High End Luxury Cars

24700 messages, Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 12:24 PM

You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

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.

Outline

Messages Page 2385 of 2471: 1; ...; 2382; 2383; 2384; 2385; 2386; 2387; 2388; ...; 2471; Prev; Next; Last

#23834 of 24700 Re: An Audi A7 [dewey] by houdini1 Feb 08, 2007 (12:54 pm)
Replying to: dewey (Feb 08, 2007 12:32 pm) I have always liked any clean, simple design and Audi has usually been high on that list. My problems with Audi here in the heartland are as follows: 1. Very poor dealers and dealer network. 2. I think they are over priced. 3. Reliability concerns. 4. That ugly drop down scoop on the front. It has never grown on me. 5. The advent, in 1989, of that gussied up Toyota.
#23835 of 24700 La Verdad! by hpowders Feb 08, 2007 (3:01 pm)
European news from our insider, JLBL!! "The best seller brand in the LPS, HELC and luxury SUV niche altogether was BMW in 2005 and 2006!" The Chris Bangle revolution continues world-wide! I wish Edmunds had an emotorcon illustrating "bursting with pride." PS: It may be warm in Spain but it just got a little warmer at the other LPS and HELC corporate offices!
#23836 of 24700 Re: I'm [dewey] by tagman Feb 08, 2007 (3:28 pm)
Replying to: dewey (Feb 08, 2007 11:37 am) Exactly, Dewey... the obvious common sense things that brightness and houdini have mentioned are easy for all to see, but when specific quantitative numbers are inserted in place of a general process, then they need to be supported. It's one thing to say that there is an initial period of time in a model's cycle that it commands a higher price (common sense) than to say that prices peak at the 8-month mark, for example (requires supportive data). It's one thing to say that the price difference between an S and an LS expands or contracts under certain conditions (common sense) than to say the $20K difference disappears, for example (requires supportive data). We all have enough common sense here, for goodness sakes to understand and observe. But when brightness or anyone for that matter makes a quantitative statement, then it is common sense to want to know the analysis or data that is used to derive at his numbers... and that's what we've been asking for... it's just common sense to make such a request. TagMan Replies to this message: brightness04 (Feb 08, 2007 5:28 pm) dewey (Feb 09, 2007 7:16 am)
#23837 of 24700 Re: Soon to be Sold on our Shores: BMW Alpina B7 [dewey] by lexusguy Feb 08, 2007 (3:54 pm)
Replying to: dewey (Feb 08, 2007 11:13 am) Not true. The RS and AMG cars as well as the Motorsport cars all have heavily revised suspensions, retuned gearing, fairly extensive body mods, and botique engines. Unless I missed something, it doesn't sound like the Alpina B7 has any of that. It seemed like a fairly off-the-shelf 7 series with a supercharger. Replies to this message: dewey (Feb 09, 2007 7:18 am)
#23838 of 24700 Re: I'm [dewey] by brightness04 Feb 08, 2007 (5:12 pm)
Replying to: dewey (Feb 08, 2007 11:07 am) Is this your research on how the $20K 07 S Class- 07 LS price premium disappears? Nope. Already told you where my confidence came from regarding real S class pricing will be in much of its model cycle: previous cycles. Arguments and vindications regarding other car models are just proof of validity on the cycle theory . . . and how silly it really is to make pricing statements based solely on the first few months of a 6-8 year model cycle. A crystal ball would be required since there have never been LS LWB sales prior to the 07 model. One thing probably is for sure: even deeper discounting for LWB S class this time around because of what you mentioned.
#23839 of 24700 Re: I'm [dewey] by brightness04 Feb 08, 2007 (5:18 pm)
Replying to: dewey (Feb 08, 2007 11:37 am) The discussion is on LS vs. S, not just 07 LS vs. 07 S. Both marques have been around for much longer than a fraction of a model year. The vast difference in MSRP between LS and S have almost always been reduced to next-to nothing in recent model years and model cycles in terms of real transaction cost, even when they were more than $20k apart in MSRP's to start off. "This time it's different" is a battle cry for hucksters, and the ill-informed.
#23840 of 24700 Re: I'm [tagman] by brightness04 Feb 08, 2007 (5:28 pm)
Replying to: tagman (Feb 08, 2007 3:28 pm) It's one thing to say that there is an initial period of time in a model's cycle that it commands a higher price (common sense) than to say that prices peak at the 8-month mark, for example (requires supportive data). Who said "_peak at_ 8-month mark"? Please provide supporting evidence. It's one thing to say that the price difference between an S and an LS expands or contracts under certain conditions (common sense) than to say the $20K difference disappears, hmm, if you agree that the price difference between S and LS contracts then you are contradicting the original MB advocate's quatitative statement regarding the $20k brand premium. when brightness or anyone for that matter makes a quantitative statement, then it is common sense to want to know the analysis or data that is used to derive at his numbers... Then how exactly does what you termed "common sense" regarding price gap fluctuation (quoted above) jive with the quantitative statement ($20k) asserted by a MB advocate? If you agree that price gap shrinks, and IMHO shrink dramaticly, during the bulk of the model cycle as common sense, I'm not sure what our disagreement is. The $20k quantitative number was not introduced by me, but by an MB advocate. My point was that the $20k claim is not backed up by real life transactions during the bulk of a model cycle. In case it's not obvious, nobody claimed the car going down in price by exactly $20k, not a cent more or a cent less. An MB advocate made the $20k quantitative statement; please take up the issue with him.
#23841 of 24700 Re: An Audi A7 [dewey] by designman Feb 08, 2007 (5:43 pm)
Replying to: dewey (Feb 08, 2007 12:32 pm) Ugly. Fugly.
#23842 of 24700 $20K by designman Feb 08, 2007 (5:45 pm)
I'm scanning posts and not reading anything that has $20K in it.