whoever argues that acura should continue to sell the RL hoping it would bring people in to buy the TL, RDX, TSX, MDX, etc...is pure crap! the automotive industry isn't like your local grocery store. if a car sits too long on the lot, the dealer is losing money daily and is occupying space that a better selling model needs. if a car doesn't sell well, most dealers will not want to have the burden of letting it sit on their lot. what this means is that Acura will be building RLs with no dealers wanting them. it's a lose lose situation. quick fix....scrap the RL! or make it better! obviously Acura doesn't want either of them to happen! as of now, if i was shopping for a new car, Acura is not even on my list. the brand have nothing that interest me at all, esp. with its styling issues. the only model that i might consider is the MDX bec. of it's 3rd row seating.

 

For July 2010, the A6/S6 sold 620 to the RL 172, so that ratio is about 3.5

Neither one is selling that well compared to the E or 5

 

172 a month, considering there are about 250 acura dealers across the country. that means each dealer is selling ~0.68 RL a month. OUCH!!!

 

Not sure if the A6 is a good comparison but I understand what you are saying. The RL was never a good seller and it's only worse now that it's tired.

The main problem I see with the A6 comparison (aside from it not being a sedan) is that it doesn't sit at top of the lineup. Keep in mind, the top car in a brands lineup ALWAYS sells less than it could. As a manufacturer you accept that. The LS460, 750, A8, etc. are all "poor" sellers relative to the cars below it. You could say, well that's because it's more expensive and less can afford it. That's partially true, but it's mainly the image thing again. The brand equity runs "thin" near the top for any brand. For example, Toyota sells very few 35k+ Avalon Ltd's but they sell significantly more ES350's at the same price eventhough its basically the same car and with LESS luxury features. But those couple thousand Avalon's sold helps define the brand and it inevitably helps with the sale of some of those 30 thousand Camry's.

That behavior goes beyond cars. People would rather buy a small house in a more prestigious neighborhood than a bigger house in a more common neighborhood even if they both offered the same benefits in every other category.

Keep that in mind too when you beat up on the RL sales figures.

 

But acura is not burdening their dealers with too many RL's. In fact, the few guys on here that sell Acura's say the main complaint is that Acura doesn't send them enough. They just don't have enough choice on the lot for colors, etc. to satisfy customers. So, with all respect, your argument is probably the one that is "pure crap"

 

There's one rare exception to this, the Lexus LS outsells the GS.

 

^^ and don't forget the SC. I think they sold 30! last month. There's some real duds in the Lexus linup. The LX is another one as pointed out by SSFTSX. For some reason, you just don't hear the same outcry. Maybe you do if you are on ClubLexus.com or others. Since this site is largely populated by peopile that "like" Honda/Acura, I suppose they are harder on them. Tough love

 

my argument is standard in the automotive business. if it doesn't sell, dealers lose money, time, and space. if you don't understand that, you're not worth arguing with.

well, considering Acura only sells ~172 RLs a month, why would Acura want to send dealers any more than what they already have? supply and demand is still the rule of thumb.

 

You're changing your assertion now. You were originally sayng that the RL is a burden on the dealers and for that reason they should kill it. You said:

I disagreed saying that Acura is not making or sending the dealers more than they can sell and sited a few Acura salesmen on here who mentioned that. Then you responded with a different statement saying the manufacturer shouldn't send the dealer more than they can sell. I agree. Who wouldn't. So what's your point?

 

if you re-read what i typed, the main message is that if it doesn't sell, dealers would not want to be burdened with too many RLs on the lot because they're losing money each day; hence, Acura is not sending them any more than what the dealers can sell. you said a few salesmen here said Acura isn't sending them enough RLs to satisfy customers. so what's your point? are there more customers who's interested in buying the RL than what acura is willing to sell?

if Acura is still making money from selling only 172 units a month, i see no reason to drop the RL; however, i highly doubt that is the situation.

 

OK. No you read something into my comment that wasn't there. I was just responding to your suggestiioin that dealers are being burdened with too many RL's, and for that reason, it should be killed. Again, you said:

I was pointing out that, in fact, there is very little inventory being sent to dealers, and that assertion is generally wrong. If anything, its to LITTLE inventory, not to much. "Colin" can speak to that first hand. He's popped into this thread a few times recently. Ask him directly if you're interested.

 

Dealears not burdended by RL infact they are putting used RL inside the Showroom. but all the new cars are Outside in sunlight.
RL has the highest resale value of any luxury car.



Infact when New Acura dealer was opened just recently. RL was inside. Most of the time New RL is parked inside the dealership on almost all Acura dealers.

 

Wow. So Acura has a showroom floor?

Too bad nothing worth anything is on it, save the TSX and MDX.

 

I would NOT call 170 vehicles selling.

I dont think they need to balance out the line up with 3 sedans and 3 suvs, especially with a car that really has no target market to compete with, doesnt sell worth a damn and is undesirable. I see no reason in keeping the car going when they could just pull it and promise people a new and better one is a certain timeline and put the money spent in manufacturing towards the design of other products.

 

Our dealer has had the same 2 RLs sitting on their lot since x-mas. I dont think they woudl want another RL if acura gave it to them.

 

you're reading too hard into what i wrote. re-read it again:

"if a car sits too long on the lot, the dealer is losing money daily and is occupying space that a better selling model needs. if a car doesn't sell well, most dealers will not want to have the burden of letting it sit on their lot."

did i say that dealer ARE being burdened already? i said "IF" and "will not"....then, you commented about acura is not sending enough cars to dealers. by now you should've found out why.

 

thank you....

 

I think the A6 is an excellent comparison. Similar size, price, mission, etc. Even has an emphasis on AWD.

I don't follow. The reason the RL is selling less is because it's a flagship? No, I think not. You can't compare it to the flagships you listed because those have the cash issue going on. Those cars start at 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s. The RL has every advantage as a flagship by comparison.

Why isn't the M having trouble selling? The S80? The Taurus? 300/Charger (going back to that Avalon class)? Lacrosse? Maxima?

It's all about EXECUTION, not brand image.
I did, and I've come to the conclusion one has to make too many excuses for the RL's "issues". Other brands do just fine with cars in this class as their flagship.

 

Is that your main concern? Are you suggesting this RL is holding them up from building a coupe, or a convertible, or a new NSX, or going global with the brand, or a v8, or RWD, or even the next RL? What do you think would happen differently next year if they stopped selling this RL? Do you think something new is going to appear? If any one of those things would happen faster by stopping sale of this RL then I would agree it would best for the brand if they stopped the RL.

But I don't think that's true. I don't think the RL is a road block in any way. It's just a tired model reaching the end of its cycle and it will be replaced eventually like every other car.

• The manufacturing plants aren't bogged down with production on the RL. I think they have one shared line they run a couple months a year to make all the RL's they need to meet demand.
• The design engineers aren't sitting there distracted with the RL as the MMC is done.
• The financial coffers are not being drained and putting the company in financial distress as they probably are breaking even at this point or losing a little money.

Bottom line; this RL is a pimple on an elephants ass to Honda. Really. It's a small drain on their entire time and money. It is in NO ONES way forward. Acura is moving slow because of other reasons. The RL is a symptom of the problem not the problem itself.

 

No, thats not my concern nor have i ever hinted at it. Nor would i EVER suggest that it would help sales of other vehicles in the lineup or get another car out sooner. I never said it was draining the company or putting them in distress. BUT pulling it now It would free up time to start retooling, save money that could be used for future and present development and From a logical financial standpoint why keep something around that isnt selling well when it could very well ADD more to their bottom line?
So in your opinion they should keep it around even though it isnt selling anywhere near normal levels? and just continue on business as usual? Im sure i know your answer and we will just agree to disagree.

 

First off. I agree there are other factors. Not saying this is the only influence. But, yes I'm saying this is a real influence in buying. Basically the top priced car in the lineup has sales pressure against it and will suffer with all things being equal. You mentioned the Maxima. Maxima sells a third of what the Altima sells. Avalon is another good example. But you are right, the rule doesn't always apply by any means and I'm not saying this is the reason the RL is a failure. I was just saying it is a negative for the car.

Regarding the M: It just came out and is being advertised heavily. Remember how the last Mwas selling. Give this M some time. I think it will be a sales diappointment.

 

Fair enough. Probably no right answer and certainly no way to prove it. Why continue trying to force our points further.

 

The Maxima may sell one third but it's still moving its own respectable numbers, some of the best in the segment in fact.

If the RL sold 1/3 of the TL it would be selling about 10 TIMES AS MUCH as it is now.

Either way you slice it one has to make excuses, as I said.

And the RL was new once too like the M. If Acura didn't advertise it enough/right then that's their own doing.

 

I made this post yesterday in the RL forum for someone who asked:

2G RL sales for pre-MMC RL

October 2004 1310--probably includes some 1G RLs, number not known to us
Nov 1941
Dec 1967
Total for late 2004.....5218

2005 17572 (up 101.4%)
2006 11501 (down 34.3%)
2007 6262 (down 45.7%)
2008 4038 (to October, change to new grille, down 23.9%)
------------
Total: 44,591 [give or take a few 2004 (1st gen) RLs sold in late 2004 at the same time the 2005 RL (2nd gen) was being offered]

The RL sold like gangbusters initially, then sales nosedived. It's simply time for a new model. Acura simply cannot afford to let a top-level model like the RL languish for nine years like it did the 1G RL.

 

"mycar", I hope you don't think I'm just making excuses for the RL because I own one. I'm no big fan of this RL. I think it's weak as a competitor in this segment I don't even know who these 200 people are that are buying it at this point. I just think it would be a bad business decision to stop selling it if they plan to replace it in a couple years. But if some of you believe otherwise then fine. I gave my reasons for my position.

 

Agree, they need to be able to turn around with a new model faster. especially when one takes such a hit in sales.

 

I'd like to boast of my intellect and judgment by saying I called this!

My post from some time ago:

"Could be wrong, but at the least it must've lost a lot of steam after at least 2005-2006/7."

Genius, this man.

 

Didn't say you were....I tend to speak my mind so if I don't say then chances are I don't think it.

In fact, I disagree with you. I don't think there's a lot of competitors that are better than the RL if you're shopping V-6, or at least I think it's better than a lot of models.

 

Won't be a disappointment as much as the RL is

 

You originally wrote

"Problem is I don't think the RL ever sold all that well. Could be wrong, but at the least it must've lost a lot of steam after at least 2005-2006/7. Others should still sell well through their entire life, like the 5-Series or E-Class."

 

Not 5 series numbers by still almost 1.5K 2G RL's a month in 2005 down by almost 90% in 2010.

 

I usually speak my mind too and therefore i must say: Wow, now you're going to say the rl is a good competitor? Do you really think that now or are you just saying that because i acknowledge what is obvious and said the RL is weak in it's segment. Do you just like to disagree with people? What a fool I think I am now. You're not debating in good faith.

Go ahead now and tell me how I'm wrong, and you're a "genius"

 

I could be wrong but I'd bet a year's salary that any Acura dealership in the country would take a free new RL if one was offered to them

 

You're probably right but I personally don't believe the car is going to be a good seller for Infiniti. There's something about it that's off when you stand in front of it. It photographs better than in person. Plus I think it's just too smallish for the price point and competitors it has. You can tell it Was not designed for the USA and is just a rebadged japan model like the RL. That just doesnt seem to work as a flagship USA sedan. I'm thinking when the advertising ends the sales will drop fast like the last gen M. Infiniti, like Acura need to bite the bullet and build a full size sedan for the US market if they want to be taken seriously.

To me the G is still the only worthy model in that lineup with it's variants. To me they nailed it well in this gen. I'm seriously considering a g convertible as my next car

 

Take the Audi A5/S5 convertible... or the BMW 3 series cabrio...
They are both amazing cars and better looking cabrio.

 

Relative to whom? Even with the last gen it was beating the GS by the second or third MY and usually in third behind the E class and 5 series in the segment. Lexus better come up with something good for the new GS other wise this will repeat.
Even on its best day after it came out the RL barely outsold the M and GS - and then dropped like a rock in sales. That's what Honda needs to aim for - something that can outsell the M and GS, consistently.

Biker, who is impressed by the amount of PWin going on in the RL thread.

 

Honda is world leader in Flexible manufacturing and it designed and manufactuer its own industrial robots.
changing car on assebly line is merely change of robot arm. so who know this 200 or so RL is making more money than 1000 Infiniti M. as RWD platform and V8 needs its own R&D that needs to be recouped. for the same reason Honda is spreading IMA across the line up.

 

Nearest Audi dealer is on the other side of the city from me. Plus I can't get over that drop jaw grill. I agree the 335i convertible gives a better ride and actually has a better back seat if you need it. Has anyone tried to sit in the G's backseat? Don't try. But the 335 loaded up like I want is low 60's. Not sure I can justify that cost. The G with MORE creature comforts is 10 grand less. If BMW offers some killer lease deal (like they sometimes do) I could see grabbing one over the G

 

True. EVERYONE looks good next to the sales results of the 2G RL. So "relative" to the RL, yes I agree the M was a success. But I remember when it came out and all the buzz about it, kind of like this one. Then it faded fast and it started getting overlooked. It wasn't (and still isn't) a worthy flaghship for Infiniti and doesn't do much to anchor the brand. The G does more of that and it shouldn't be that way

I've been arguing this issue about the RL being canceled a lot. Probably too much in retrospect now. Some people seem to be associating me as a fanboy of the RL. Just for the record on where I stand. I am not a defender of the RL in 2010. I own one but wouldn't buy another one right now given the options out there. I'm just a defender of the idea to keep it going until they can replace it in a couple years.

 

Please enlighten us with what your qualifications are for a "flagship" if the M doesn't qualify. It's expected that a newly introduced model is going to sell well at first and then stabilize. How is that a definition of "disappointing" sales? I guess EVERY model is disappointing since almost every model exhibits the same thing.

There's a big difference between a "flagship" and an "anchor" of a brand. Acura's anchors are the TL and TSX. Infiniti's is the G. Lexus's is the ES. BMW's is the 3-series. Toyota's is the Camry. Flagships are usually not anchors, but the "top" model. Acura's is the RL, Infiniti's is the M, Lexus's is the LS, BMW's is the 7, Toyota's is the Avalon.