Cars that "devalued" the brand...

[AlonzoHarris]

Non AMG cars don’t have any external or internal badging as far as I’m aware? Perhaps some mats.
BMW have the M sport brand with M badges everywhere, as do Audi with their S line branded cars.

[Labradorofperception]

Bugger, somebody got to the Alfa Arna before me.

Made from a combination of cheese and Sicilian placenta skin.

Maserati Ghibli diesel. Merc engine, all the performance of tectonic shift and supercar service pricing.

X type with bonnet leaper, obvs.

[blueg33]

IanH755 said:

For me it was the Porsche Boxster, because it used to be quite rare to see "supercar" like a Porsche or Lambo or Ferrari etc, and now every 3rd car is a bloody Porsche so, for me, that mass market has made them more like a "premium" Audi etc than a the Porsche of old.

Except the Porsches you see everywhere are various flavours of 911

[cherryowen]

Court_S said:

Turbotechnic said:

Chris Bangle designed BMW’s

I think they’ve actually got better with age. I hated his 6 series when it came out, but quite like it now. The E60 has aged really well too to my eyes at least.

The 2 series active tourer is a monstrosity though. There’s a special place in hell for whoever signed that off.

Agreed on all the above

My suggestion may be a little inflammatory, but it's this:-



It's an attractive thing, but not as achingly gorgeous as the DB9 that followed it. Also, being based on a Jag platform from the mid-1970's without the luxury of a handcrafted V8, it reeked of being an "affordable" Aston. I would accept that it sold in numbers, and paved the way to where Aston are now, but it could - at the time - be considered to be de-valuing the badge.

[2xChevrons]

blueg33 said:

Lotus Elise. Cheap sports car, prior to that Lotus made cars that were priced nearer Ferrari - i think.

Doesnt mean the Elise wasn't superb, plus it probably saved Lotus.

Happy to be proven wrong

Lotus prices never quite reached the level of Ferrari, and the Elise was really more of a 'return to form' after Hethel's collective delusional phase in the 1970s. Obviously Lotus had humble origins making kit cars and basic club racers like the Seven and the Elite. The Elan wasn't exactly expensive - about £1400 when a Seven cost £860, a 1.5-litre Ford Cortina was £690, an Austin-Healey 3000 was £1100, an MGB was £840, a Jag E-type was £2000, a Mercedes 230 SL 'Pagoda' was £3400 and a Ferrari 330GT was £6200. So they were not 'cheap and cheerful' but they were far from costly...and certainly not Ferrari prices. The Elan was significantly more expensive than an MGB but then it was also significantly more capable.

It was in the 1970s that Lotus really jacked up its prices, when Chapman had visions of grandeur and how, with all of Lotus' F1 success and the adoration heaped on the Elan, that he really was running a company on a similar plane to Porsche or Ferrari, and would make cars priced to suit. The T75 Eclat topped out at £7900, making it the world's most expensive four-cylinder car and the Esprit was £5800, at a time when the glass-fibre Ferrari 308 and the Porsche 911 was about £12,000, while a mid-range Vauxhall Victor/Ford Granada was about £2000.

Prices for the Elise started at £19,000 in 1996 and few useful options would take you over £20k, when a Golf GTI cost around £13,000 and a MX-5 was about £16,000. So very similar to the position of the Elan in the 1960s - more expensive than other potential rivals but still affordable and hugely better from a driving/performance perspective for the money.

[greysquirrel]

Labradorofperception said:

Bugger, somebody got to the Alfa Arna before me.

Made from a combination of cheese and Sicilian placenta skin.

Maserati Ghibli diesel. Merc engine, all the performance of tectonic shift and supercar service pricing.

X type with bonnet leaper, obvs.

It’s not a Merc engine, it’s made by VM Motori (Fiat). They also do a quattroporte diesel which is an even more expensive car (and their flagship).

Sadly, like most performance marques they are having to try and increase volume sales to stay afloat.

[donkmeister]

white_goodman said:

City Rover - OK, Rover were already on the ropes at this point but despite variable build quality and designs much in need of an update, the 25/45/75 were all actually pretty decent cars. However, the OAPs all needed an "upgrade" for their Metros/Rover 100s and this is what Rover gave us. Based on an Indian Tata of some sort,

They've rebadged it, you fool!

[Cold]

2xChevrons said:

blueg33 said:

Lotus Elise. Cheap sports car, prior to that Lotus made cars that were priced nearer Ferrari - i think.

Doesnt mean the Elise wasn't superb, plus it probably saved Lotus.

Happy to be proven wrong

Lotus prices never quite reached the level of Ferrari, and the Elise was really more of a 'return to form' after Hethel's collective delusional phase in the 1970s. Obviously Lotus had humble origins making kit cars and basic club racers like the Seven and the Elite. The Elan wasn't exactly expensive - about £1400 when a Seven cost £860, a 1.5-litre Ford Cortina was £690, an Austin-Healey 3000 was £1100, an MGB was £840, a Jag E-type was £2000, a Mercedes 230 SL 'Pagoda' was £3400 and a Ferrari 330GT was £6200. So they were not 'cheap and cheerful' but they were far from costly...and certainly not Ferrari prices. The Elan was significantly more expensive than an MGB but then it was also significantly more capable.

It was in the 1970s that Lotus really jacked up its prices, when Chapman had visions of grandeur and how, with all of Lotus' F1 success and the adoration heaped on the Elan, that he really was running a company on a similar plane to Porsche or Ferrari, and would make cars priced to suit. The T75 Eclat topped out at £7900, making it the world's most expensive four-cylinder car and the Esprit was £5800, at a time when the glass-fibre Ferrari 308 and the Porsche 911 was about £12,000, while a mid-range Vauxhall Victor/Ford Granada was about £2000.

Prices for the Elise started at £19,000 in 1996 and few useful options would take you over £20k, when a Golf GTI cost around £13,000 and a MX-5 was about £16,000. So very similar to the position of the Elan in the 1960s - more expensive than other potential rivals but still affordable and hugely better from a driving/performance perspective for the money.

By the time it hit the shops in '76, the Esprit was priced at £7883 which soon jumped to £7979. A 911 Lux was £11500, a 308 GT4 was £11660.

[bearman68]

dme123 said:

Hard to think of anything further from the engineering lead, powerplant centric Jaguar of old that a front wheel drive X-Type with a 2 litre 4 pot diesel, and McPherson struts so the X-Type is in with a good shout.




These fking things still offend me.

See I quite like these. Posh Mondeo I hear you all cry, but actually that's a good thing. Ford engineering these days is pretty good, and these 2.2 oil burners are robust smooth and economical engines. And you can find a decent one of these for £600.
I agree the headlights are a bit dubious, but really, these are lovely cars to drive and own.

[ChevronB19]

IanH755 said:

For me it was the Porsche Boxster, because it used to be quite rare to see "supercar" like a Porsche or Lambo or Ferrari etc, and now every 3rd car is a bloody Porsche so, for me, that mass market has made them more like a "premium" Audi etc than a the Porsche of old.

Despite all the zillions of 924’s, 944’s, 912’s, 914’s?

Sorry, but Porsche has always made (relatively) affordable sports cars

[donkmeister]

I've never been a big one for brand and image (anyone who has seen my clothes and hair would agree), but there have been a few changes in message in recent years that had me scratching my head...

The BMW fwd 2-series... A company with an identity built around red "ultimate driving machines" unveiling a 3-cylinder fwd mpv was... Unexpected.

Vauxhall / Peugeot discontinuing the VXR range devalued the Vauxhall brand... Probably a sound business decision but the Vectra then Insignia VXRs were a great antithesis to the engine downsizing that cars were exhibiting at the time... Adding a 2.8T V6 and 4wd to a non-premium repmobile/family transport was brilliant and I was disappointed Ford didn't come up with a response. Now the fastest Insignia has barely 200bhp.

I wonder if the current trend for sub-brands will backfire... In the BL days people didn't buy an Austin because they aspired to a similar car with different styling and a Wolsely badge, so I don't know why Citroen and Seat think it will work now. Having a halo version of a mainstream model generates interest at the lower price points too, (which unfortunately is how we've ended up with the AMG and M-sport brands being wked flatter than a pancake) a young chap would buy the standard 1.6 with a view to upgrading to the turbo-nutter when he had a few years of NCB and some payrises.

[Cold]

Land Rover Defender. What were they thinking? Coil springs on a Land Rover? That'll never work, there's no way any farmer will buy something so complicated. You can fix leaf springs with a hammer and a welder, but coil springs? What a way to ruin the brand.

Oh, and the Cygnet was nothing to do with emissions lowering. It was just a car in its own right but for an existing AM owner to use to potter around the city. A tender, if you like.

[2xChevrons]

donkmeister said:

I wonder if the current trend for sub-brands will backfire... In the BL days people didn't buy an Austin because they aspired to a similar car with different styling and a Wolsely badge, so I don't know why Citroen and Seat think it will work now. Having a halo version of a mainstream model generates interest at the lower price points too, (which unfortunately is how we've ended up with the AMG and M-sport brands being wked flatter than a pancake) a young chap would buy the standard 1.6 with a view to upgrading to the turbo-nutter when he had a few years of NCB and some payrises.

It was the other way round in the 'bad old days' of BMC badge-engineering - most people could see the rather cynical marketing exercise of the higher-end marques slapped on mass-produced stodge for what it was and didn't buy them. The Wolseley, Riley and MG versions of the 'Farina' saloon range (of which the Series V Morris Oxford/Austin A55 Cambridge were the mass-market versions) sold in relatively tiny numbers - something like 85,000 Wolseleys, 30,000 MGs and 25,000 Rileys against half a million apiece for Austin and Morris. People weren't willing to pay the 40% premium for a Riley when it was just a Morris with a fancy grille, a second carburettor and a wooden dash. Especially when you could buy an MG for 15% less and get the same thing.

When the badge-engineering did offer something worthwhile it sold well - the Vanden Plas Princess versions of the 'Big Farina' and the ADO16 sold much better than BMC anticipated because they were genuinely enticing products, with genuine hand-crafted, coachbuilt luxury interiors and high quality external trim/paint standards but because it was built into a mass-produced shell and mechanical parts they were dirt cheap for what they were and, despite being BMC's 'flagship' marque they outsold the likes of Riley several times over.

I think this is why, say, VW's rampant (and sensible) platform sharing hasn't hurt perceptions in the same way. If you know nothing about cars then a Skoda isn't obviously a cheapened VW with a different badge, and an Audi isn't obviously a tarted-up VW. I mean, we here on PH know that they fundamentally are but a) it's not exactly a bad thing to be based on a modern VW (and it certainly isn't perceived that way because VW has a pretty good reputation and image) and b) it's not done as blatantly as in the old BMC days when it really was just a case 'grille, badge and dashboard pressing, plus some extra on the price'.

There's nothing wrong with sub-branding as it makes better use of your investment in a platform and other parts and, when done well, expands your market without really having to design a new product. It just has to be done sensible and the parent company has to keep a tight rein on where all the various brands are pitched in relation to each other so they are always clear in the mind of the consumer and don't start treading on each other's toes. That's where BMC went wrong - the actual tangible differences between Wolseley, MG and Riley saloons was wafer-thin at best by the end of the 1960s so no-one at the company knew what each brand should stand for and the customers didn't care. Meanwhile Ford would offer you half a dozen Cortina trim levels, each on a clearly-defined and differentiated 'rung' of the ladder.

[The Li-ion King]

Jim the Sunderer said:

Jagaur X-Type, BMW 2 ActionSport whatever phony name the front wheel drive monstrosity is called.

I'm not a rear wheel drive purist, it's just apparently a cheap and easy way to make crappy cash grab motors.

This. Especially when they put the Duratorq diesel engine in the Jag that could be found in the Mondeo and Transit, it was a dark day.

2 Series Active Tourer is awful, I went to look at one for a 7 seater, I think it was a 216d with a thrashy 3 pot engine in poverty spec, the only saving grace was the power tailgate.



Still, the cops dont seem to mind the petrol ones, but not a true rear wheel drive, or X vehicle either in performance or build quality.

Toyota Z4, sorry I mean Supra is another example...

[Mr Tidy]

Turbotechnic said:

Chris Bangle designed BMW’s

Well he did a good job on the Z4 IMO!

[blueg33]

2xChevrons said:

blueg33 said:

Lotus Elise. Cheap sports car, prior to that Lotus made cars that were priced nearer Ferrari - i think.

Doesnt mean the Elise wasn't superb, plus it probably saved Lotus.

Happy to be proven wrong

Lotus prices never quite reached the level of Ferrari, and the Elise was really more of a 'return to form' after Hethel's collective delusional phase in the 1970s. Obviously Lotus had humble origins making kit cars and basic club racers like the Seven and the Elite. The Elan wasn't exactly expensive - about £1400 when a Seven cost £860, a 1.5-litre Ford Cortina was £690, an Austin-Healey 3000 was £1100, an MGB was £840, a Jag E-type was £2000, a Mercedes 230 SL 'Pagoda' was £3400 and a Ferrari 330GT was £6200. So they were not 'cheap and cheerful' but they were far from costly...and certainly not Ferrari prices. The Elan was significantly more expensive than an MGB but then it was also significantly more capable.

It was in the 1970s that Lotus really jacked up its prices, when Chapman had visions of grandeur and how, with all of Lotus' F1 success and the adoration heaped on the Elan, that he really was running a company on a similar plane to Porsche or Ferrari, and would make cars priced to suit. The T75 Eclat topped out at £7900, making it the world's most expensive four-cylinder car and the Esprit was £5800, at a time when the glass-fibre Ferrari 308 and the Porsche 911 was about £12,000, while a mid-range Vauxhall Victor/Ford Granada was about £2000.

Prices for the Elise started at £19,000 in 1996 and few useful options would take you over £20k, when a Golf GTI cost around £13,000 and a MX-5 was about £16,000. So very similar to the position of the Elan in the 1960s - more expensive than other potential rivals but still affordable and hugely better from a driving/performance perspective for the money.

Thanks that's interesting. Growing up in the 70's and 80's I always saw Lotus as a brand that were almost up there with Ferrari, especially when the Espirit was launched. It had all the visible cachet's of any supercar at the time, and was as quick as Ferrari's in the reviews I read.

So it was my impression. When the Elise was lauched I recall the magazines described it as cheap (maybe they said good value), and for many years this was effectively the only car Lotus made, it was both the base car and the flagship. Thats why in my view it devalued the brand. Its interesting that the pricing history contradicts my impressions, and actually it means the current Lotus range sort of sits where it always sat in pricing terms.

[Roger Irrelevant]

As virtually none of the examples given of cars that 'devalued' a particular brand had any appreciable effect on the manufacturer's bottom line - usually quite the opposite - I can only conclude that 'devalued the brand' in fact means nothing more than 'caused a few internet car bores to have a whinge'.

[Pupbelly]

Roger Irrelevant said:

As virtually none of the examples given of cars that 'devalued' a particular brand had any appreciable effect on the manufacturer's bottom line - usually quite the opposite - I can only conclude that 'devalued the brand' in fact means nothing more than 'caused a few internet car bores to have a whinge'.

Not at all, Audi, BMW, and Mercedes were once deemed as 'posh' and a car to aspire to. Now that these brands have chosen to dilute their names with the S line and M series and AMG spec which basically means you can have the wheels and looks of the 'proper' sporty ones but without the performance, therefore they are no longer 'special' brands, so I would say they have been devalued by their own need to keep up with (i.e. sell as many) the midrange brands.

Edited by Pupbelly on Friday 5th April 09:21

Edited by Pupbelly on Friday 5th April 09:23

[T-195]

cherryowen said:

Agreed on all the above

My suggestion may be a little inflammatory, but it's this:-



It's an attractive thing, but not as achingly gorgeous as the DB9 that followed it. Also, being based on a Jag platform from the mid-1970's without the luxury of a handcrafted V8, it reeked of being an "affordable" Aston. I would accept that it sold in numbers, and paved the way to where Aston are now, but it could - at the time - be considered to be de-valuing the badge.

I disagree, one of the best looking cars ever made.

It's no Cygnet.

[300bhp/ton]

AlonzoHarris said:

Non AMG cars don’t have any external or internal badging as far as I’m aware? Perhaps some mats.
BMW have the M sport brand with M badges everywhere, as do Audi with their S line branded cars.

The alloys have engraved on the them. Not sure, but think the seats might have had something too. No badges on the car exactly though.