Car Snobs - I Despise Them

[Gary C]

av185 said:

Agree but it would be interesting to know how many actually can truly afford it as oppose to the apparent majority who simply want the latest 'shiny bauble' in a vain attempt to impress their equally shallow neighbours with their ubiquitous tdi on the drive.l!

Well, out of the four cars I have, two are owned outright (one worth about £100, one with about £80k). The other two are leased. One is the wife's car and is on a lease/PCP for 3 years with service on 60k miles as its needed for work and will do that milage. it works out simpler to have a new car with warranty that she likes and can rely on and with those miles, it's equity is a bit shot anyway.

My 1.0 polo is on lease but makes much less sense (was a fall out from the wife's previous work car). It's only £150 a month but I will have no equity after all those low and careful miles. It will be swapped for a second hand gt86 at the end of the year now I don't have learners to insure on it.

Can afford the cars and not really worried about out posing the neighbours with a leased 'shiny bauble', if I want to pose I would park the 911 on the drive, but that's locked away.

The apparent majority ?, wonder who they are.

[classicyanktanks]

I get more joy out of driving a £600 50 year old dumper truck than my 911's.

Some of ther best cars ever were old bangers.

Edited by classicyanktanks on Tuesday 16th January 17:23

[bad company]

Willy Nilly said:

It seems like every other car thread has car requirements that largely boil down to image and my guess is that in most cases image is a larger driving factor in what make people choose a car than anything else.

And a ‘guess’ is all it is. I agree that image can sometimes be a factor but how much weight it carries in the average buyers decision, who knows.

[Willy Nilly]

bad company said:

Willy Nilly said:

It seems like every other car thread has car requirements that largely boil down to image and my guess is that in most cases image is a larger driving factor in what make people choose a car than anything else.

And a ‘guess’ is all it is. I agree that image can sometimes be a factor but how much weight it carries in the average buyers decision, who knows.

If image wasn't a major factor then car brands wouldn't spend fortunes on advertising, which is in the main portraying an image.

[bad company]

Willy Nilly said:

bad company said:

Willy Nilly said:

It seems like every other car thread has car requirements that largely boil down to image and my guess is that in most cases image is a larger driving factor in what make people choose a car than anything else.

And a ‘guess’ is all it is. I agree that image can sometimes be a factor but how much weight it carries in the average buyers decision, who knows.

If image wasn't a major factor then car brands wouldn't spend fortunes on advertising, which is in the main portraying an image.

Car companies do spend a fortune on advertising that their products are better, safer, more economical and in days gone faster than their competitors. Yes image also a part of that but how do justify saying ‘in the main portraying an image’?

[InitialDave]

Nanook said:

They advertise toilet roll on TV. Is that about portraying an image?

I'd certainly rather that my friends and family didn't think I used my bare hands.

[bad company]

Nanook said:

Willy Nilly said:

If image wasn't a major factor then car brands wouldn't spend fortunes on advertising, which is in the main portraying an image.

What sort of logic is that?

They advertise toilet roll on TV. Is that about portraying an image?

[Willy Nilly]

Nanook said:

Willy Nilly said:

If image wasn't a major factor then car brands wouldn't spend fortunes on advertising, which is in the main portraying an image.

What sort of logic is that?

They advertise toilet roll on TV. Is that about portraying an image?

Of course it is.

[Willy Nilly]

bad company said:

Willy Nilly said:

bad company said:

Willy Nilly said:

It seems like every other car thread has car requirements that largely boil down to image and my guess is that in most cases image is a larger driving factor in what make people choose a car than anything else.

And a ‘guess’ is all it is. I agree that image can sometimes be a factor but how much weight it carries in the average buyers decision, who knows.

If image wasn't a major factor then car brands wouldn't spend fortunes on advertising, which is in the main portraying an image.

Car companies do spend a fortune on advertising that their products are better, safer, more economical and in days gone faster than their competitors. Yes image also a part of that but how do justify saying ‘in the main portraying an image’?

Time and again in the Car Buying forum people would rather buy a ropey old luxury car than a better car from a less favorable brand.How many times have you seen the term "white goods car" on here?

[bad company]

Willy Nilly said:

How many times have you seen the term "white goods car" on here?

In all honesty, never.

[RobM77]

Willy Nilly said:

Nanook said:

Willy Nilly said:

If image wasn't a major factor then car brands wouldn't spend fortunes on advertising, which is in the main portraying an image.

What sort of logic is that?

They advertise toilet roll on TV. Is that about portraying an image?

Of course it is.

Plus car adverts these days are purely about portraying an image. Virtually all car adverts say nothing about the car, and just involve convincing you it'll turn you into some sort of cool person who does cool things. What can you say about most cars these days? Too tall, under-damped, front wheel drive, no steering feel, everything feels rubbery and uninvolving? Doesn't sell cars well. Convincing people they need such a car to go surfing is far easier and more profitable (I still don't see any at my local break though ).

[Pan Pan Pan]

Not sure if it could be regarded as car snobbery, or even reverse car snobbery, but I was walking down the local high street the other day, and bloke drove by in a Porsche Cayman, Just in front of me was a bloke with his girl friend, and looking at the Cayman he told her it was not a Porsche.
Could it be that despite the fact that Caymans are designed by Porsche, built by Porsche, sold by Porsche, and carry the Porsche badge, that Caymans are not in fact a Porsche? I just wondered what would make the bloke in question say what he did. Could it be car snobbery in reverse or just a case of the green eyed monster making its appearance?

[captain_cynic]

Nanook said:

What sort of logic is that?

They advertise toilet roll on TV. Is that about portraying an image?

Well yes, in an Andrex ad you see happy families with dogs and everyone smiling in an attempt to get you to associate an ideal lifestyle with their product... If they were selling the product based on it's real world usage, the ad would say "it feels like sandpaper but it'll get st off yer arse" which wouldn't sell bog roll.

With cars, as with any product, the ones that have merit do not need to do a lot of advertising. This is why you don't see many ads for Porsche's or BMW M2's (or even a bog standard 2 series) as people looking for these cars know what they're about, OTOH you see heaps of advertising for the latest vulgar SUV, the crappier it is, the more advertising it gets.

[IJB1959]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Hardly an 'industry secret'. Some brands are, but not all as you seem to imply. They are mostly MB's as we all know. Taxi drivers want durability, reliability and comfort, so maybe that's why they have German cars???

Edited by IJB1959 on Wednesday 17th January 10:41

[IJB1959]

captain_cynic said:

With cars, as with any product, the ones that have merit do not need to do a lot of advertising. This is why you don't see many ads for Porsche's or BMW M2's (or even a bog standard 2 series) as people looking for these cars know what they're about, OTOH you see heaps of advertising for the latest vulgar SUV, the crappier it is, the more advertising it gets.

Yes, I agree there is some merit in that where they focus on a specific model. The likes of BMW, Audi etc....advertising is just generally about brand/technology awareness.

[daemon]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

And your point?

They're taxis here too - loads of Mercedes E Class taxis about.

That doesnt stop them being (perceived as) prestige / premium brands.

I'd say many taxi drivers use Apple iphones, that doesnt preclude them from being a premium brand either.

[liner33]

It was getting into a German 190 E Merc taxi with 400,000km's on it that persuaded me to buy a Mercedes E Class, the car had no rattles or bangs and was doing well into 3 figures on the autobahn

Alas Mercs of that era are much better than modern Mercs

[RobM77]

liner33 said:

It was getting into a German 190 E Merc taxi with 400,000km's on it that persuaded me to buy a Mercedes E Class, the car had no rattles or bangs and was doing well into 3 figures on the autobahn

Alas Mercs of that era are much better than modern Mercs

They're legendary They also have a fantastic neutral balance in the corners, despite absolutely nackered suspension. I've been in many a Merc taxi with intergalactic mileage and driven on rough dusty roads in weird places of the world, and they always impress.