Ask the Car People.SM


High End Luxury Cars

24723 messages,  Last post on Jan 28, 2013 at 6:55 PM

You are in the Sedans Forum.

What is this discussion about? Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Jaguar XJ-Series, Lexus LS 460, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Volkswagen Phaeton, Maserati Quattroporte, Mercedes-Benz CL-Class, Sedan



Let's try to define this forum as being limited to luxury performance vehicles where the mainstream version in a typical configuration has an MSRP of at least $60k.

A luxury vehicle with a base price of $59k qualifies because it would typically be bought with some additional equipment, bringing the MSRP over $60k.

Vehicles like the E, 5, A6, M, or GS, even if available in certain versions over $60k, don't qualify because they are cars from companies that have higher end cars in their lineups.

Messages Page 1017 of 2473

#10158 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [syswei] by merc1

Aug 12, 2005 (2:57 am)

Replying to: syswei (Aug 12, 2005 2:48 am)
in 1999, MB beat Lexus unit sales in the U.S., 189,000 units to 185,890
 
Thats easy, that was the year they rode the popularity their first SUV introduced in 1998, and 1999 and 2000 were the best years for the previous M-Class, that is what put them over Lexus, not their more expensive cars.
 
Lexus is only ahead of MB and BMW because they caught the SUV wave, not because of their cars. If the portion of Lexus' volume based on SUVs was taken out they'd still be behind Mercedes. Lexus is the best seller because of SUVs, not because all their cars are some sort of best-selling allstars.
 
The biggest reason for MB's relative sales performance between then and now (i.e., going from top-selling luxury import to number 3) imho is the impact of MB reliability issues on the buying public. It has nothing to do with price, because MB has been more expensive all along.
 
That is your opinion, but there is no way to prove that. To me Lexus selling way more SUVs than cars says a lot about where the market shifted, and to Mercedes' fault they missed the SUV market giving Lexus a big lead. If the Germans as a whole got in on the ground floor with SUVs or the right kind of SUV, which Lexus did, the story might have been different. Secondly a lot of Mercedes models play in a much pricier market beyond Lexus and that can't be swept under the prestige excuse by saying that price doesn't limit sales.
 
Prestige can't account for the difference in price between every Lexus and Mercedes, and if it could how do we measure it?
 
Lexus is ahead based on SUVS and a the popular ES330, a car no other foreign car company even considers competition.
 
Why do you think Mercedes has renewed its interest in SUV and/or SUV like vehicles? That is where they missed the action and Lexus has made that painfully clear to MB, BMW and Audi, who all have jumped on the SUV bandwagon in the last 5 years of so. This ain't got nothing to do with no lame surveys.
 
If everyone or even the majority who bought SUVs were into surveys, Land Rover wouldn't be able to command the prices they do for theirs, especially the Range Rover. People wouldn't even want SUVs if they truly cared what they press has to say about them being unsafe and everything else so un-PC about them. The previous M-Class has the worst of reputations in these surveys, yet it sold decently right up to the end and the new one is off to a flying start. If surveys were the end all the new one wouldn't get off the ground.
 
M

#10159 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [merc1] by syswei

Aug 12, 2005 (4:14 am)

Replying to: merc1 (Aug 12, 2005 2:57 am)
[1999] was the year [MB] rode the popularity their first SUV introduced in 1998, and 1999 and 2000 were the best years for the previous M-Class, that is what put them over Lexus, not their more expensive cars.
 
Not much of an excuse, because both companies had SUVs by 1999. The LX450 was introduced in Jan 1996 (and btw surpassed Range Rover in the space of 2 months), while the RX300 went on sale in the spring of 1998.
 
So both companies competed in SUVs in 1999, as they do now. Yet the relative sales (cars+SUVs) have swung by 43% in Lexus' favor in the past 6 years.

#10160 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [merc1] by syswei

Aug 12, 2005 (4:20 am)

Replying to: merc1 (Aug 12, 2005 2:57 am)
But anyway, let's say for the sake of argument that SUVs just shouldn't count.
 
In 1999, excluding SUVs, MB sold 144,231 units. In 2005, it is on track to sell 172,939. A gain of 20%.
 
In 1999, excluding SUVs, Lexus sold 98,658 units. In 2005, it is on track to sell 140,313. A gain of 45%.
 
Do you see a trend here?
 
Again, price doesn't explain it, as MB was expensive in 1999 too.

#10161 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [syswei] by merc1

Aug 12, 2005 (4:27 am)

Replying to: syswei (Aug 12, 2005 4:14 am)
Not much of an excuse, because both companies had SUVs by 1999. The LX450 was introduced in Jan 1996 (and btw surpassed Range Rover in the space of 2 months), while the RX300 went on sale in the spring of 1998.
 
Totally irrelevant. The LX450 was and still is (LX470) a low volume seller with a much higher price than the M-Class which was priced like a mainstream SUV back in 1998, and the LX450 was not. The M-Class was the first mainstream priced SUV from a luxury car maker, hence it putting MB on top until others joined in. Plus the MB M-Class while seemingly sound in concept wasn't what the market wanted. It wanted a more car-like ride like the RX. Plus in 1999 the ML was hitting its stride like the RX did in later model years.
 
There is no way around the fact that Lexus' SUV sales are what put them on top.
 
So both companies competed in SUVs in 1999, as they do now. Yet the relative sales (cars+SUVs) have swung by 43% in Lexus' favor in the past 6 years.
 
Have you ignored everything from the previous post? It is SUVS that have done this. The RX and the GX. Mercedes had basically nothing to compete against this. Lexus' car sales aren't what has turned the tide. Well those SUVs and the ES330, which I can't see any European luxury car brand seeing as competition.
 
We can re-visit this once the M, R, and new GL are all in place.
 
M

#10162 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [syswei] by merc1

Aug 12, 2005 (4:33 am)

Replying to: syswei (Aug 12, 2005 4:20 am)
Do you see a trend here?
 
Yeah I do. Lexus having introduced a new key sedan this year is what I see. They went from about 8500 unit sales of the GS last year to double that already this year because of new car. Mercedes didn't introduce a new version of one of their volume cars like the E, C or S this year. The CLS is too impractical to sell past the 2K per month mark, if you were going to bring that up. This is not some type of long-term crisis or downturn at MB like you're trying to imply. Lets go over this again the next time MB introduces a new E, or C-Class or even after they introduce the new S-Class. Now if they don't increase car sales on top of the introduction of one of those new key cars then you might have a point, until then you don't and just reaching for something that isn't there.
 
M

#10163 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [merc1] by syswei

Aug 12, 2005 (5:15 am)

Replying to: merc1 (Aug 12, 2005 4:33 am)
Lexus having introduced a new key sedan this year is what I see.
 
Oh, so now we should exclude the contribution of new models from sales performance? I think you're the one "reaching for something that isn't there" (to use your words). Here are the facts:
 
For Lexus, the GS has contributed an incremental 13,801 units to 2005ytd sales.
 
For MB, the CLS and SLK have contributed an incremental 14,092 units to 2005ytd sales.
 
So it is MB, not Lexus, that has been helped (slightly) more by new models.
 
The fact remains, whether you adjust for new models or not, and whether you include SUVs or not, Lexus has gained significant share vs MB in the last 6 years. There is a long-term trend there, whether you wish to see it or not. IMHO, MB needs to turn around its reliability if it wants to turn around that trend.

#10164 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [syswei] by merc1

Aug 12, 2005 (5:41 am)

Replying to: syswei (Aug 12, 2005 5:15 am)
Oh, so now we should exclude the contribution of new models from sales performance? I think you're the one "reaching for something that isn't there" (to use your words). Here are the facts:
  
For Lexus, the GS has contributed an incremental 13,801 units to 2005ytd sales.
  
For MB, the CLS and SLK have contributed an incremental 14,092 units to 2005ytd sales.
  
So it is MB, not Lexus, that has been helped (slightly) more by new models.
 
Wow a whole 291 units. Some trend. The GS has far more potential than the CLS and SLK by virtue of it being a 3-box sedan unlike the CLS and especially the SLK. What was the point here again, I honestly have forgotten because this is silly imo.
 
The fact remains, whether you adjust for new models or not, and whether you include SUVs or not, Lexus has gained significant share vs MB in the last 6 years. There is a long-term trend there, whether you wish to see it or not. IMHO, MB needs to turn around its reliability if it wants to turn around that trend.
 
And the fact also remains that Lexus sells at cheaper price points overall model for model (in almost every case) compared to MB. MB has also grown in the last 6 years also, just not at the pace of Lexus has. Price and not having 3 SUVs to pad their bottom line with have much more to do with that than some surveys that not everyone worships. The Germans missed the SUV craze, plain and simple.
 
To stop the trend you're talking about they would need to lower prices, not gonna happen.
 
M

#10165 of 24723 Re: Merc1 [merc1] by ljflx

Aug 12, 2005 (5:49 am)

Replying to: merc1 (Aug 11, 2005 11:56 pm)
"The thing is it hasn't happened yet nearly on the scale of which we have to read about every few months."
 
You go from making $2.5bln a year to losing money in 3 years and you don't think that is a serious downturn. Your cars are placed at the lowest end of reliability studies and customer satisfaction studies when they historically occupied the exact opposite space and you don't think that is a serious downturn. Now resale values have fallen through the floor when they were at the exact opposite end of the spectrum and you don't think that is a serious downturn. MB is being crimped on all sides. Higher production costs, big warranty repair costs, retention writeoff because leased cars were worth a lot less than the lease retenion values, too big a line-up to maintain successfully etc etc. i could go on but I'll leave it there. The one thing every CFO or knowledgable Wall Street analyst looks at is a little term called "Incremental Margin". Most non-financial people don't know what it is until it hits them in the wallet. But it's real simple. In laymans terms it means the last car you sold was more profitable than the car before it and far more profitable then the 10,000th car before it. You don't need to see sales cut in half, or a third, or even a quarter to bring on a serious downturn. 10% will do it, because that 10% is contributing tremendous incremental margin/prtofits to the business. Combine that with the high cost structure of a brand like MB, the increasing warranty and rcall costs plus the out of control costs to maintain so many model variants and it happens fast.. It's happened right before our eyes already and you are reading about it every three months because every three months the fundamentals and the numbers are worsening.

#10166 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [merc1] by syswei

Aug 12, 2005 (5:52 am)

Replying to: merc1 (Aug 12, 2005 5:41 am)
Of course if MB lowered its prices, it would help unit sales. And if Lexus magically attained MB's prestige, it would help unit sales.
 
But I'll say again, MB's prices have nothing to do with the trend of relative sales declines vs Lexus, because MB's prices were high both at the end and at the beginning of the period. If MB had raised its prices more than Lexus during the period, then you would be able to point to price as an excuse for the relative sales performance.

#10167 of 24723 Re: Lexux? [merc1] by syswei

Aug 12, 2005 (5:58 am)

Replying to: merc1 (Aug 12, 2005 5:41 am)
Wow a whole 291 units. Some trend. The GS has far more potential than the CLS and SLK by virtue of it being a 3-box sedan unlike the CLS and especially the SLK. What was the point here again, I honestly have forgotten because this is silly imo.
 
I wasn't pointing to the GS as a trend, silly. I pointed out that even excluding SUVs, Lexus' sales are up 45% in 6 years, vs 20% for MB, and you brought up the GS in an attempt to explain away Lexus' performance. I just pointed out that MB has been helped slightly more by the CLS and SLK than Lexus has been helped by the GS. You can forget about the GS/CLS/SLK line of discussion, and just focus on 45% vs 20%.

Messages Page 1017 of 2473

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement