RE: Geneva 2012: Range Rover Evoque Convertible

[sider]

Reminds me of a Suzuki X90!

[Mini1275]

No.

It's just wrong on so many levels.

It's actually so wrong I'm contemplating flying over to Geneva and setting fire to it.

[Vantagefan]

sider said:

Reminds me of a Suzuki X90!

How? It barely resembles it in any way!!

Let's face it, talk of convertible off-roading is a bit nonsense; the Evoque was hardly positioned as the next Defender was it?

It would do very well as a product and makes good business sense, it's perfect for the new 'Victoria Beckham designed' image of the Evoque. I hope it goes into production - the more market share the Evoque commands the less the Bentley will get and that means less bleaching of my eyes every time I see that abomination.

[Yachtworker]

I dont think I have ever seen a picture other than this with the roof closed, can anyone help with a decent one?

[CY88]

[Chapppers]

crofty1984 said:

gafsol65 said:

I'm sure it'll sell. I even quite like the looks but a "sports utility vehicle" it is most definitely not!

I agree.

It'd be st offroad, but I'd imagine less than 1% of them will ever get muddy. So why not treat it like it is? It's an expensive hatchback, with lots of styling cues from an existing and popular car which will sell well. People in the market for things like this (I'm basically talking the MINI and Fiat 500 here) also like convertibles, so why not make them one?
It's not a proper old-school Range Rover, but if you want one of those, buy one.

Ha, how wrong you are. It's as good as current Freelander off-road but with better approach angles. Oh well, target market and all that.

ETA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DMefhEv0xo (turn the volume down, the music is s**t)

Edited by Chapppers on Tuesday 6th March 15:27

[Orbin]

i'll say it again ... it looks great.

[0a]

Arun_D said:

Looks positively beautiful when compared to that Bentley SUV thing.

I was wondering why my view on this changed completely - I've just viewed the Bentley thread

[unrepentant]

crofty1984 said:

It'd be st offroad,

Why? The Evoque is at least as capable offroad as a Freelander and they were good enough for the G4 Challenge.

[Yachtworker]

CY88 said:

Thanks, thats a better image and its not the worst looking thing at all. I fully support this vehicle if it sells well and helps LR stay afloat, don't mind who drives it or if any of them get muddy. "It is what it is", as my boss would say.

[Streetrod]

To all those that don’t like it I'm afraid that is why you are not running successful car companies. You may not personally like it but you would have to be a fool not to realise that there would be a huge market for this car. Now if that guarantees jobs for the boys and girls at LR and helps drag UK PLC out of the dumps then bring it on.

[crofty1984]

unrepentant said:

crofty1984 said:

It'd be st offroad,

Why? The Evoque is at least as capable offroad as a Freelander and they were good enough for the G4 Challenge.

Then my apologies. I was under the impression it was a different 2wd platform.
Shame on me.

[Vantagefan]

Streetrod said:

To all those that don’t like it I'm afraid that is why you are not running successful car companies. You may not personally like it but you would have to be a fool not to realise that there would be a huge market for this car. Now if that guarantees jobs for the boys and girls at LR and helps drag UK PLC out of the dumps then bring it on.

Well said sir.

[ReaperCushions]

I actually really like it too.

Seems we are few and far between (on here at least, you'll see them in multiples of 10 in Cheshire Oaks car park next year)

[Trommel]

Streetrod said:

To all those that don’t like it I'm afraid that is why you are not running successful car companies. You may not personally like it but you would have to be a fool not to realise that there would be a huge market for this car

Of course, but the flip side is that the Range Rover "brand" is devalued (further) so it is potentially short-sighted if you're concerned about maintaining the cachet which has allowed you to do it to begin with.

When you start chopping out products at half their existing price with the same label on it is inevitable.

[CY88]

Trommel said:

Streetrod said:

To all those that don’t like it I'm afraid that is why you are not running successful car companies. You may not personally like it but you would have to be a fool not to realise that there would be a huge market for this car

Of course, but the flip side is that the Range Rover "brand" is devalued (further) so it is potentially short-sighted if you're concerned about maintaining the cachet which has allowed you to do it to begin with.

When you start chopping out products at half their existing price with the same label on it is inevitable.

Why is the brand devalued? Global sales success and countless prizes across the board for most if not all of Land Rovers products would suggest otherwise?

[Trommel]

CY88 said:

Why is the brand devalued? Global sales success and countless prizes across the board for most if not all of Land Rovers products would suggest otherwise?

Ever heard of Pierre Cardin?

[unrepentant]

Trommel said:

Of course, but the flip side is that the Range Rover "brand" is devalued (further) so it is potentially short-sighted if you're concerned about maintaining the cachet which has allowed you to do it to begin with.

When you start chopping out products at half their existing price with the same label on it is inevitable.

Absolute bilge. Sorry but you don't know what you're talking about.

[Bash Brannigan]

unrepentant said:

Trommel said:

Of course, but the flip side is that the Range Rover "brand" is devalued (further) so it is potentially short-sighted if you're concerned about maintaining the cachet which has allowed you to do it to begin with.

When you start chopping out products at half their existing price with the same label on it is inevitable.

Absolute bilge. Sorry but you don't know what you're talking about.

How is this 'bilge'? It's a cyclical trend in the fashion industry, just look at Burberry and Tommy Hilfiger. It would also fit the standard private equity style 5 year acquisition to disposal time as TATA took over JLR in 2008. Hopefully it won't happen and jobs will be kept in the UK, but it cannot be denied that a model like this could damage the perception of the brand.

[Trommel]

unrepentant said:

Absolute bilge. Sorry but you don't know what you're talking about.

Strange that someone making a living from flogging them would think that.

You cannot maintain the value of a prestige brand if you sell larger numbers of cheaper products with the same label - it's a trade-off.

Why do you think diffusion brands exist?