Edward'TLS

That's the last thing Honda Motor Co. wants to see. When people lump Honda and Acura together, all these years of marketing effort and marketing $$$$$ to differential the Acura brand has gone down the drain. In contrast, see how people tend to view Toyota and Lexus as different entities.

runnerX

they actually put any effort and marketing $$$ to differential the Acrua brand???? lol

phile

Honda has done a very poor job in terms of marketing Acura as a separate brand.

charliemike

I wonder how many people don't know what an Acura is vs. the # of people that get Honda and Acura confused/think they are the same.

I think people have heard of Acura don't see the brand as equal to Lexus.

phile

I think people just don't know what an Acura is. I can remember back in junior high school I saw a TL for the first time and didn't know what it was. Granted I didn't care for cars at that point, but I could generally tell a Chevy, a Ford, even a Honda. But the Acura badge didn't ring a bell.

Ken1997TL

$43,000 for the top of the line Legend back in 1995...

LuvMyTSX

Agreed. I think most people just don't even know what Acura is. They don't exactly market themselves enough for people to take notice. I think they are starting to do a tiny bit more, though. I've noticed that they are sponsoring just about every NJ Devils home game because the announcers keep saying, "And now for the Acura recap..." However, they still need to do more, such as have more commercials during prime time tv so people are actually aware that they exist.

LuvMyTSX

Seriously? Damn

mrdeeno

I have an idea that those dumb-fuks at Acura probably haven't thought of...

Instead of trying to convince people that "Acura" is different than "Honda" with commercials and ads and whatnot, why don't they just freakin' design cars that differentiate themselves enough from Honda. Maybe then people will start to realize that an Acura is different from a Honda.

You can spend millions of $$$ advertising a black duck as a red duck, but at the end of the day people will still see that it's a black duck.

sonnyboyacura

Acura needs to lower the prices of their cars. There's no way in hell I'm paying top dollar for a TL when I could get a BMW, MB or Lexus for comparable money.

mrdeeno

Wha? They are already the lowest priced/best valued "premium" brand. Any lower and the TSX and TL would be competing head to head with an Accord.

If the price you paid for a TL is comparable to a similarly equipped BMW, MB, or Lexus, then your dealer's laughing all the way to the bank.

charliemike

Equates to about $56k in 2006 (last year of inflation data available).

runnerX

a few things I see wrong with Acura:

1. a lot of high school kids drive them, tons of integrates or RSX. if you look around in high school, no many of them drive BMW, MB, or Lexus. it seems Acura has chosen wrong group to target. the brand image was destroyed.

2. All part or at least most parts used in Acura has this "America Honda Group" label. it is on every single glass and every where. Are they really worry buyers would not know Acura is Honda? my friend Lexus has Lexus brand printed on all parts of the car.

3. build quality!!! The paint is ultra thin, they peel quickly. paint on the bumper does not age well, in 3 years they started to discolor and soon the car becomes two tone. heated seat issue (they replaced mine multiple times), tranny issues, etc, etc, etc... it was the most troublesome car I ever owned.

4. Lastly... even hyundai knows luxury cars need RWD. putting AWD in Accord look a like RL won't sell at all.

runnerX

oh one more... cheap brakes that warp all the time, even VW has much much better brakes than Acura.

Moog-Type-S

Bingo! It's not confusion over the brand versus Honda.....the problem is that the cars themselves are similar to Honda in most peoples eyes. Sorta, but not exactly, like Mercury/Ford or Buick/Oldsmobile.

Acura needs to design and build vehicles that are vastly different in terms of exterior design & powerplant options than Honda vehicles.

Also (beats dead horse) if Acura wants to be a REAL lux brand, then they have to have the same products the other lux brands have: V8, multiple transmission options, RWD...etc. (done beating dead horse)

Moog-Type-S

The Legend was a pricey ride back in the day.

mrdeeno

And back in the day, there was no Honda product similar to the Legend. The Legend offered amenities well above the top of the line Accord (not to mention it was built on a separate platform). Same with the Integra. Civics were just econo-cars compared to the much sportier Integras. Then came the NSX, and there was nothing in the Honda lineup, or any other Japanese lineup, that could match that.

Where did they go wrong?

Edward'TLS

Nothing wrong with the Legend. Sales started to fall only after it became the lame 210-225hp RL (no longer called Legend) while the much cheaper 260hp TL-S was coming out.

Edward'TLS

Acura cars are in fact rebadged Honda cars sold in Europe and most Asian countries. Enough said about Acura as being a separate brand. I don't see how any auto company in this world would be successful in running a luxury division when in fact the luxury-division cars are identical to those in its economy division located elsewhere. Car buyers are not stupid these days. Don't skim on new sheet metal. Acura cars MUST NOT look the same as Honda cars, let alone identical.

neuronbob

We've had this discussion in RL for the year and a half I've been hanging out there.

Sigh.

Basically, Acura has failed as a marketing entity. The only people interested in Acura are Hondaphiles like myself. Even Cadillac has done a better job of turning heads, creating buzz, and marketing than Acura. Just look at how we (OK, me) are salivating over the CTS, and it actually matches features with the RL.

If Honda can't or won't designate significant dollars to differentiate Acura, it will continue to lose sales and will wither away. In particular, if Hyundai's Genesis is successful, Acura is in REALLY deep shit as it won't even be able to keep its reputation as a provider of luxury at reasonable prices.

mrdeeno

i meant where did they go wrong after being successful with the legend and integra. The Integra was still around, even though that got long in the tooth. They also put out the 1G TL and CL which wasn't much to write home about, not to mention the Acura trooper, er, I mean SLX or whatever it was called. The TL-S wasn't until much later towards the end of the 2G tl's model run.

Honda should put out cars that people don't talk about, but can trust and rely on for quality and value. Acura should put out cars that enthusiasts and the general public will talk about, but instead they try to put out cars that people don't talk about but can trust and rely on for quality and value, with a bit of sportiness and luxury thrown in.

biker

Lexus has done very well with that model till last year.

Edward'TLS

You are right, but Lexus also has its presence in Europe which is the next largest auto market behind the US. In Europe, even the Acura flagship NSX is still known as the Honda NSX.

But why Lexus can do well, but Acura can't ? Are we back to the V8/RWD formula once again !?

SpicyMikey

All these comments are true about perception problems with Acura. Regardless, I am still stunned how off base the reality is from the perception. Not just Acura's total score. I'm talking about the scores in general and the sub categories. Amazing how powerful advertising can be. MrDeeno was talking about red ducks and black ducks earlier. Well, it seems you CAN convince someone it's red if you say it enough times. Volvo's score proves that. Their cars aren't any safer then anything else in their class. Ugh! It's discouraging sometimes to see how easily misled people can be.

mrdeeno

That is one part of the equation.

No matter how hard Acura tries, it can't fight the obvious. When the general public, not to mention many enthusiasts, consider a V8 and RWD a necessity in the luxury segment, it is going AGAINST most people's expectations when they don't offer a V8 or RWD, even if for the "halo" effect.

Another part of the equation is design (besides V8 and RWD)...design cars that are much less conservative than Hondas in both options, features, exterior design, and dynamics. The RWD would make a world of difference in separating Hondas from Acuras already, but they need to take several more steps with options and features and exterior design. Be conservative with Honda, be bold with Acura. This way most people CAN'T compare their Accord to their TSX or TL. And whoever has been picking rim designs for Acura, FIRE HIM or his entire team!

And then there's marketing. Once the products ARE different, market that fact. People will be more receptive to marketing efforts when the products reflect the marketing. People will be more receptive when you market a BLACK duck as a BLACK duck, rather than try marketing a BLACK duck as a BROWN duck.

Then there's service. I have only been to 3 Acura dealerships and 1 Infiniti dealership, and 2 of the 3 Acura dealerships PALED in comparison to the Infiniti dealership. It felt no more than when I took my Civic in to the Honda dealership back in the day. Maybe it had something to do with one Acura dealership being part of a Honda/Hyundai/Suzuki dealership, and the other part of a Nissan dealership while the Infiniti dealership was part of a Land Rover and Jag dealership.

To me, it just feels like Honda has the passion and desire to raise the Acura brand image (or so they say), but they are very hesitant when it comes to execution and they always end up half-assing it somehow.

SpicyMikey

Service in my Acura dealership is first class MrDeeno. It's a standalone Acura dealership that was built around 6 years ago. it doesn't have a "food bar" servicing free hot food (like my local BMW dealer), but it definitely doesn't feel like a Honda or Toyota dealership

mrdeeno

Back in the day, Volvo was safer than the competition, so they marketed black ducks as black ducks. And so the competition has caught up with the safety, but that does not negate that Volvos are still safe, so they are still marketing black ducks as black ducks. If Volvo's have become death machines, then you can say they are marketing black ducks as red ducks.

SpicyMikey

Very true. I suppose I misspoke. I guess I was trying to say that the perception of 77% that Volvo is the "safest" was stunning. Must be a lot of older folks taking this survey that remember back 20 years ago when Volvo clearly stood out with their priority for safety features. But, like you pointed out, those days are gone. I understand their is always going to be a lag time between changes in reality and changes in perception. But it still seems surprising.

Does this mean if Acura completely turned their products and service around tomorrow, that it would take 10+ years for them to be perceived differently? Maybe so. Look at MB. Overpriced, below average reliability, but yet they still have an image based on the 80's

charliemike

So does Hyundai for that matter.

For the good of Mercedes and to the detriment of Hyundai it seems to take years to overcome deep-seated assumptions about quality.

It is said that it takes 7-9 times the amount of money to attract a new customer as it does to keep one. This is a fairly widely-known axiom in business and yet it's amazing to me how often companies let quality go to shit for years before someone wakes up and tries to change things.

Meanwhile the customers run off to other brands and a struggling company ends up being in even tougher circumstances because now they have to spend a shitload of money to go get back customers that left.

I realize this is oversimplification nearly to the point of being meaningless but I think there's enough truth left in it to be relevant.

Acura is in a situation where I think they have a generally positive reputation from people in terms of quality. Value may or may not be there. About 5 years ago it was. The problem is "gotta have it" ... There really isn't one in the lineup.

mrdeeno

I think the lag time to change perception varies depending on what issue is at hand. For example, reliability is a "required" factor. Same as safety. if a brand is unsafe or unreliable, then turns around the next year, that stigma of not having the "required" safety or reliability still haunts. And it works both ways...if Toyota falls from reliability, they still have the stigma of being reliable and the lag time to change the perception is slower.

But for "want" factors like styling, performance, and other similar issues, I think it will vary depending on how "bold" the automaker chooses to be. These things are objective (one person may want a sedate car, the other may want an involving drive...neither is "required". If Acura wants to take "baby steps" to becoming a more prestigious brand, then no one will notice. But if they decide that next year they will offer all their models in RWD, release a supercar, and an all-out sports coupe, that's going to make some waves and people will notice and change the brand perception quickly (granted they do a lot of other things right also). But it seems like they would rather dip their toes in the water and not make any waves, and hence, not be noticed.

I think the point is that there is much less risk when to "perceive" that a once mediocre car is now a hot-rod than it is to "perceive" a once dangerous death-trap is now tops in safety.

SpicyMikey

Very insightful. I tend to agree with you. Since Honda/Acura truly does have a good reputation in the important category, maybe a turn around wouldn't take that long if/when they wake up and get in the game. For all the bashing we do on HMC, they are, in fact, a VERY good car manufacturer that does an awful lot right.

mrdeeno

As much money as Honda makes, I don't think there is any risk for them to take risks and throw money into more engines (V8) and RWD platforms and bolder designs. That is unless they like the "near luxury" image, which they have in the past expressed that they don't and want to move on up.

Edward'TLS

I agree with your "black ducks" effect. I guess the RL is totally doomed. It has become the "non-selling" duck. The next gen. RL should be given another name to completely shake off the "non-selling" duck effect.

mrdeeno

I actually think they can re-use the RL name.

There's no negative stigma associated with the RL name from the general public's point of view. If it was a death trap (ie "Pinto") or known for being unreliable (any model "Yugo"), then of course it would be stupid to re-use the name. But in this case, the RL is a non-niche car trying to find buyers in a niche segment (V6-only, AWD-only, fully-equipped, no-available trim levels, conservative design sedan market). The only people who know it doesn't sell is us and Honda/Acura and its dealerships. If anything, they can re-use the name just because most people don't have a reaction one way or another when they think of the RL.

For a comparison, take a look at the 1G M45 and 2G M45. The 1G did as bad, if not worse, than how the RL is currently doing, but it had no negative stigma associated with it.

Now trying to resurrect the "Pinto" name...that would be another case.

SpicyMikey

I think they should rename it "Pacer". That name brings back such great memories

SpicyMikey

So Acura is a bit surprised by the results -- according to this article. I am too. If it's accurate, then it's worse then I thought

http://wardsauto.com/ar/acura_consum...?CFID=19260468

Mansa24

I disagree. I believe the general public is probably more concerned with luxury features, style, fit and finish, etc, RWD and a V8 is the last thing on the list. IMO, this is why I, and maybe other people, see more V6/AWD optioned cars verses their V8/RWD versions.

mrdeeno

You must've missed where I mentioned the "halo" effect.

Acura isn't considered an established "luxury" brand for several reasons, and one of those reasons is lack of RWD and V8. You're right most people will buy V6 versions of a luxury vehicle, but that does not help perception of the brand (as the CR study shows, in spite of how well TL's and TSX's sell). Having V8 is one of the unwritten "requirements" to be perceived as a TRUE luxury brand, and is missing from Acura's product line. RWD not so much (as in the case of Audi), but at least a V8 is a prerequisite.

And we're not talking sales here, as Acura has held its own the past several years, we're talking about perception as it concerns the CR study.

SpicyMikey

I tend to agree that Acura's attempt at being perceived as a "lux" brand is hurt by their lack of a V8 full sized sedan and FWD platforms.

Not sure the RWD is a must have for his sector. These are not track cars. I think they have something really great with the SHAWD. It's a fantastic feature to market and sell to the lux sedan crowd. No reason to de-evolve to rwd only vehicles. Just get rid of the FWD platforms! That clearly screams economy car more then the number of cylinders.

scv76_

Survey lists really don't mean squat unless you know the background of the person par-taking in the survey.
Some of these survey responders may not even be able to read or afford anything other than a used KiA while others may turn up their noses at anything less than a $100K automobile.
Do we really care what they think?
Survey results without some demographics about the people who responded to the survey is useless information

I for one hope Acura stays low on these survey lists; that will keep the price reasonable.
How some of these manufactures can charge as much as they do is criminal.
Is it because they really are better, or because they placed high on a list and can now charge what they want?

Performance...what an over-rated topic
There's a large number of people who could give a hoot about performance, styling etc., because they are stuck in city driving conditions. They just want a car that is affordable and won't leave them stranded on the corner.
Buy a V-8 to drive in the city? Not buy a v-6 because it only has 280 h.p.? This is the sort of thinking that drives up prices and wastes resources