Ask the Car People.SM


Jaguar X-Type

2594 messages,  Last post on May 04, 2013 at 1:02 PM

You are in the Jaguar X-Type Forum.

What is this discussion about? Jaguar X-Type, Sedan

Messages Page 124 of 260

#1225 of 2594 lenscap's article by jagboyxtype

Aug 19, 2002 (6:48 pm)

You guys! I read that article way back some time around March before I even got my X-TYPE! That article is terribly outdated. Besides, I'm sure lenscap accidentally (you know, totally by mistake) left out all of the quotes in defense of the X-TYPE and the entire "entry level luxury sport class". From what I remember, the whole article was about how the X-TYPE would destroy Jaguar, and how they're going to sell too many of them, and how prestige will be lost and yada yada yada...! The whole article was quite laughable, there's no reason to get angry at all.
 
Here are some counter statements to some of the article's quotes anyway:
 
-"'Jaguar sees quick money to be made in diluting the brand, and they don't see the long-term problem,' warns Jim Twitchell, a University of Florida professor of English and advertising, and a specialist in luxury branding. '...They are taking a great brand story and (squandering) it away.'"
 
Well, since the X-TYPE was made to attract new buyers to the Jaguar brand who will "upgrade" to higher Jaguar models, there doesn't seem to be any "long-term problem" at all, Mr. Twitchell. It actually appears to be quite the opposite. That new XJ8 looks mighty appealing to me, and I drive an X-TYPE!
 
-Later Twitchell says Jaguar is "...bending over a dollar to pick up a dime....you don't change who you are when you buy a Jaguar X-Type. You own a cheap version of what's already out there..."
 
First, any idiot who buys a car to "change who he or she is" probably doesn't even diserve a car in the first place. Secondly, there is a difference between the words "cheap" and "inexpensive". Many people have forgotten this and are replacing the longer "inexpensive" with the shorter and easier to say and type, "cheap". However, my answer to the quote is "Yes", the X-TYPE is a less-expensive version of what's already out there: It is a very nicely priced Jaguar (and unless it was the very first Jaguar, it cannot be something that is not already out there).
 
-"In a study of the X-Type's cost to Jaguar, FutureBrand, an international brand consultancy in New York, estimates that the car has erased $637 million, or 17.5 percent, of the $3.635 billion in Jaguar brand value that existed before its launch last year." Part of the loss in value is based on Jaguar's strength and stability vs. other brands in the same class."
 
So, that would be why, and I quote from a recent article from August 4, 2002, "residual values on leased Jaguars are rising while those of several German rivals are staying flat or declining" largely in part due to the introduction of the X-TYPE. The only way for that to happen would be for demand for Jaguars to be picking up, and in turn "brand value" would be rising. Hmmm, looks like FutureBrand's estimates were off a bit.
 
-"'To do proper brand management, you have to do the product right,' said Steve Saxty, executive director of the automotive practice at FutureBrand. 'Clearly, people are getting it wrong. The world has turned against Jaguar because the product doesn't deliver,' he said. 'There is no excitement about the X-Type.'"
 
Really, no excitement? People against Jaguar? That's why there were many thousands of pre-orders before the car even debuted - right? That's why when the car did debut, Jaguar's sales went up 104 % in parts of Europe and up 62% in the U.S. as of June 2002! That's why it's impossible to get vehicles with in-high-demand options without ordering them from the factory directly. That's why "Nine out of 10 X-Type buyers are new to Jaguar" and "Since then, X-Type sales have continued to climb. Overall, the 18,662 X-Types sold through June are fewer than 100 cars behind the Audi A4, an established model in the segment". Again, FutureBrand is wrong. On top of that, that's also why the X-TYPE dominates an unheard of 65% and 67% of the entry-level/mid-luxury class in sales for Great Britain and Italy respectively. I'm sure the people at Jaguar are excited too.
 
-"The article goes on to say that the X-Type is selling well, but at the expense of losing sales to the more expensive Jaguar models. Although Mercedes has a cheaper car in the C230, that car is only slated for worldwide sales of 18,000 vs. 100,000 for the X-Type. Therefore, the C230 will not dilute the Mercedes brand like the X-Type will with Jaguar."
 
Yes, the X-TYPE did take sales from the other Jaguar models, but its sales outweigh the sales of the other Jaguar models had they not had some sales taken by the X-TYPE and had the X-TYPE not been introduced. Sales-wise, the X-TYPE has been a great success for Jaguar and in what the other Jaguar models lost to the X-TYPE in sales, the X-TYPE made up for and more, as well as taking sales from competators (again, 9 out of 10 X-TYPE buyers are new to Jaguar). Also, let's not forget that the X-TYPE is a fine Jaguar saloon, and that Jaguar has been making saloons like it and the XJ and the S-TYPE for its entire existance. It really isn't a radical departure from any of the traditions or values that Jaguar holds dear. It does introduce new technology and new buyers, but all of that is good for Jaguar. Also, when Jaguar starts selling 200,000 total cars a year globally, that number is still very exclusive when compared to the 500,000 BMW 3-Series that are sold alone in one year; 100,000 X-TYPEs is not a lot. Also, Mercedes-Benz could sell just one C230 hatchback and lose more "brand prestige" than Jaguar with the X-TYPE because the C230 hatchback is a radical departure from traditional Mercedes-Benz values. The X-TYPE is a smaller Jaguar saloon in size and that's about it, everything else is there; the C230 hatchback is, well, a hatchback for Heaven's sake! But even then, if Mercedes-Benz wants to enter a new market and expand, why should we hold that against them, or BMW with the 1-Series? (BTW - Jaguar isn't going that low in the market with $47,000 X-TYPEs for sale v. $25,000 M-B's and $20,000 BMWs).
 
-"Those elite brands can effectively move downmarket if the cheaper products still occupy a premium position in the new segments they enter" says Susan Jacobs, president of auto consultancy Jacobs & Associates. "Jaguar is smothering their cars with incentives to get the products moving. That hurts the brand more than the vehicles themselves..."
 
The only incentive is the "London Calling" special, which is just a 2002 model clear out so that the 2003's can come in. "London Calling" ends Sept. 3, new 2003's arrive Sept. 5 - Hmmm. Also, I think that everyone here has heard the complaints about how the good lease rates, etc. are only good on "stripper" versions of the cars and we all know that options add up quickly. Besides, who isn't giving incentives on their cars these days? Jaguar's certainly not smothering their cars with them, and they are moving into premium postions in their cars' markets (especi

#1226 of 2594 Part II by jagboyxtype

Aug 19, 2002 (6:49 pm)

especially Europe with domination of over half of some of the market segments).
 
-"'What hurts Jaguar most is that it is a brand without a strong set of loyal buyers,' said David Martin, president of the InterBrand consultancy in New York. 'When Mercedes launches an automobile, it's relative to a large pool of goodwill, so it doesn't degrade the franchise that much,' Martin said. 'But a brand in flux like Jaguar can be savaged by one bad move.'"
 
Remember that Jaguar had been selling only 2 models for the last two decades though. The $60,000 XJ saloon and the $70,000 XK/XJS coupe/convertible. The average age of a Jaguar on the road in 2001 was 15 to 20 years old and that of course included new S-TYPEs. People couldn't afford to buy another Jaguar when they'd pay that much for a car, and buyers of the XJ and XK are historically much older than X-TYPE buyers - who will have a chance in life to buy another car both because they are younger and because the car is a bit less expensive. Jaguar is creating loyal buyers with their new cars, and Mercedes-Benz is actually gaining none if there is any truth to the following quote: "Through June, Jaguar sales in the bellwether U.S. market were up 62.1 percent over last year, easily outpacing rivals Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Lexus. In western Europe, sales of Jaguars surged 66.1 percent, compared with 3.6 percent for Audi, 0.4 percent for BMW and flat sales for Mercedes".
 
Jaguar also only has around 150 dealerships in the entire U.S. It has 3 in Mexico and a few more in Canada. For the X-TYPE to sell so well with much less than even half the number of dealerships of its competators speaks for itself.
 
In conclusion, that old article was nothing but an "Its the end of the world" cry in a futile attempt to deride the X-TYPE and Jaguar. And with the way things have actually been going for both the X-TYPE and Jaguar, things look pretty bright to me.
 
"Jaguar is a challenger. We're challenging the established order."

#1227 of 2594 jagboyxtype by lenscap

Aug 20, 2002 (7:13 am)

A few comments:
 
1. There is no possible way you read the article I mentioned in March. The article, which as I said was in a June 24, 2002 industry magazine, contains sales data through the end of May. It was not even written in March.
 
Further, Vic Doolan is quoted in the article and is mentioned as being the President of Volvo Cars NA. He was not named to that post until June 2002 (prior to that he was Executive Director of the Premier Automotive Group), again proving the recency of the article.
 
2. According to the article, Jaguar had been using incentives to move their cars prior to London Calling. In fact, the article mentions Jaguar's strategy of moving cars by heavy discounting as similar to the techniques used by Infiniti up until this year (Infiniti has since stopped the practice).
 
3. The article contained virtually no positive comments (ones you claim I left out). There were some positive notes, but most came from Mike O'Driscoll, president of Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover NA. So yes, I did leave his comments out because they are biased and not independent.
 
4. You question FutureBrand's quantification of brand values. They are based on three variables: its forecast of the brand's financial performance, its assessment of the role of the brand in driving profit or cash flow, and its assessment of the finacial strength and stability of the brand vs. brands in the same class.
 
5. I didn't want to interject my opinion on the article, but for the most part I disagree with it. I feel Jaguar had no choice but to move "downmarket" and capture younger buyers with cheaper cars. Further, I don't even feel they have gone "downmarket" since the X-Type is still $30,000+. I do disagree with BMW and Mercedes thinking of selling $20,000 cars.
 
So, despite your negativity toward me I for the most part agree with you. As I said in my first post, the article was controversial and would surely stir debate.

#1229 of 2594 lenscap- by jagboyxtype

Aug 21, 2002 (12:59 am)

I first viewed the article in dispute on the internet - before it reached the trade publication of which you speak. I will try and find the initial version of that article on the net, but I believe the link I have has since been severed and the article removed. Amendments are made to articles when displayed in different locations/formats: One of the last paragraphs in the "First Drive" of the Edmunds article on the X-TYPE is also located in a full-length review on the site autobytel.com and also can be found in the X-TYPE review located at womanmotorist.com, etc. The internet version of a Car&Driver X-TYPE comparison has many amendments from its initial paper printed version (changes in the actual text, not just mis-measured numbers). Again, I will try to find the version of the article I initially read which I read before I got my car - in March.
 
"2. According to the article, Jaguar had been using incentives to move their cars prior to London Calling. In fact, the article mentions Jaguar's strategy of moving cars by heavy discounting as similar to the techniques used by Infiniti up until this year (Infiniti has since stopped the practice)."
 
I used the "London Calling" as an example for today. That article was old as I have said. Today, the only incentives are the "London Calling" (expires September 3rd) and a good lease rate on the new 2003 S-TYPE, with the special lease rate expiring September 30th. However, at the time when I first saw the article, the only incentive was a special lease rate on 2.5 litre X-TYPEs ($349 per month for 39 months or something like that) - now over or ending at dealerships. You can go here: <http://www.autosite.com/new/grabbag/rebatet.asp> if you do not believe me. See "Jaguar".
 
"3. The article contained virtually no positive comments (ones you claim I left out). There were some positive notes, but most came from Mike O'Driscoll, president of Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover NA. So yes, I did leave his comments out because they are biased and not independent."
 
Here is what you just said. I have emphasized my perspective:
 
--The article contained virtually no positive comments (ones you claim I left out). There were some positive notes, but most came from Mike O'Driscoll, president of Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover NA. So yes, I did leave his comments out because they are biased and not independent.--
 
Yes, I do remember many of the positive comments coming from Mr. O'Driscoll, but not all of them came solely from him as you would like to make us believe. The article was meant to give the views of those who believed the X-TYPE would hurt Jaguar v. Jaguar's beliefs about the X-TYPE and what it does for Jaguar's future. It was your opinion that O'Driscoll's comments were biased, however, by leaving out those comments for readers here, you left out half of the article and skewed the information you posted here to your own liking. You posted the equivalent of a half-truth in my opinion.
 
"4. You question FutureBrand's quantification of brand values. They are based on three variables: its forecast of the brand's financial performance, its assessment of the role of the brand in driving profit or cash flow, and its assessment of the financial strength and stability of the brand vs. brands in the same class."
 
I do not question them, I stated that they were incorrect with some of their estimates. I understood how their assessments work. And with those three variables, you would think that their information would be closer to the correct answer, but like a poor marksman, they keep missing the target. As I stated before, all FutureBrand has are estimates, where as the real world data for Jaguar and the X-TYPE speaks in their favor and against FutureBrand's predictions. "[X-TYPE] sales are beginning to exceed forecasts" was one of the latest quotes from the new article I found from August 4th, along with it mentioning how residual values for Jaguars are rising where competitors are in turn declining or staying flat. Jaguar's "brand value" has been rising with having more cars on the road v. less, even though the opposite would seem to be true in that situation. Also, "Halfway through the year, Jaguar is the fastest growing brand in the United States and Western Europe. Through June, Jaguar sales in the bellwether U.S. market were up 62.1 percent over last year, easily outpacing rivals Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Lexus." That's called demand, which FutureBrand gravely miscalculated in their Jaguar predictions.
 
"5. I didn't want to interject my opinion on the article, but for the most part I disagree with it. I feel Jaguar had no choice but to move "downmarket" and capture younger buyers with cheaper cars. Further, I don't even feel they have gone "downmarket" since the X-Type is still $30,000+. I do disagree with BMW and Mercedes thinking of selling $20,000 cars."
 
No matter how rude I may seem at times (and I'm really not trying to be - you have to kind of read my latest posts in a monotone kind of way), or how annoyed we can make each other, your opinions are always welcome, even when they differ from my own (!). I don't feel that Jaguar has moved "downmarket" either, by your reasoning and for another one. Along with the X-TYPE starting at $30,000+ as you said; to "move downmarket", a company would have to move all of their offerings to a lower "class" (for lack of a better word). Jaguar, with the X-TYPE, simply expanded its coverage of the luxury/luxury-sport class by offering a car in a slightly less expensive category of that class. They didn't decide to make cars only to compete in the "economy class" or "hatchback class", which would be "moving downmarket".
 
As for Mercedes-Benz and BMW creating cars for anything less than the "entry-level luxury-sport" market, I don't necessarily disagree with them, yet I'm still at the "I wonder why they'd do that?" stage. They especially cause me to wonder what their market plans/predictions are as BMW has Mini for the $17,000 - 20,000 hatchback class and Mercedes-Benz is supposed to be the "higher" offerings for DaimlerChrysler, able to use Chrysler/Dodge (and Hyundai and Mitsubishi) for "lower" offerings in the teens-to-mid-$20,000 range. Premier Automotive Group has stated that Jaguar will not compete any lower than the "entry-level luxury-sport" class, as they have Volvo for that as well as for SUV's and Land Rover for SUV's etc. as well. I would think that Mercedes-Benz and BMW would try to "preserve prestige" by doing something similar and utilizing Mini and Chrysler/Dodge, Jeep, Hyundai, Mitsubishi. Remember that the BMW and Mercedes-Benz names were not deemed "prestigious enough" for the companies' ultra-luxury Rolls-Royce and Maybach level offerings - I don't see why a similar but reversed plan would not apply for below

#1230 of 2594 part II by jagboyxtype

Aug 21, 2002 (12:59 am)

the other end of the luxury market. Lexus will not go below the IS300 and ES300 offerings in the "entry-level" class as they have Toyota for that. However, Acura has with the RSX (even though they have Honda), but because of their offerings like the RSX, they are arguably considered lower on the prestige scale than Lexus and those other marques which will not create lower-than-entry-level offerings. Oh well, it's their choice and I don't really have a problem with them choosing to do so. Besides, in Europe, M-B has the little A-Class, a "micro" minivan-type vehicle below the C230 hatchback (and they're thinking of bringing the A-Class here); and Audi has the A3 hatchback.
 
And to think that the "radical new Jaguar X-TYPE" could stir up so much commotion when all it did was complete Jaguar's saloon lineup and set Jaguar to double global sales while bringing in "the new Jag Generation" of buyers!
 
Best Regards,
Jagboyxtype

#1231 of 2594 Jaguar X-TYPE R by jagboyxtype

Aug 24, 2002 (6:16 am)

Well, I went hunting for fast cats today, here's what I found: an exposed, secret prototype X-TYPE R.

Pictures

1.) <http://www.sportscartesting.com/Media/cache/3/3115_596x447.jpg>

2.) <http://www.sportscartesting.com/Media/3/3111.jpg>

3.) <http://www.sportscartesting.com/Media/3/3112.jpg>

4.) <http://www.sportscartesting.com/Media/3/3113.jpg>

5.) <http://www.sportscartesting.com/Media/3/3114.jpg>

It's supercharged AJ-V6 will produce over 300 bhp.

__________________________________________

Dashboard & Center Console Material

Lately in the media, car reviewers have been saying that Audis have the leading interiors in terms of quality materials. Well, guess what! The dashboard and center console materials in the X-TYPE are supplied by Benoac (a subsidiary of ContiTech), who exclusively produces and supplies the dashboards of a unique material for the Jaguar X-TYPE and Audi. The machines which produce the dashes and consoles are called "slush machines" by the company, and they brought in two new ones just for the X-TYPE. The remaining older machines are used to make dashes/consoles for the Audi A6 and their flagship A8.

Here is the link: <http://www.contitech.de/ct/contitech/allgemein/erfolgsstories/01_10_jaguar_x_e.html>
______________________________________

Here are some very nice, high-quality pictures of the X-TYPE's debut at Geneva:

1.) <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.01.jpg>

2.) <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.02.jpg>

3.) <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.03.jpg>

4.) <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.04.jpg>

5.) <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.05.jpg>

6.) <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.06.jpg>

7. <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.07.jpg>

8.) <http://ultra.cto.us.edu.pl/pub/Multimedia/Pictures/Cars/Jaguar/2001.X-Typegeneva.08.jpg>
_____________________________________

That's all. My X-TYPE is still doing great, too! You all will think I'm crazy, but I still love the car as much as the day I first got it - even more so now.

Best Regards,
jagboyxtype

#1232 of 2594 x-type R by pluskin

Aug 26, 2002 (4:35 am)

Sorry to break the news, but the X-type R program was cancelled earlier this year.

#1233 of 2594 X Type R by rea98d

Aug 26, 2002 (6:38 pm)

Those pics seem to be nothing but a regular X-Type with bigger wheels. Granted, there could be a blower under the hood, but who's to tell. Maybe a couple of Jag engineers decided to have some fun with the auto-journalist spies, bolted a set of XJR wheels on an X-Type, and took it out in the snow for some fun. I know if I worked as a Jag engineer, that's what I'd do. Totally confuse the heck out of the car-spies.

#1234 of 2594 X-TYPE R by jagboyxtype

Aug 27, 2002 (4:12 pm)

It's been delayed. Not totally cancelled.

Messages Page 124 of 260

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