I agree with Deeno. One size fits all strategy offers only one advantage to the buyer. It helps keep down costs. In the lux segment a couple thousand extra added to manufacturing costs is not important. I want choice and I want the car the way I want it. It's a good strategy when selling Civics but bad when selling RL's

 

1) It's "Infiniti", not "Infinity".

2) Most of Infiniti's lineup is no more "in your face" than most other competitors in this segment. The exceptions would be the FX and G37, but the G35 and M35/45 are no more "in your face" than the 3-series, C-class, TL/TL-S, 5-series, or E-class.

3) Infiniti may not have the status or image as MB or BMW (which had much much more time to work on their image), but neither does Lexus. But the point is that Infiniti is moving in the right direction while Acura doesn't seem to be moving anywhere.

4) Slow sales is fine up until you are ready to trade in or sell, but also makes for unattractive lease rates which hurt the model even more.

 

Sorry - Infinitly!
M35/45 just doesn't do it for me, good cars but the design lacks my enthusiasm.
A LS460h will push past the MB and the BMW cache.
Don't trade it in, wear it out and don't lease it costs more than buying. Look on the bright side - slow sales give you cheap exclusivity.

 

"Cheap exclusivity" is one of the few "silver linings" in the cloud of poor sales, but let's face reality for a minute...there are far more disadvantages to slow sales than there are advantages. When was the last time you saw anyone root for a non-niche volume car to sell fewer units? The CL-S was a decent car with slow sales, but the exclusivity wore thin when I started shopping for a different car...although in my particular situation I got lucky (long story).

The RL may be a fine car and low sales may be fine with you personally, but I'm sure the sales are a disappointment to most other RL drivers, and most people would trade "cheap exclusivity" for better sales numbers any day because very few plan to drive it into the ground.

On a personal note concerning exclusivity, even with Infiniti's better M35/45 sales than the RL sales, I enjoy better exclusivity with the Infiniti than I would with the RL...I see about 4-5 RL's per day compared to 0-1 M's per day (and I attribute this to living in an area with moderate snow every winter).

 

You will even see more RLs on the road and zero M in the winter time (snow day).

 

Slow sales make resale more of a challenge for those who chose to purchase outright.

I'm just now beginning to wonder if the existence of the RL isn't as much a pain to Acura dealers as the slow sales might be a disappointment to RL owners.

The RL competes with Lexus, Infinii, M-B, and BMW -- marques that strive for a unique and upscale dealership experience that Acura does not really offer. Those customers who chose the RL and cross-shopped the others have a reasonable expectation to be treated appropriately and not jerked around come service time, say.

Lexus set the tone early on, and my observation is that Infiniti also tries to go the extra mile (my dad has had 2 Infinitis). There is enough evidence on the board of less-than-stellar service from Acura.

Imagine the discomfort Acura dealers might feel if the RL sold really well. There would be even more high-expectation (high maintenance?) customers of the sort they aren't geared towards.

So, some part of the blame for poor RL sales has to be laid at the dealers (in addition to the sales and marketing folks). They probably see it as an albatross. The car deserves better.

Rob144

 

actually, I've driven my M45 sport in 4+ inches of snow...with snow tires of course. Handles the snow with snow tires better than my FWD CL-S w/ all-seasons ever did, but the dynamics were much different too.

 

I think it's a vicious circle when it comes to dealers and Acura...

The dealers are probably happy about the TL/MDX/TSX, so don't want to make too much noise, but they are also disappointed about the RL and even the RDX to an extent. But since I bought my CL-S way back in 2000, my dealer told me that they and other dealerships were pushing for a RWD V8 RL to compete with Lexus (Infiniti wasn't even considered back then), and they were sure the next RL would have been either a RWD w/ V8, or AWD with V6 and hybrid drivetrain driving the front wheels to really blow away the competition.

Instead they ended up with what we have today. So I'm sure they're asking themselves why they should "up" their service with their own money when Acura isn't listening to them. Sure, Acura "compromised" with a decontented RL, but that was after-the fact. It takes both Acura and the dealers to "step up" to the competition, and dealers aren't going to stick their necks out if Acura isn't going to stick its neck out.

 

You can already get an A spec RL. It gives you the body kit 18x8 wheels with a +55 offset and swaps the springs out to lower the car 10mm.

It hasn't helped.

Mark my works, for better or for worse, the next RL will be a larger vehicle, closer to a 7 series.

I know where you RL owners are coming from, there really isn't anything wrong with your cars. The problem is that most of America isn't smart enough to buy them.

 

That's because Acura has no choice in the RL's design or features except for deciding what features to omit in order to hit a certain price point. And Acura can't kill the RL unless HMC in Japan says they can.

 

I understand your point, but I disagree with that mentality. Poor business model.

The dealer where I bought my RL proves my point. In my opinion I would argue that they would rival a Lexus dealer with respect to sales experience and especially service experience.

As a result, they are one of the highest volume Acura dealers in the region, and have no problems moving RLs.

When I asked a salesmen about the poor RL sales, his response was that the problem is most people (including sales people) can't immediately differentiate why the RL is a better car than the TL. As a result, they can't justify the price.

He went on to say that he does appreciate the differences in the RL and makes sure potential customers understand the product.

What a concept huh? A saleperson who actually understands his product and actually "sells" it as opposed to just writing up a sales contract.

I truly miss that dealer having moved to southeast Michigan. Interestingly though, I still see two or three RLs a day even here. Not as much as the 5 or 6 I saw back in the Chicao 'burbs, but still higher than I expected considering I'm in the backyard of the Big 3.

 

It is interesting the comments regarding the numbers of RL's seen in different areas. We have a lot of cars here in Southern California but I rarely see an RL.
The TL and the RL are the same to a salesperson because the features of both cars are similar and it's the features that the salesperson is told to push. You could put the RL features in a Pinto and the salesperson would consider them the same car.
I think that the comments regarding the dealerships is correct - I don't think that the Acura environment is up to the level of its competitors. But then again, my idea of a dealership or service department is one that I never have to visit.

 

No dealer wants any car sitting on the lot for an extended period of time. The dealer has to pay interest every month on the cars that are still on the lot. Having a few RLs on the lot for a long time is a killer.

 

and hence the vicious circle...

If Acura has no choice in the RL design, then the dealers have no influence on Acura, so again, why should they stick their necks out if Acura doesn't stick its neck out?

Dealers, as inept at car knowledge as they sometimes are, are the EYES and EARS for Acura/Honda...they see who the customers are, they see what customers want, and they see when a customer buys from a different brand and why. And Honda/Acura has a relatively poor track record at hitting their target demographics after doing all their "studies" (CL/CL-S was targeted at empty-nesters, Element was targeted at college-age people, RL was targeted at 5/E/GS/A6/M buyers).

Is it a "pride" thing? I know Nissan couldn't be turned around except until a "foreigner" was brought over to break the traditions that undermined the company. Honda isn't at that point yet where they're bleeding money, but it still looks like they are heading that way with regard to Acura (no RWD models, no V8, no coupes, no convertibles, etc.).

 

I guess in sunny California, a dealer can't stress the need for AWD as much as he can up in the northeast U.S.

Most cars I see around here are FWD or AWD. I would say I see more AWD versions of 3/5-series, GS, E-classes, and G35/M35x than I do the RWD versions. The RL at least has a chance up here...which is why I still think they should have offered a RWD version and an AWD version, so people can have choices for their specific needs.

 

I agree with Mr. Deeno that the Acura dealers are the eyes and ears. However, those eyes and ears seem to be limited in many cases. They can't see or hear that they need to provide luxury car service and luxury car knowledge in order build the brand. They need to be more like Bang & Olufsen or Roche Bobois or even an Apple Computer store. Without that, even a true Acura luxury car (full size, V8, RWD) will fail.

 

But salespeople don't listen, they talk and even after a company has sold a car you get a Satisfaction Survey that does not ask the correct questions for improvment input. They should conduct a phone survey after 3 mos and have an expert dissemminate the conversation into a list of desires and enhancements. Of course, they could monitor this forum if they so desired.

 

Very few people will make the effort to sell the RL when the TL appears on par with the RL (at least superficially). A salesman is looking to make a sale, and rarely does that mean matching the appropriate car to the consumer. Further, in the effort to educate a consumer to a better fit product they can lose the close on an easier sale. How many times have you experienced or witnessed a buyer looking to buy, say a high end luxury sedan, and when the deal cannot be made the salesman will counter with something like: 'Can I interest you in a used minivan we have on the lot?' or 'What else can I get you into today'. It is not about the right car for the right person...it is about making a sale, ANY sale.

With the TL offering so much, very few salespeople or consumers will make an effort to appreciate the RL.

As said before, this car deserve better. But I for one (of the few) love it just as it is. I am glad I did not miss out on this stellar vehicle.

 

If Acura offered a successful luxury car, then the dealers would respond by offering luxury car service and knowledge.

But the way things are going, Acura is only offering successful near-luxury cars, and therefore dealers are responding by only offering "near luxury" car service and "near luxury" car knowledge.

One hand washes the other...but as long as each hand refuses to step up, both will remain dirty.

 

I think the sales commission should be proportional to the cost of the car. That would at least give sales people an incentive to sell a more expensive car. Is the commission for an RL proportionately bigger than the commission for a TL?

 

I wish CL6 were still here to answer that for us. A PM might be in order. I'm curious about that as well.

 

I believe he spoke to this previously. The commision is dependent on the dealership owner / management and not dictated by the manufacturer.

Of course incentives, promotions and dealer overhead all come into play, but I believe CL6 said the commisions were not usually scalable, they were flat across the model line. But should you sell a higher priced model, the commission is more. Unless there are manufactuer or dealer incentives to sales reps on top of that push a model and unlad inventory. And even if there are manufacturer incentives, the dealer may or may not choose to offr all or any part of that to the rep.

Bottom line, most sales reps tend to close in on the likely sale without risking losing the bird in hand while gambling to upsell to an ambiguous product.

 

Sales commission is a percentage of the dealerships profit on the car NOT the sales price. That's why the salesman gets screwed on these skinny deals. He makes no money. To make it worse, many dealers, hold back a certain dollar amount on the really popular cars that pretty much "sell themselves". There's a word for it but I can't remember. I'd need to ask my brother. On the flip side, when someone walks in and pays sticker for a car, the salesman is doing a dance in the back room that night.

Bottom line; being a car salesman is a tough job. We give them $hit all the time but their behavior is usually a reflection of the environment they are in. Think about that next time you buy a car.

 

I have a good buddy that works at an acura dealership. Usually its anywhere from 150 dollars on a used car to about 300 per new car. Sell 6 cars in a month, you have 1.8 K before taxes as salary.

 

That is $21,600 a year. That is not good.
In my book, sale person at Acura should sell at least 12 cars a month to survive.

 

It sounds like there isn't adequate incentive for an Acura salesperson to even learn about the RL, let alone sell it.

 

With the lack of advertisement of the RL, and those numbers (roughly translating into sales rep motivation), it is a triumph to sell 300 units a month!

Most consumers are likely to find the Holy Grail before the RL gets on the radar!

 

Sales commission plans vary by dealer, but they generally pay on a percentage of gross, with gross being the difference between invoice and selling price. 20% is a common number. Slim deals are called minis and they are $100 or $150. That's the lowest it goes. So an invoice deal like the RL yields a mini. Sales people also make money on CSI (customer satisfaction index) and get SPIFS for monthly volume targets and sometimes bonuses on particular cars they want to move.

The CSI is very important to them. Their bonus starts at 100% and they lose money from there with surveys that score less than 100. That's why they always try to push you towards a perfect score. Ever since I found out what happens with their pay, I make it a point to score 100, unless they really screw up. I will find another way to make my point.

Sales guys only make commission on front end gross based on the purchase price of the car. Back end gross from extended warranties, prepaid maintenance plans, glass and dent insurance, pro packs and marking up finance rates from banks go to the F&I manager. Ever wonder why they push those so hard?

The dealer makes money on front end gross, back end gross, CSI bonus money and volume bonus money. Most dealers make slim margins on new cars and make it up on service and used cars. New cars bring in service vehicles as well as good supply of used cars. They like to average $3K gross on a used car, way more than new.

My old MDX I just sold to Carmax was reconditioned and listed for 5.5K more than they paid me. They gave me $16.5 and sold it for $22. The fixed the dings, new tires, etc, but good margin, huh! It sold in 3 days. I was watching it.

I have never sold cars nor owned a dealership, but learned all of this while shopping. I would never want to be a car salesperson.

 

That's pretty good summary. That's how I I understand it to work. The only extra thing my brothers dealership did was also holdback some money (above the norm) when there was a hot car selling. It sucks, but the dealer can do what he wants to his salesmen. If they don't like it then go somewhere else and sell cars that are a dog. I suspect the Buick salesmen are not getting full pop on the Enclave right now.

 

From 1985 - 1991, Cressida sales always met Toyota's expectations. I think it was 1992 (or maybe 1993) when the Cressida turned into the Avalon as Toyota tried to further distance the Cressida from the Camry.

I owned a 1985 Cressida and it was one heck of a car. I got my 168,000 miles worth out of it!.

 

I stand corrected. Production did end in 1992 as you mentioned. (It rung a bell in my head) I had a decision to make that year, buy a 1992 Toyota Cressida or a 1993 5-spd SHO. Bought the SHO. (Now I wish I bought the Cressida)

I was thinking 89 because my parents bought one in 1989 for something like $18,800 in Oct. 89, when MSRP was around $24-$25K. Some outrageous discount as it was model year end and the dealer had three in stock!

That car was solid as a rock, no rattles at all. That motor (same as the Supra but just slightly detuned) was smooth and had good power! Parents sold it in 2000 or 2001.

However, I think they went to the Avalon and dropped the Cressida as a way to cut costs, move production here to the US, and attempt to go upscale, even though they were (and probably still are) using an elongated Camry unibody for the Avalon...

The Cressida was the last Toyota badged rwd sedan. What a shame.

 

Selling an RL was a pain in the ass. $150, a ton of work, and that's about it. Some dealers might pay more for a 'mini' but, really, it doesn't happen.

Things at Acura now suck and the sales people are demoralized and Acura isn't doing squat to help them.

 

Thanks for your answer, CL6.

That's really too bad. I guess dealer/salesperson morale is one more than that Acura corporate needs to take care of in an attempt to increase sales.

 

Acura used to offer a lot of Spins on their cars. You sell a car, go on the web and get money directly from Acura. That was awesome and as the comissions went down the Spins helped. Acura rarely offers those anymore. Actually for 2007 there may have only been one Spin the whole time whereas in 2005 and 2006 they were constant.

That's an easy way to motivate sales people. I made at least 4k off of them one year.

Good sales people will just jump ship, that's all...

 

That is sad to hear.

 

Number of Cars sold to earn a living?

Acura new vehicle sales per franchise were 62 in August 2007 and 54 in July 2007. Reference: Automotive News Sep 17, 2007 page 26. This would mean 2 new vehicle sales a day.

Calculations to show this:
August 2007 Acura total new sales was 16436. http://www.hondanews.com/search/rele...august&s=acura

Number of U.S.A. dealers is about 258. http://www.globalautoindex.com/maker.plt?no=83

16436/258= 63.7 new sales per month per dealer

If there were 20 salesmen in a dealer, average would be 3.1 new vehicles a month. 62/20=3.1. This does not count used.

Used cars can sell in greater volume than new. Used cars can have greater profit than new and maybe more money for the salesman. To reach 12 cars sold /mo, this hypothetical salesman would sell 3 new and 9 used vehicles a month and make $43,200 per year if he received $300 per sale. 12 cars*12 months*$300 per sale= $43200

However, if 20 salesmen sell 9 used cars a month at $2800 profit (far less that the $5500 difference in trade in price and selling price in this thread for one vehicle) the total is 20 salesmen*9 used cars per month*12 months*$2800 profit per car= $6,048,000 on used cars per year. Not counting new car sales, service, parts. Of course, advertising costs as do employees, rent and utilities.

The owner makes huge bucks when sales are good. The dealership owner makes millions and gets to be a good buddy with the city politicians by providing lots of sales tax. Meanwhile, the peon salesman is tempted to try any method fair or foul to get his $300 per new car. The finance man tries to twist dollars from the customer. The temptation of dollars can make anyone a bit inaccurate with words when selling that "profit protection package". The customer wonders why the salesman was misleading and wonders why his loan is longer and has a higher monthly payment than he expected. And what are those things he did not ask for are on the car. What a business.


RL facts:
As of Sep 1, 2007, inventory of RL was 1600 units. Days supply as of Sept 1 was 83.
60 is considered normal. Source: Automotive News Sep 17, 2007 page 26.

 

Customers lie as much, if not more, than sales people do.

The price is on the window. Too bad that's not what things sell for. It would remove a lot of issues on both sides.