4 ms·

In the android phone market, we know that mid-tier phones do very poorly; People can afford a high end one, or they can't afford anything, so they have to get t

by jbob2000 11y ago

In the android phone market, we know that mid-tier phones do very poorly; People can afford a high end one, or they can't afford anything, so they have to get the cheapest one available. I kind of feel like automobiles are going the same way. Why pay for a mid market car from VW when you can spend another $5,000 and sit in a BMW or Mercedes? Or why spend $30,000 when you can spend $20,000 and get essentially the same thing (Jetta vs. Corolla S, for example)?

ams6110 11y ago
I haven't looked at a VW in a long time. I last bought an A2 generation Jetta new in 1991. At that time, I think they were about $11 or $12K, and there was a definite "German" feel to the vehicle compared to similarly priced Asian or American cars. Better handling, better gear changes, a more tight and solid feel, and quieter. A Corolla at the time felt like a beer can on wheels, a Ford or Chevy in that price range felt perhaps more solid than a Corolla but had a very bland, generic, vague driving feel. No idea if they are still that way but at least at the time a Jetta and a Corolla were not anywhere close to the same thing.
- dominotw 11y ago
  > there was a definite "German" feel to the vehicle Could it be placebo effect/confirmation bias? I am not a car enthusiast but I recently bought a new one and test drove both german and asian models and I honestly couldn't tell them apart.
  - TheCapn 11y ago
    Anecdotal but, I think for someone who truly enjoys driving and looks for the little things there's enough to notice. I drove a '99 VW until it got wrecked. I picked up a '99 Acura afterwards and immediately could feel the difference in clutch & gearbox. I now drive an '03 VW, my girlfriend an '04 Honda and I can still feel the same differences. She's mentioned it too and says she prefers the "solid" feel of my car compared to hers. I've driven VWs of every generation from MK3 to current (MK7), I've driven Chevy/Honda/Toyota/Hyundai manual transmission cars and nothing feels as tight as the VWs I've driven. So I'm a pretty big fanboy, but I definitely feel and believe there's a difference that can be felt.
- georgeecollins 11y ago
  I drive a 2015 VW GTI. It is really a very good car. Comfortable, fun to drive, good fuel economy. There is a reason why it is always on the Car and Driver Ten Best list for North America. It just isn't a mass market car. It's a car for people who will pay extra for car just because it is fun to drive but not pretentious or ostentatious in any way.
georgeecollins 11y ago
The automobile market is not that simple. It's possible for a car to be moderately priced, sell in huge numbers, and make a profit. In the mid '90s Chrysler sold 100k+ minivans a year and made an average profit of $5k. I'm sure today someone is doing almost that well with cute SUVs. VW has the wrong product mix for North America: no trucks, no popular SUVs. They got burned with US regulation because they cheated. It's easy to imagine that they would do better as a premium brand, but there is no evidence that they have the brand or the competency. Does anyone remember the Phaeton? Google that. VW has had this fantasy before. Source on Chrysler : http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1994/05/30/79354/index.htm http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive...
- Domenic_S 11y ago
  It's less simple than you think. Chrysler essentially invented the modern minivan and had a massive jump on sales in the 90s. Great competition like the Sienna didn't happen until the late 90s. When you have a popular new category and no competition, I'd expect to kill it like Chrysler did. BMW doesn't have any trucks, and Honda didn't for a long time either. It's easy money but it's not the only way to make an auto brand. (Fun side note: VW's minivan was a rebadged Chrysler.)
- joezydeco 11y ago
  It's easy to imagine that they would do better as a premium brand, but there is no evidence that they have the brand or the competency. Yet, VW turned Audi around and made it into a luxury brand in the US. The Planet Money podcast covers a little more into how they did it. http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/15/155039824/can-lincoln-be-cool-again http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/15/155039824/can-l...
grillvogel 11y ago
your price differentials are a little off. you can't spend $5000 more than VW prices to get an equivalent Mercedes/BMW/Audi, its more like 10-15k more. VW's whole thing used to be that they were about 5k more than the mass market cars, but were almost as good as a luxury car with a nice feel and unique features. I'd be fine with them returning to this niche model, the american Jettas and Passats are lame.
- cvwright 11y ago
  The other problem with this strategy is that, at least according to Consumer Reports, the reliability of a new VW is way below that of a similar Toyota or Honda. Why pay more for a car that won't last as long?
- monksy 11y ago
  That is one of the reasons I bought a VW Jetta, I wanted an Audi, but I won't pay the Audi price for it.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

ams6110 11y ago

I haven't looked at a VW in a long time. I last bought an A2 generation Jetta new in 1991. At that time, I think they were about $11 or $12K, and there was a definite "German" feel to the vehicle compared to similarly priced Asian or American cars. Better handling, better gear changes, a more tight and solid feel, and quieter. A Corolla at the time felt like a beer can on wheels, a Ford or Chevy in that price range felt perhaps more solid than a Corolla but had a very bland, generic, vague driving feel. No idea if they are still that way but at least at the time a Jetta and a Corolla were not anywhere close to the same thing.

dominotw 11y ago
> there was a definite "German" feel to the vehicle Could it be placebo effect/confirmation bias? I am not a car enthusiast but I recently bought a new one and test drove both german and asian models and I honestly couldn't tell them apart.
- TheCapn 11y ago
  Anecdotal but, I think for someone who truly enjoys driving and looks for the little things there's enough to notice. I drove a '99 VW until it got wrecked. I picked up a '99 Acura afterwards and immediately could feel the difference in clutch & gearbox. I now drive an '03 VW, my girlfriend an '04 Honda and I can still feel the same differences. She's mentioned it too and says she prefers the "solid" feel of my car compared to hers. I've driven VWs of every generation from MK3 to current (MK7), I've driven Chevy/Honda/Toyota/Hyundai manual transmission cars and nothing feels as tight as the VWs I've driven. So I'm a pretty big fanboy, but I definitely feel and believe there's a difference that can be felt.
georgeecollins 11y ago
I drive a 2015 VW GTI. It is really a very good car. Comfortable, fun to drive, good fuel economy. There is a reason why it is always on the Car and Driver Ten Best list for North America. It just isn't a mass market car. It's a car for people who will pay extra for car just because it is fun to drive but not pretentious or ostentatious in any way.

georgeecollins 11y ago

The automobile market is not that simple. It's possible for a car to be moderately priced, sell in huge numbers, and make a profit. In the mid '90s Chrysler sold 100k+ minivans a year and made an average profit of $5k. I'm sure today someone is doing almost that well with cute SUVs. VW has the wrong product mix for North America: no trucks, no popular SUVs. They got burned with US regulation because they cheated. It's easy to imagine that they would do better as a premium brand, but there is no evidence that they have the brand or the competency. Does anyone remember the Phaeton? Google that. VW has had this fantasy before. Source on Chrysler : http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1994/05/30/79354/index.htm http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive...

Domenic_S 11y ago
It's less simple than you think. Chrysler essentially invented the modern minivan and had a massive jump on sales in the 90s. Great competition like the Sienna didn't happen until the late 90s. When you have a popular new category and no competition, I'd expect to kill it like Chrysler did. BMW doesn't have any trucks, and Honda didn't for a long time either. It's easy money but it's not the only way to make an auto brand. (Fun side note: VW's minivan was a rebadged Chrysler.)
joezydeco 11y ago
It's easy to imagine that they would do better as a premium brand, but there is no evidence that they have the brand or the competency. Yet, VW turned Audi around and made it into a luxury brand in the US. The Planet Money podcast covers a little more into how they did it. http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/15/155039824/can-lincoln-be-cool-again http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/15/155039824/can-l...

grillvogel 11y ago

your price differentials are a little off. you can't spend $5000 more than VW prices to get an equivalent Mercedes/BMW/Audi, its more like 10-15k more. VW's whole thing used to be that they were about 5k more than the mass market cars, but were almost as good as a luxury car with a nice feel and unique features. I'd be fine with them returning to this niche model, the american Jettas and Passats are lame.

cvwright 11y ago
The other problem with this strategy is that, at least according to Consumer Reports, the reliability of a new VW is way below that of a similar Toyota or Honda. Why pay more for a car that won't last as long?
monksy 11y ago
That is one of the reasons I bought a VW Jetta, I wanted an Audi, but I won't pay the Audi price for it.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]