|
|
|
|
 |
Ganplosive
 |
|
I just wanted to also post that I know where you guys are coming from, I'm equally frustrated and annoyed that Acura isn't doing what it's capable of doing. That said, in a more direct response to the concerns of Acura's core products not enjoying the limelight it used to, all I can say is that -
Yeah, it's true that the TL lost its luster, the RL is selling like sh*t and the TSX needs a boost in the arm, but that's not necessarily the ZDX's fault. Had Acura spent the ZDX resources on the core products, there's no guarantee that the TSX, TL, or RL would resume top-of-the-class sales. The demise of these vehicles are also largely attributed to the competition, by bringing the ZDX to the market Acura essentially divested its portfolio. What if the ZDX had been a huge hit? What if the coupe had been a horrible concept / sale? We don't know, and neither does Acura, they took a gamble and while it didn't pay off as handsomely as they'd anticipated, it doesn't mean that it was a wrong decision.
Think of it this way, maybe Acura has a SUV team, a sedan and a sports (HSV) team. Due to the nature of the platforms, these engineer and designer teams were units and non-interchangeable so what Acura did was utilize an idle unit rather than siphon expertise away from the sedan / sports team? The sedan team is trying to rejuvenate the RL, while the SUV team with successes like the MDX thought that they could work their magic once more. Sedan team worked their asses off on the new RL, and SUV team worked on the ZDX. ZDX had an earlier due date, and was pushed to market while the sedan team basically got cut circa 2008.
ZDX gets produced, went and earned some money (or all money) back. Everything else cut because it would require more costs for unsure market. Would it have made the investments back? I don't know, we didn't get to find out.
These are just my assumptions, they could be just as valid as the other people's assumptions regarding how the ZDX siphoned and wasted resources.
|
Ganplosive
|
|
|
diversify* Although in many people's views maybe Acura did "divest" lolol
|
Colin
|
|
Ganplosive wrote:
The ZDX platform shared from the MDX and Pilot was simply there for the taking. The model itself brought new frontiers to Acura interior finishes (and market data for upkeep etc). I don't get the resources and engineering that you guys keep talking about...
Let's see... V6 engine, MDX platform, SH-AWD, a group of designers, existing factory capacity and staff.
Regardless of how or why it was brought to the market (before times have changed: because it was a sunken cost, because it was low barriers of entry...
Is the ZDX a complete waste of an exercise? Only time will tell. But fwiw - coupe profile, great interior, panoramic roof, new design language..
|
Thanks, I'll add to this. I know I've discussed this many times. In my conversations with factory folk, you are correct. The ZDX was relatively "low hanging fruit". All of the bits and pieces were already there, and a low volume vehicle was a good test bed for the new manufacturing techniques needed to create those dramatic rear fenders we're sure to see going forward.
Are you familiar with the phrase "the die is cast"? In this case we can take it (quite literally) to mean the machines, tooling and "dies" used to stamp the sheet metal had already been cast. Since these manufacturing tools are paid for in advance, in the case of the ZDX, it cost less to go forward then to go backwards. For all the criticism leveled against "cheap" Honda, do you really think they would have chosen a more expensive path? This will soon get an MMC, I'm sure the outcry will begin anew. However, when building product on this scale, I'm quite sure that the cost of an MMC was budgeted into the car at the outset and not a 'new' cost.
|
VTECRacer
|
|
Ganplosive wrote:
Why not have the cake AND eat it too? Acura MUST kill the ZDX in order to bring coupes and 9000 RPM cars onto the market? Why does everything have to be so either / or?
The ZDX platform shared from the MDX and Pilot was simply there for the taking. The model itself brought new frontiers to Acura interior finishes (and market data for upkeep etc). I don't get the resources and engineering that you guys keep talking about, just how much more did Acura actually invest to draw up the ZDX? Is there an actual statement from Acura that said, "Acura spent __________ and __________ amount of _________ to get the ZDX to the market that would've otherwise gone to ________."?
Let's see... V6 engine, MDX platform, SH-AWD, a group of designers, existing factory capacity and staff. It's not like today they cancelled your coupes and messed up the RL on purpose to get the ZDX out on time. I'll take it a step further - they straight up cancelled the HSV and V8 RL, what about THOSE wasted resources?
I really don't get it. The ZDX was the closest being done, Honda / Acura obviously thought that the model was ready enough for production AND that it was low enough of a cost to continue on with bringing it to market. Now that it's already here, everyone's demanding it be killed by fire. It's not like the ZDX cancelled the V8 RWD HSV / RL / COUPES, it's the market stupid (lighthearted). Had the other products in the pipeline been ready for market, maybe Honda / Acura might have continued forth and brought it to market. I don't know, I'm not Ito-San or a member of the board, and neither are any of us. I'd rather not play the assumption game, but stick with the hard numbers that I've posted further up.
Regardless of how or why it was brought to the market (before times have changed: because it was a sunken cost, because it was low barriers of entry, because Acura was stupid, because Acura can and wanted to, I don't know), the model's already here and introduced IMO a risky move by Acura to push beyond where this traditionally conservative company is willing to go. For what it's worth, the product has found homes in buyers willing to fork over cold-hard-green, and I'm sure it's helped Acura's bottom line more than it hurt it.
Is the ZDX a complete waste of an exercise? Only time will tell. But fwiw - coupe profile, great interior, panoramic roof, new design language, and the audacity to build it while big shots like Audi and Lexus hasn't even dare to venture into (yet, Audi plans to), makes me want to love this car DESPITE THE FACT That it runs completely contrary to the "smart value" proposition that Acura is now devoted to.
BOTTOM LINE: Acura having the ZDX in its lineup bothers me NONE and gives the dealerships one more (unique) product to sell, which in my opinion is a good for a company starved of models.
|
^^^^ +1
|
dominik331
|
|
Ganplosive wrote:
I think it's a great idea. You don't know whether or not those ZDX sales are coming from existing Acura customers. For all we know, the existence of ~100 sales a month @ 55K x 12 months = 66 million in revenue that would've not existed (in America alone) on the bottom line. Now I don't know how much your annual income is, but I think 66 million USD is a lot of good money to be made per year. Bump 100 sales to 200 a month, and you're looking at 132 million a year.
Better yet, you need to step out and see the kind of cachet that the ZDX will hold in a global market. Point is, Acura's offering something not that many people can find, to a small amount of people. That IMO is much better than offering an extremely outdated RL which is being cannibalized by Acura's other vehicles / beaten to death by others.
Look, I get it. You and TOV hate the ZDX. But just because you don't like something, doesn't mean others shouldn't like it either. Despite it's low volume, the ZDX is still selling.
2009 numbers Decembers end - 79
2010 numbers Decembers end - 3529
2011 numbers Decembers end - 1564
That's a total of 5172 units moved total in 2010+2011.
accounting for the average transaction price of say 52K (I highly doubt people buying the ZDX would forgo tech / advanced, I mean it's a ZDX ffs).
5172 x 52,000 = 268,944,000 USD in revenue.. Why the fuck not? There are 5093 people that paid for it. For everyone that hates the ZDX (let's assume 200 million people) to put a dollar AGAINST the ZDX, the model is still out earning ~69 million dollars. Put THAT into perspective.
|
How much out of those $52K would actually go into Acura's pockets in revenue? Think about it.
I don't mind the ZDX at all, Im actually one of the few that like the damn thing here, but it is impractical for me, so I wouldn't buy it. That's its main shortcoming. A lot of people feel the same way.
Other than the hard to mold rear fenders, what else does it offer that can not be done in another Acura vehicle, specially the MDX. I like how it drives and handles, but the MDX can do the same. It's got a nicer interior than the rest of the line up, but they could've tried that on any other model.
You talk about the resources being there already, yeah you're right, they got the resources to share and build a TSX or TL based coupe variant too. (whether people would buy it or not...that's another story) but that's what Acura has been missing and people have been asking for. And why does it take so long for Acura to introduce a new gen of the RL? 8years?
I am not against it (the ZDX) at all. My point is that if Acura people gives its customers what they want first, there would be less complaints about the ZDX.
Honda/Acura needs to focus on the market. Pay more attention to the competition (Civic, anyone?).
|
DCR
|
|
Ganplosive wrote:
Is the ZDX a complete waste of an exercise? Only time will tell. But fwiw - coupe profile, great interior, panoramic roof, new design language, and the audacity to build it while big shots like Audi and Lexus hasn't even dare to venture into (yet, Audi plans to), makes me want to love this car DESPITE THE FACT That it runs completely contrary to the "smart value" proposition that Acura is now devoted to.
BOTTOM LINE: Acura having the ZDX in its lineup bothers me NONE and gives the dealerships one more (unique) product to sell, which in my opinion is a good for a company starved of models.
|
Time will tell? How much longer do we have to wait? The alarm clock has been ringing for a long while already, but no one at Acura has heard it.
People repeatedly claim that the ZDX didn't cost very much to make, but I don't buy that at all. From concept planning, packaging, design, plant allocation, unique interior and sheetmetal, glass, marketing...millions and millions spent. Where is the return? Bad press and terrible sales? It is an albatross on the neck of Acura and needs to be killed.
I do not disagree that they entered into uncharted water for the ZDX niche, but pinning the brand on such a venture was simply a bad decision. A brand like BMW or Audi can afford to have one or two niche sellers lying in the brand, because they already have a very strong luxury reputation, foothold and customer base.
As fas as giving Acura dealers another model to sell...I'd be willing that some of the folks here would have an easier time selling a dead body than this thing.
|
Colin
|
|
DCR wrote:
I don't buy that at all.
|
The 'problem' is that you don't know. When people who do know tell you differently, you respond by saying 'I don't buy it'. This makes the entire topic nothing more than a automotive equivalent of the Muslims vs. Christians or Catholics vs. Protestants.
|
NealX
|
|
Colin wrote:
DCR wrote:
I don't buy that at all.
|
This makes the entire topic nothing more than a automotive equivalent of the Muslims vs. Christians or Catholics vs. Protestants.
|
Sure...
|
Mikeydred
|
|
DCR wrote:
Ganplosive wrote:
Is the ZDX a complete waste of an exercise? Only time will tell. But fwiw - coupe profile, great interior, panoramic roof, new design language, and the audacity to build it while big shots like Audi and Lexus hasn't even dare to venture into (yet, Audi plans to), makes me want to love this car DESPITE THE FACT That it runs completely contrary to the "smart value" proposition that Acura is now devoted to.
BOTTOM LINE: Acura having the ZDX in its lineup bothers me NONE and gives the dealerships one more (unique) product to sell, which in my opinion is a good for a company starved of models.
|
Time will tell? How much longer do we have to wait? The alarm clock has been ringing for a long while already, but no one at Acura has heard it.
People repeatedly claim that the ZDX didn't cost very much to make, but I don't buy that at all. From concept planning, packaging, design, plant allocation, unique interior and sheetmetal, glass, marketing...millions and millions spent. Where is the return? Bad press and terrible sales? It is an albatross on the neck of Acura and needs to be killed.
I do not disagree that they entered into uncharted water for the ZDX niche, but pinning the brand on such a venture was simply a bad decision. A brand like BMW or Audi can afford to have one or two niche sellers lying in the brand, because they already have a very strong luxury reputation, foothold and customer base.
As fas as giving Acura dealers another model to sell...I'd be willing that some of the folks here would have an easier time selling a dead body than this thing.
|
Actually I have read several articles praising the ZDX for what it is. Outside of getting criticize for being different the ZDX has not been hit that hard, many have called it a looker, you either love it or you don't. I had one as a loaner for a few days and I think it could find a market, loved the exhaust note and the glass roof is unbelievable, especially at night. It surely looks futuristic enough to keep it around and maybe the market will open up, after all Mercedes and Audi are ready to jump in. If they can keep the RL around for 8 years, no reasons why not too keep a spinoff of a MDX until there are no more buyers. 80-150 buyers a month is not that bad for a niche. Like other have stated who knows what we would have gotten had the ZDX not come out, we may have got nothing and still would be complaining, I commend Acura for the attempt and none of us have an Honda/Acura accountant in our back pocket to determine if it has been a failure, for all you know the design exercise may be paid for. The ZDX handicap is its engine, does not have the oomph to go along with the looks!
|
Jesse
|
|
I agree with Ganplosive.
If the ZDX isn't sucking money out of Acura and if the cost to develop the SUV-Coupe-Whatever is minimal, why kill it? Besides it's a beautifully designed vehicle. I know the ZDX is impractical but luxury has never been about practicality.
IMO, I hope Acura shouldn't kill the ZDX. It does help lift the company's troubled brand image and it is a very intriguing vehicle.
|
DCR
|
|
Colin wrote:
DCR wrote:
I don't buy that at all.
|
The 'problem' is that you don't know. When people who do know tell you differently, you respond by saying 'I don't buy it'. This makes the entire topic nothing more than a automotive equivalent of the Muslims vs. Christians or Catholics vs. Protestants.
|
I don't know, but neither do you.
Read this, only this, and tell me if you don't see dollar signs galore:
http://www.honda.com/newsandviews/article.aspx?id=6163-en
Given what they ASSUMED they would sell with this unit, I can easily see that they dropped plenty of money in to it.
There might be some shared platform bits, but those stamping dies are not cheap, nor is the injection molding/design of the new interior for the ZDX. With that alone, how could have they escaped millions spent? What did the entire collective design team that spent 3 years or more designing it make?
There had to be tremendous sunk costs with this, period. Acura hasn't developed a pennies on the dollar method of developing cars, unless you know something I do not.
|
DCR
|
|
Jesse wrote:
I agree with Ganplosive.
If the ZDX isn't sucking money out of Acura and if the cost to develop the SUV-Coupe-Whatever is minimal, why kill it? Besides it's a beautifully designed vehicle. I know the ZDX is impractical but luxury has never been about practicality.
IMO, I hope Acura shouldn't kill the ZDX. It does help lift the company's troubled brand image and it is a very intriguing vehicle.
|
What?
It EMBODIES the troubled brand image!!!
|
Colin
|
|
DCR wrote:
Colin wrote:
DCR wrote:
I don't buy that at all.
|
The 'problem' is that you don't know. When people who do know tell you differently, you respond by saying 'I don't buy it'. This makes the entire topic nothing more than a automotive equivalent of the Muslims vs. Christians or Catholics vs. Protestants.
|
I don't know, but neither do you.
Read this, only this, and tell me if you don't see dollar signs galore:
http://www.honda.com/newsandviews/article.aspx?id=6163-en
Given what they ASSUMED they would sell with this unit, I can easily see that they dropped plenty of money in to it.
There might be some shared platform bits, but those stamping dies are not cheap, nor is the injection molding/design of the new interior for the ZDX. With that alone, how could have they escaped millions spent? What did the entire collective design team that spent 3 years or more designing it make?
There had to be tremendous sunk costs with this, period. Acura hasn't developed a pennies on the dollar method of developing cars, unless you know something I do not.
|
Don't you see that none of that matters? The money to develop the car was already spent. The choice was:
A) Not make the car and lose it all
or
B) Make a few and recoup something
Every car built and sold is better than NO cars built and sold cause there is no way to get any of the development money back OTHER than selling the car.
Now, the other intangibles like the 'stink' of a poorly selling car are not what I'm talking about. Would be brand reputation be better off without the car? Probably, because nobody wants to be on 'poorest selling' lists, but I'm not trying to discuss that aspect.
|
DCR
|
|
Well, at this point, I think that is the aspect that matters.
Given the potential the three new models have, I think a simultaneous discontinuation of the ZDX would be perfectly timed, because sooner or later they will have to MMC it.
|
Colin
|
|
DCR wrote:
Well, at this point, I think that is the aspect that matters.
Given the potential the three new models have, I think a simultaneous discontinuation of the ZDX would be perfectly timed, because sooner or later they will have to MMC it.
|
It's going to be MMC'd later this year, so we'll see some revisions for 2013 MY.
|
Jesse
|
|
DCR wrote:
Jesse wrote:
I agree with Ganplosive.
If the ZDX isn't sucking money out of Acura and if the cost to develop the SUV-Coupe-Whatever is minimal, why kill it? Besides it's a beautifully designed vehicle. I know the ZDX is impractical but luxury has never been about practicality.
IMO, I hope Acura shouldn't kill the ZDX. It does help lift the company's troubled brand image and it is a very intriguing vehicle.
|
What?
It EMBODIES the troubled brand image!!!
|
I'm talking from a design perspective. And IMO I don't think it embodies the troubled brand image. There were lots of compromise on that vehicle for the sake of styling and design. And I believe that is how Acura should work because Acura is supposed to be a luxury company. They shouldn't be holding back.
It is only unfortunate that that vehicle came out at a time where Acura was like a piņata where people like to bash it.
|
Ganplosive
|
|
I like how for a moment the discussion turned into a "I don't know, but neither do you" moment. Probably the most true statements we've heard on TOV in a while, with so much armchair CEO'ing that goes around here hahaha.
I think for as far as the ZDX goes, that "ASPECT" is definitely worth discussing. A lot of us can relate and say that yeah, the costs were spent and it's better to sell some models and make something back than not sell anything at all.
Now let's talk about how the ZDX affects the Acura brand. DCR do you think that having a ZDX in the lineup genuinely hurts Acura (2 worst sellers, RL and ZDX) despite all the "firsts" that it brought? Assuming for a moment that the roofs and nice interiors and button less interface would NOT have shown up in other models.
I think the ZDX definitely brought more to the table than it eats up.
|
owequitit
|
|
Ganplosive wrote:
I like how for a moment the discussion turned into a "I don't know, but neither do you" moment. Probably the most true statements we've heard on TOV in a while, with so much armchair CEO'ing that goes around here hahaha.
I think for as far as the ZDX goes, that "ASPECT" is definitely worth discussing. A lot of us can relate and say that yeah, the costs were spent and it's better to sell some models and make something back than not sell anything at all.
Now let's talk about how the ZDX affects the Acura brand. DCR do you think that having a ZDX in the lineup genuinely hurts Acura (2 worst sellers, RL and ZDX) despite all the "firsts" that it brought? Assuming for a moment that the roofs and nice interiors and button less interface would NOT have shown up in other models.
I think the ZDX definitely brought more to the table than it eats up.
|
Personally, I think the ZDX is simply a scapegoat for Acura's other perceived issues.
First, you don't hear anyone bitching about the low sales of the NSX, and it was lucky to sell as many cars in a single year as the ZDX is selling in a month... Granted different price levels, but still.
The problem is that the ZDX is pretty much superfluous in all regards. It neither enhances nor detracts from the success of Acura. If they sell ZERO it still wouldn't fix the problems with the rest of the brand. Enthusiasts, on this board especially, use it as a symbol of Acura's problems. However, I contend that the lack of a ZDX wouldn't necessarily fix Acura's "problem." The TL would still be an AWD Accord with a controversial schnoz, the RL would still sell a pittance and the TSX would still be considered to be "too close" to the TL in size (even though it is like a full 10" smaller). The ZDX could have never existed and Acura would still have each and every single one of the issues it currently has, so IMO, it is simply metaphorical.
What I am sort of glad to see is Acura work on refocusing the entire brand, rather than cancel one model because a group of people is carrying a bunch of pitchforks on a witch hunt. However, unless they put some engineering lust back into the products, it isn't going to matter what they do for the enthusiasts. ZDX or not, Acura has other, larger problems IMO.
|
Ganplosive
|
|
Agreed. There are so many other issues that Acura needs to tackle right now, killing the ZDX shouldn't be one of them. Give the model a chance, sales figure have yet to come in from China. For all we know the model might sell extremely well in China and more than recoup for its original costs.
Least we forget, the ZDX is largely manufactured in the United States. This is one of the few gems that's being exported out of the country, soon globally along with the MDX and TL.
Note** The TSX is badged Honda from Japan, but the RL is badged Acura also largely from Japan.
|
Colin
|
|
Ganplosive wrote:
I like how for a moment the discussion turned into a "I don't know, but neither do you" moment. Probably the most true statements we've heard on TOV in a while, with so much armchair CEO'ing that goes around here hahaha.
|
Funny thing is, I actually do know... many things have been shared with me through the years.
|
Ganplosive
|
|
|
LOL hahaha well Colin, I for one am glad to be on the right side this time. I suppose the question now becomes how much will Acura invest in the ZDX, will it reinvigorate sales and are there plans for a FMC? I certainly hope so, Acura's has has too many one-off models that live for a cycle or two and then disappearing, not enough continuity.
|
DCR
|
|
Ok, since Colin knows...
How much did the ZDX cost to develop?
|
Colin
|
|
Ganplosive wrote:
I suppose the question now becomes how much will Acura invest in the ZDX, will it reinvigorate sales and are there plans for a FMC? I certainly hope so, Acura's has has too many one-off models that live for a cycle or two and then disappearing, not enough continuity.
|
We'll never know real dollar amounts and it's not really relevant cause we wouldn't know what that means in the whole perspective of other products. IWO, how much did it cost to develop the entire chassis that it rides on? Essentially, they didn't build the car to lose money, they built it to lose less money than not building it.
Will an MMC help sales? I think it's doubtful unless they find a way to lop $5000 off the price of the car. Will there be a FMC? I couldn't say, but I think it's obvious that this was made with a different product/brand philosophy than is currently in force (ie smart luxury).
So I'd have to say that if it were to live on, they have to find a way to increase the value quotient relative to the class it competes in. Also, whether the class is even worth pursuing. Anyway, none of this has anything to do with the new RDX or ILX and it's nothing that isn't discussed endlessly in the monthly sales threads. Moving on.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - 1 [2] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
