will resist.
Basically, here's where Acura drivers IN GENERAL differ from drivers of "real" luxury brands: 1) we want as many standard features for the money as possible, 2) we don't (or can't) recognize subtle luxury features such as real wood and plush leather and therefore aren't willing to pay for it. The current Acura customers, many who are cross-shopping with Honda brand cars, are one reason why Acura is going to have a hard time being taken seriously as a "true" luxury brand. If they try to really go upscale with the luxury similar to Lexus, Mercedes, and Cadillac, the customers will resist.
There are plenty of reasons why the RL is more expensive than the TL outside of SH-AWD. It's just that your typical Acura driver can't or won't see the differences. If they did have that level of sophistication or if they were less price sensitive, they might not be driving Acuras at all.
12-29-2006, 01:02 PM
#140
Pro
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: gotham, new york
Age: 60
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by neuronbob
The RL is hardly in the same position as the Q-ship, thankfully. It can still be saved from oblivion.
I agree that $45k is about right. Acura saw this too but chose to put a decontented base model at that price level.
Let me tell you as one who has owned the TL and RL....the build quality alone justifies the premium in price. Most others who moved up from the TL on this board will say similarly.
By the way....this thread rocks, as do all of you.
I agree that $45k is about right. Acura saw this too but chose to put a decontented base model at that price level.
Let me tell you as one who has owned the TL and RL....the build quality alone justifies the premium in price. Most others who moved up from the TL on this board will say similarly.
By the way....this thread rocks, as do all of you.
In the past couple of years, the Q was a non-factor in Infiniti's lineup. The 2nd gen RL is much better, and Acura has spent time and money developing it, albeit not quite in a way that the masses would like it to be.
Nonetheless, the RL is a great car, for its price. I was so torn in between choosing the TL and the RL. MY wife, the accountant, nagged me so much that I had little choice but to settle for the TL, which at that time, was about $10k cheaper. In retrospect, it seems that her idea of putting the $10k savings into a 529 college savings plan is not such a bad idea. But then, I have to give up not having the build quality of the RL, the car I really wanted.
I worked hard for my money, and why should I not enjoy the fruits of my hard labor. 
Maybe our son should do what I did ... put myself through college and grad school ... and forget about the 529. 
12-29-2006, 01:09 PM
#141
Three Wheelin'
Not only will a Honda/Acura fan ask what the difference is between a Honda Pilot and an Acura MDX, but I have a friend who is really struggling to figure out the difference between a Honda CR-V and an Acura RDX. And if you think people are bitching about why they should pay the price difference between the TL and RL, you should hear this man whine about why he should pay the price difference between the CR-V and the RDX.
It's all about the brand. I'm sure Lexus drivers don't have these conflicts as often.
It's all about the brand. I'm sure Lexus drivers don't have these conflicts as often.
12-29-2006, 01:18 PM
#142
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
As usual, CL6 makes good points. Have you considered working for another dealership, one that doesn't sell Acuras? Sounds like morale at your dealership could be a little low.
Now, back to some other interesting points. To really understand why Honda/Acura customers can't see the price difference between the RL and TL, you have to understand the psychology of the Honda/Acura fan. As I mentioned, your average driver of a Honda or Acura is VERY price sensitive (yes, I mean cheap). For example, I've met people who drive Honda Accords because they thing the Toyota Camry is over priced. Honda fans and Acura fans want as many obvious features as possible for the price. Because of this, they are willing to give up other aspects of the car. For example, your average Acura driver would rather have blatantly fake wood for "free" (standard in the car) than to pay extra for real wood. That's why most Acuras don't even give you the option of real wood from the factory. So when the RL comes along with real wood (the ONLY Acura currently available with real wood), people don't appreciate it. Lexus drivers, on the other hand, are more than willing to pay extra for real wood. Another example would be leather. Leather is an option on some Lexus cars, but people willingly pay for it. Why? Because it is a good quality of leather. Acura drivers, on the other hand, expect leather to be standard equipment, even if the leather is only one step above "pleather" or "leatherette." When you try to give an Acura driver a better quality of leather, and raise the price accordingly, Acura drivers will resist.
Basically, here's where Acura drivers IN GENERAL differ from drivers of "real" luxury brands: 1) we want as many standard features for the money as possible, 2) we don't (or can't) recognize subtle luxury features such as real wood and plush leather and therefore aren't willing to pay for it. The current Acura customers, many who are cross-shopping with Honda brand cars, are one reason why Acura is going to have a hard time being taken seriously as a "true" luxury brand. If they try to really go upscale with the luxury similar to Lexus, Mercedes, and Cadillac, the customers will resist.
There are plenty of reasons why the RL is more expensive than the TL outside of SH-AWD. It's just that your typical Acura driver can't or won't see the differences. If they did have that level of sophistication or if they were less price sensitive, they might not be driving Acuras at all.
Now, back to some other interesting points. To really understand why Honda/Acura customers can't see the price difference between the RL and TL, you have to understand the psychology of the Honda/Acura fan. As I mentioned, your average driver of a Honda or Acura is VERY price sensitive (yes, I mean cheap). For example, I've met people who drive Honda Accords because they thing the Toyota Camry is over priced. Honda fans and Acura fans want as many obvious features as possible for the price. Because of this, they are willing to give up other aspects of the car. For example, your average Acura driver would rather have blatantly fake wood for "free" (standard in the car) than to pay extra for real wood. That's why most Acuras don't even give you the option of real wood from the factory. So when the RL comes along with real wood (the ONLY Acura currently available with real wood), people don't appreciate it. Lexus drivers, on the other hand, are more than willing to pay extra for real wood. Another example would be leather. Leather is an option on some Lexus cars, but people willingly pay for it. Why? Because it is a good quality of leather. Acura drivers, on the other hand, expect leather to be standard equipment, even if the leather is only one step above "pleather" or "leatherette." When you try to give an Acura driver a better quality of leather, and raise the price accordingly, Acura drivers will resist.
Basically, here's where Acura drivers IN GENERAL differ from drivers of "real" luxury brands: 1) we want as many standard features for the money as possible, 2) we don't (or can't) recognize subtle luxury features such as real wood and plush leather and therefore aren't willing to pay for it. The current Acura customers, many who are cross-shopping with Honda brand cars, are one reason why Acura is going to have a hard time being taken seriously as a "true" luxury brand. If they try to really go upscale with the luxury similar to Lexus, Mercedes, and Cadillac, the customers will resist.
There are plenty of reasons why the RL is more expensive than the TL outside of SH-AWD. It's just that your typical Acura driver can't or won't see the differences. If they did have that level of sophistication or if they were less price sensitive, they might not be driving Acuras at all.
but this goes back to how Acura needs to define themselves. do they want to be a "half-step" between normal and premium brands, or do they want to be a real premium producer.
The concensus seems to be that there is no concensus...they sell a lot of cars based on VALUE, then give us an expensive sedan that doesnt' offer that much value for the MSRP.
As for the RL, I wish they "slashed" the price. They did not in any way slash the price, because that would be a way of admitting that they overpriced it and piss off anyone who paid close to MSRP for one. What they did was "decontent" it and adjust the price based on the "decontenting" done to it. If they just "slashed" the price, that would mean that a fully equipped model whcih MSRP'd at $50k would now be MSRP'd at $45k, or whatever it is, and this woudl be a HUGE slap in the face to them, which they would never allow to happen.
I say it is too late for this generation RL. The best they can do is finish the next generation based on what is NEEDED to compete in the class (V8, rwd/awd, bolder styling, etc.), and kill this one off early. but based on history, this RL will be around for 6-7 more years.
12-29-2006, 01:47 PM
#143
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes
on
519 Posts
I think the RL is still a great value for its price, but that kind of value is different thatn the value in a TL or TSX. The major difference is obviously the actual price of the RL. As a 50k car, the RL does offer a lot. But like what most of us have said already, that 50k can get you a base 5-series or GS, and people consider those cars as "better deals" just because of their brands. So, does that mean Acura should never've bothered with the RL, or, for 50k, they should've put even more into the car? Keep in mind though, the RL didn't share many components with any other Hondas/Acuras until recently, and so it didn't benefit from economy of scale.
12-29-2006, 02:00 PM
#144
'05 Acura RL - CGP/Ebony
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hilton, NY
Age: 75
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kenny5
"The problem is that the traditional Acura customer, like his Honda-buying brethren, is price sensitive."
This is exactly the point I tried to make in my very first post on this thread -- which is -- I believe Acura's customer-base consists primarily of value-minded consumers who like luxury and performance, but are willing to settle for less than what the prestigous nameplates offer, if the price is right. This is NOT a bad thing, but it will not elevate Acura to the same level of recognition as MB, BMW, Audi, Lexus, or even Infiniti. Just now, I looked at Infiniti's website and tried to find out what Infiniti wants its potential customers to compare the M35 with. Not to my surprise, RL is not there, but Audi A6, BMW 530 and Lexus GS are named as "comparables."
[snip]
So, it is going to be a big test and calculated maneuver for Acura, if it wants to be in the same league as its Japanese brethen -- Lexus for luxury, and Infiniti for performance. Right now, Acura is neither, and its attempt in crossing the luxury-performance bridge has not been very successful.
As jhr3uva90 has astutely noted, Acura may lose some of its fans (particulary RSX lovers) if it desires to reinvent itself as a serious player in the arena of prestigous nameplates with bona fide ultra luxury and performance cars, including SUVs.
Do we WANT Acura to go that route? Speak up and be heard, Acura executives may be listening very closely.
This is exactly the point I tried to make in my very first post on this thread -- which is -- I believe Acura's customer-base consists primarily of value-minded consumers who like luxury and performance, but are willing to settle for less than what the prestigous nameplates offer, if the price is right. This is NOT a bad thing, but it will not elevate Acura to the same level of recognition as MB, BMW, Audi, Lexus, or even Infiniti. Just now, I looked at Infiniti's website and tried to find out what Infiniti wants its potential customers to compare the M35 with. Not to my surprise, RL is not there, but Audi A6, BMW 530 and Lexus GS are named as "comparables."
[snip]
So, it is going to be a big test and calculated maneuver for Acura, if it wants to be in the same league as its Japanese brethen -- Lexus for luxury, and Infiniti for performance. Right now, Acura is neither, and its attempt in crossing the luxury-performance bridge has not been very successful.
As jhr3uva90 has astutely noted, Acura may lose some of its fans (particulary RSX lovers) if it desires to reinvent itself as a serious player in the arena of prestigous nameplates with bona fide ultra luxury and performance cars, including SUVs.
Do we WANT Acura to go that route? Speak up and be heard, Acura executives may be listening very closely.
12-29-2006, 02:03 PM
#145
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by mrdeeno
but this goes back to how Acura needs to define themselves. do they want to be a "half-step" between normal and premium brands, or do they want to be a real premium producer.
The concensus seems to be that there is no concensus...they sell a lot of cars based on VALUE, then give us an expensive sedan that doesnt' offer that much value for the MSRP.
As for the RL, I wish they "slashed" the price. They did not in any way slash the price, because that would be a way of admitting that they overpriced it and piss off anyone who paid close to MSRP for one. What they did was "decontent" it and adjust the price based on the "decontenting" done to it. If they just "slashed" the price, that would mean that a fully equipped model whcih MSRP'd at $50k would now be MSRP'd at $45k, or whatever it is, and this woudl be a HUGE slap in the face to them, which they would never allow to happen.
I say it is too late for this generation RL. The best they can do is finish the next generation based on what is NEEDED to compete in the class (V8, rwd/awd, bolder styling, etc.), and kill this one off early. but based on history, this RL will be around for 6-7 more years.
The concensus seems to be that there is no concensus...they sell a lot of cars based on VALUE, then give us an expensive sedan that doesnt' offer that much value for the MSRP.
As for the RL, I wish they "slashed" the price. They did not in any way slash the price, because that would be a way of admitting that they overpriced it and piss off anyone who paid close to MSRP for one. What they did was "decontent" it and adjust the price based on the "decontenting" done to it. If they just "slashed" the price, that would mean that a fully equipped model whcih MSRP'd at $50k would now be MSRP'd at $45k, or whatever it is, and this woudl be a HUGE slap in the face to them, which they would never allow to happen.
I say it is too late for this generation RL. The best they can do is finish the next generation based on what is NEEDED to compete in the class (V8, rwd/awd, bolder styling, etc.), and kill this one off early. but based on history, this RL will be around for 6-7 more years.
As far as value, have you compared the RL to other cars in its price range? Compared to the TL, the RL might not be a great value (although I beg to differ), but compared to the E-Class Mercedes, Lexus GS, etc. the RL is a good deal even at MSRP.
12-29-2006, 02:21 PM
#146
'05 Acura RL - CGP/Ebony
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hilton, NY
Age: 75
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by allykahn
How come Honda/Acura does not "go back to the drawing board" with its cars during a model run? Infinit's G35 sedan for example, has been tinkered with almost every year to make it better or to keep pace with the competition. It appears that Infiniti listens to their customers to some extent.
While reading this great thread, I am wondering why did I buy my Accord EX 5spd coupe rather than the Integra GS and what was I looking for in a car. Honestly, I wanted the most for my dollar. I wanted a dependable, rock solid car that had room and that looked pretty good too. The integra was smaller and also more to insure than the Accord.
Now that I am in the market again, I want the same things as before plus a little extra; more sport, better technology, safety and dependability. The question is how much is this stuff worth to me? Am I willing to pay 50K for a new RL? No! Even though I really like the car, it is not worth 10K+ more than a TL. A new RL FORCES you to look at other brands in the same price range whether you want to or not. If this car was $37K - $40K, it would sell like the TL.
While reading this great thread, I am wondering why did I buy my Accord EX 5spd coupe rather than the Integra GS and what was I looking for in a car. Honestly, I wanted the most for my dollar. I wanted a dependable, rock solid car that had room and that looked pretty good too. The integra was smaller and also more to insure than the Accord.
Now that I am in the market again, I want the same things as before plus a little extra; more sport, better technology, safety and dependability. The question is how much is this stuff worth to me? Am I willing to pay 50K for a new RL? No! Even though I really like the car, it is not worth 10K+ more than a TL. A new RL FORCES you to look at other brands in the same price range whether you want to or not. If this car was $37K - $40K, it would sell like the TL.
12-29-2006, 02:46 PM
#147
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by lflorack
Excellent post! I can put myself in the category of someone who was looking for a luxury deal! I was coming from the TL and wanted to go a bit more upscale. The RL was the ticket. What sold me? In order to get anything close to it, I'd have had to pay as much as $10K more -- just to get the perceived prestige that I wasn't interested in getting that much. (It'd be nice to get both the deal along with prestige though. <grin>.)
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
As far as value, have you compared the RL to other cars in its price range? Compared to the TL, the RL might not be a great value (although I beg to differ), but compared to the E-Class Mercedes, Lexus GS, etc. the RL is a good deal even at MSRP.
This is me, too. I can afford a BMW 530xi or 545i, or a topped out Lexus GS350, but fail to see why I should have to pay more money to get that when Acura is offering the same features for less, and frankly don't need the prestige. I want my money's worth. If Acura even marketed that aspect of its brand, I am sure they'd sell more cars.
Originally Posted by mrdeeno
say it is too late for this generation RL. The best they can do is finish the next generation based on what is NEEDED to compete in the class (V8, rwd/awd, bolder styling, etc.), and kill this one off early. but based on history, this RL will be around for 6-7 more years.
12-29-2006, 03:05 PM
#148
Three Wheelin'
If the Acura folks are reading these posts, then I'd like to say this:
I love my Acura RL and I like my salesperson (Mike Nelson @ Radley Acura), but I don't love the Acura brand. To me the RL is the ONLY Acura currently in production that approaches Lexus quality and luxury. This car is my 4th Acura and after driving this RL for 20 months, I can't go back to any other Acura. I hope to keep this RL for a LONG time, but after that, I don't know if I will get any more Acuras. Why? Because the RL is at a level that other Acuras can't reach. And what makes it so bad is that the dealerships (sales and service) and even some Acura customers don't seem to appreciate the subtleties of true luxury.
If Acura wants to be the Japanese version of Volvo, that's fine. But eventually, some customers will outgrow that and want to go to true luxury brands.
I love my Acura RL and I like my salesperson (Mike Nelson @ Radley Acura), but I don't love the Acura brand. To me the RL is the ONLY Acura currently in production that approaches Lexus quality and luxury. This car is my 4th Acura and after driving this RL for 20 months, I can't go back to any other Acura. I hope to keep this RL for a LONG time, but after that, I don't know if I will get any more Acuras. Why? Because the RL is at a level that other Acuras can't reach. And what makes it so bad is that the dealerships (sales and service) and even some Acura customers don't seem to appreciate the subtleties of true luxury.
If Acura wants to be the Japanese version of Volvo, that's fine. But eventually, some customers will outgrow that and want to go to true luxury brands.
12-29-2006, 03:56 PM
#149
My only car is a Bus
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
Basically, here's where Acura drivers IN GENERAL differ from drivers of "real" luxury brands: 1) we want as many standard features for the money as possible, 2) we don't (or can't) recognize subtle luxury features such as real wood and plush leather and therefore aren't willing to pay for it. The current Acura customers, many who are cross-shopping with Honda brand cars, are one reason why Acura is going to have a hard time being taken seriously as a "true" luxury brand. If they try to really go upscale with the luxury similar to Lexus, Mercedes, and Cadillac, the customers will resist.
I don't know that I necessarily agree. The fact that nearly every Acura dealership is right next to a Honda dealership may have something to do with it. I have tons of customers who ask why there is fake wood in the TL, why the leather is not softer, etc. I didn't mean to suggest that the majority of the customers I have ever met shop us with Hondas but, again, being next to a Honda dealership does make that easier.
You may be drawing the conclusion that the 'Honda/Acura' customer does not see the value in all the great stuff the RL has... I don't think it's that I think it's the overall package. People complain about the rattle traps their TLs have become and they say it is because it's not made in Japan.
My morale is fine... I only have a problem with a stranger trying to claim the upper hand on me.
12-29-2006, 04:11 PM
#150
Burning Brakes
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
If the Acura folks are reading these posts, then I'd like to say this:
I love my Acura RL and I like my salesperson (Mike Nelson @ Radley Acura), but I don't love the Acura brand. To me the RL is the ONLY Acura currently in production that approaches Lexus quality and luxury. This car is my 4th Acura and after driving this RL for 20 months, I can't go back to any other Acura. I hope to keep this RL for a LONG time, but after that, I don't know if I will get any more Acuras. Why? Because the RL is at a level that other Acuras can't reach. And what makes it so bad is that the dealerships (sales and service) and even some Acura customers don't seem to appreciate the subtleties of true luxury.
If Acura wants to be the Japanese version of Volvo, that's fine. But eventually, some customers will outgrow that and want to go to true luxury brands.
I love my Acura RL and I like my salesperson (Mike Nelson @ Radley Acura), but I don't love the Acura brand. To me the RL is the ONLY Acura currently in production that approaches Lexus quality and luxury. This car is my 4th Acura and after driving this RL for 20 months, I can't go back to any other Acura. I hope to keep this RL for a LONG time, but after that, I don't know if I will get any more Acuras. Why? Because the RL is at a level that other Acuras can't reach. And what makes it so bad is that the dealerships (sales and service) and even some Acura customers don't seem to appreciate the subtleties of true luxury.
If Acura wants to be the Japanese version of Volvo, that's fine. But eventually, some customers will outgrow that and want to go to true luxury brands.
Despite the perceived issues with Acura and Honda's underdog status vs. Toyota and Nissan, in the quarter ended September 30th, Honda's automotive sales were up 4% in North America and 6% worldwide by units sold, and 11% in both by net sales (in yen) (Honda does not break out Acura sales in its financials - I'll check the SEC filings when I get back to the office). It seems that Honda is doing pretty well in a time of huge turmoil for the domestic automakers and volatile oil prices.
12-29-2006, 04:14 PM
#151
Burning Brakes
Originally Posted by CL6
I don't know that I necessarily agree. The fact that nearly every Acura dealership is right next to a Honda dealership may have something to do with it. I have tons of customers who ask why there is fake wood in the TL, why the leather is not softer, etc. I didn't mean to suggest that the majority of the customers I have ever met shop us with Hondas but, again, being next to a Honda dealership does make that easier.
You may be drawing the conclusion that the 'Honda/Acura' customer does not see the value in all the great stuff the RL has... I don't think it's that I think it's the overall package. People complain about the rattle traps their TLs have become and they say it is because it's not made in Japan.
My morale is fine... I only have a problem with a stranger trying to claim the upper hand on me.
You may be drawing the conclusion that the 'Honda/Acura' customer does not see the value in all the great stuff the RL has... I don't think it's that I think it's the overall package. People complain about the rattle traps their TLs have become and they say it is because it's not made in Japan.
My morale is fine... I only have a problem with a stranger trying to claim the upper hand on me.
12-29-2006, 04:34 PM
#153
12-29-2006, 04:58 PM
#154
My only car is a Bus
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by dwboston
None of the Acura dealerships in or around Boston are located next to Honda dealers. Maybe it's different in other parts of the country but not here.
12-29-2006, 05:23 PM
#156
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by dwboston
(Honda does not break out Acura sales in its financials - I'll check the SEC filings when I get back to the office). It seems that Honda is doing pretty well in a time of huge turmoil for the domestic automakers and volatile oil prices.
Having a Honda dealership next to an Acura dealership does encourage people to cross shop the brands. However, it isn't just a local problem. I remember reading an article that where an Acura executive said the car most likely to be cross-shopped with the TL is the Honda Accord.
Meanwhile, there are people out there who don't even realize Lexuses are Toyotas.
12-29-2006, 05:45 PM
#157
Burning Brakes
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
Honda might not break out Acura sales in its financials, but it does release how many Acuras they have sold in the US. Check Hondanews.com. Last time I checked sales for the TL and RL were decreasing, despite the new TL Type S and de-contented RL.
Having a Honda dealership next to an Acura dealership does encourage people to cross shop the brands. However, it isn't just a local problem. I remember reading an article that where an Acura executive said the car most likely to be cross-shopped with the TL is the Honda Accord.
Meanwhile, there are people out there who don't even realize Lexuses are Toyotas.
Having a Honda dealership next to an Acura dealership does encourage people to cross shop the brands. However, it isn't just a local problem. I remember reading an article that where an Acura executive said the car most likely to be cross-shopped with the TL is the Honda Accord.
Meanwhile, there are people out there who don't even realize Lexuses are Toyotas.
Most Honda models are experiencing the same thing, except for the Civic and the Fit, which didn't exist last year. Still, Honda North America's sales are up 5% thanks to the Civic (and especially the Civic Hybrid) and Fit. Doesn't bode well from a profit perspective when your lowest margin cars are your sales leaders, although I'm sure margins are higher on the Civic Hybrid than the regular Civic models.
12-29-2006, 06:02 PM
#158
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by CL6
Wow. Here in California they are all next to one another it seems. Maybe the land was cheaper and more available when they were built?
I'll find the requested stats. I compiled them for another thread last month.
12-29-2006, 06:55 PM
#159
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
November stats:
Infiniti M series:
2006-2015, 2005-1982, year over year increase 1.7%
YTD 2006-23,475, YTD 2005-21,448, increase 9.5%
for them
Source: Nissan/Infiniti News Bureau
Acura RL series:
2006-731, 2005-1298, year over year decrease 43.7%
YTD 2006-10,799, YTD-2005 16,294, decrease 33.7% 
for us
Source: Honda News
EDIT: Added Lexus GS300/430/450h series
2006-1860, 2005-2619, year over year decrease 29%
YTD 2006-25,102, YTD-2005-30,026, decrease 16.4% for them too
Source: The Auto Channel
Infiniti M series:
2006-2015, 2005-1982, year over year increase 1.7%
YTD 2006-23,475, YTD 2005-21,448, increase 9.5%
for themSource: Nissan/Infiniti News Bureau
Acura RL series:
2006-731, 2005-1298, year over year decrease 43.7%
YTD 2006-10,799, YTD-2005 16,294, decrease 33.7%
for usSource: Honda News
EDIT: Added Lexus GS300/430/450h series
2006-1860, 2005-2619, year over year decrease 29%
YTD 2006-25,102, YTD-2005-30,026, decrease 16.4%
for them tooSource: The Auto Channel
12-29-2006, 07:01 PM
#160
Three Wheelin'
Yes, but let's look at RL sales trends over several years. 2005 was unusually strong year for the RL, mainly because of excitement over the new model. After all, we had not seen a new RL in 8 years. Now, sales have decreased compared to last year, but they are pretty much in line with years before 2005. So bascially, the RL is selling about the same as it always has (2005 excluded), plus the new RL uses the Global Midsize Platform, which makes them cheaper to make. So basically, Honda/Acura are probably doing about the same with the new RL profit wise, but the dealerships are getting screwed because they have to reduce the price to sell the car.