RE: Audi 'R4' Gets The Chop?
Discussion
EDLT said:
I don't see how Porsche losing sales is a bad thing, as long as someone in the group gets the money. If someone wants a posh convertible, but doesn't like the Porsche they could have the Audi, now they will buy a Mercedes or BMW instead.
Some people would buy one but not the other, some people would buy either. So increasing the choice would increase the market, but wouldn't leave the existing product unaffected. Some Porsche buyers who'd prefer an Audi would switch. So yes, the group still gets the cash, but they've had to develop an extra car, but would have got the cash anyway for a car they've already built. Not every sale would be conquested from another manufacturer/group - some would be cannibalised from their own existing parc.So develop one car and achieve x sales - might be a good business case.
Or develop two cars and achieve 1.5x sales - might not be a good business case.
ETA - especially if the two dealer networks are having to discount against one-another to win sales. That's a proper mess, and the dealers would be very unhappy to be put in that position.
Peter and Paul robbing each other, but giving the proceeds to the customer!
Edited by BarnatosGhost on Monday 9th May 15:05
mat205125 said:
Where did it say about "marginal gains"? Given that the article describes the Boxster as a "sluggish seller", reclaiming a proportion of the Z4, SLK, Boxster sports car market makes great sense. I can, however, understand the concern that the sales of the soft top TT could be effected.
I called it marginal because I reckon the majority of that car's market already belongs to VAG (remember the Boxster comes under this), which gives no gain, and the marginal gain is any sales it manages to nick from the SLK et al.EDLT said:
I don't see how Porsche losing sales is a bad thing, as long as someone in the group gets the money. If someone wants a posh convertible, but doesn't like the Porsche they could have the Audi, now they will buy a Mercedes or BMW instead.
They can sell a Boxster all day at £40k+, or an Audi at £25k-35k (the £50k TT's don't sell, we know that through the TTR and TT-RS).Which would you rather do? Turnover is vanity, profit is sanity.
Boxster sales are sluggish because the demographic who used to buy them (up and coming yuppies), no longer have the finances to buy them. This is proven through the fact 911 and Pamamera sales are still strong. They're selling £80k+ cars well....just not £40k cars...which probably means the market for mid-level premium sports cars isn't that hot right now (I've not seem many 370Z's either).
I'm not willing to take the rumor at face value, because doing so inevitably leads to a realisation of extensive mental retardation at VW/Audi, right at the board level. How could they have not have noticed that they also build the TT? Even reasonable media reports were considering the R4 as a TT replacement because they would occupy such close market segments. Likewise, VW announcing they would not produce a next gen EOS made a VW version more plausible. The rumor must be wrong regarding their reasons. I'm pretty sure the R4 is canned, that part sounds right.
It's more reasonable to assume that between the R4 and a next-gen TT, their initial decision was to go with the former, but they retracted when they realised how small their gains would be. R4 wouldn't capture enough conquest sales over what the next-gen TT can achieve to justify cannibalising Boxster sales. Worse yet, with RWD it would cost significantly more than the TT to produce when their customers are rather unlikely to value RWD more than FWD (were that the case, those customers would be after SLKs or Z4s and not TTs), hurting profits. So VW being VW, they went for the blinged Golf variant, which is not the least bit surprising.
I'm rather more surprised that I ever believed VW/Audi would come out with an interesting car.
It's more reasonable to assume that between the R4 and a next-gen TT, their initial decision was to go with the former, but they retracted when they realised how small their gains would be. R4 wouldn't capture enough conquest sales over what the next-gen TT can achieve to justify cannibalising Boxster sales. Worse yet, with RWD it would cost significantly more than the TT to produce when their customers are rather unlikely to value RWD more than FWD (were that the case, those customers would be after SLKs or Z4s and not TTs), hurting profits. So VW being VW, they went for the blinged Golf variant, which is not the least bit surprising.
I'm rather more surprised that I ever believed VW/Audi would come out with an interesting car.
nickfrog said:
Would have been funny to see the average Quattro driver spin at the first wet roundabout, not having realised that the throttle was not an on-off switch on a proper car...
Perhaps people with decent grip on their tyres should be forced to drive around with shonky budget ditchfinders to make them stop taking good grip for granted too?Lucas Ayde said:
nickfrog said:
Would have been funny to see the average Quattro driver spin at the first wet roundabout, not having realised that the throttle was not an on-off switch on a proper car...
Perhaps people with decent grip on their tyres should be forced to drive around with shonky budget ditchfinders to make them stop taking good grip for granted too?nickfrog said:
Interesting but I don't quite see your point. Quattro does not add lateral grip, just traction.
Apparently it can stop you spinning at wet roundabouts when you give it a load of throttle - something which you don't seem to think is beneficial.Your comment certainly seemed to be in the proud moronic PH tradition of "if it makes driving fast easier and safer, it must be rubbish". Do feel free to inform me what you were actually getting at.
marcosgt said:
Margin, brand image, etc, etc...
Who's going to buy a Porsche if there's a VW version of the same car?
M.
VW-Porsche 914?Who's going to buy a Porsche if there's a VW version of the same car?
M.
Sad news, really. I hope the Bluesport continues development, 'cause it looks very nice, but I guess that's rather unlikely, since it would've shared a platform with the R4.
I could see a market for a sub-Boxster Porsche, however. The original Boxster was substantially cheaper, with the 4 cylinder being compared to MX-5s, S2000s and the like. Now, it's more on par with the base 911, and they no longer offer the 4cyl. option.
Lucas Ayde said:
nickfrog said:
Interesting but I don't quite see your point. Quattro does not add lateral grip, just traction.
Apparently it can stop you spinning at wet roundabouts when you give it a load of throttle - something which you don't seem to think is beneficial.Your comment certainly seemed to be in the proud moronic PH tradition of "if it makes driving fast easier and safer, it must be rubbish". Do feel free to inform me what you were actually getting at.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff