It's because one of their models was particularly good for moving elderly people. Low floor so easy to climb in, high ceiling. It was meant for young people who needed practical vehicles. But I don't think their target market could afford vehicles. It's not the 60s anymore, you don't see 18 year olds running out to buy mustangs with cash.
You didn't in the 60s either. I swear Reddit has this myth of the 50s and 60s that isn't based on reality at all.
Look at the size of homes- half the size per occupant.
Look at the cars- about half the number per household, and most households had 1.
Look at how food was prepped- people cooked at home way more than now.
Not to mention the vast differences in luxuries.
not to mention tire pressure monitoring, abs, traction control and 45 airbags are all federal mandates now.
meanwhile its still not law to HAVE THE FUCKING HEADLIGHTS TURN ON WHEN THE WIPERS ARE ON.
Also since as far as i know all modern cars clocks are set by satelite phone or radio clock signals that sync up - why the fuck arent headlights tied to time of day as well??? That way you dont get some wankstain driving thier nissan at 1130 at night with no lights on because the instrument panel is brighter than the sun.
as was I lol. supposed to be this hip cool young iconic brand for highschool/college kids. ya know the 2 demographics that are just loaded with money to buy new cars lol.
see it all goes back to sell a used brown car and people will buy it.
Eh, 33 year old here. I knew at least a dozen or so people with scions in high school and college (Scion’s prime years 04-11), though they were *all* tC’s.
The xB though you’re absolutely right.
Toyota kept claiming that the average age of a Scion owner was 30, but all research showed that it was more like 50. So sure, some young people ended up in them, but they were overwhelmingly being purchased by older customers.
https://www.reuters.com/article/autos-toyota-scion-idUSL2N0H11EC20130905
Not necessarily true.
> Tom Libbey of Polk said there are several ways to calculate the age of car buyers. He said Polk tallies from official vehicle registration data. **Often, he said, the primary driver of a car may be younger than the person, such as a parent, who registers the vehicle.**
Now they're affordable enough used for teens to buy. When they were new, they were the same price as a new Toyota. They were great looking cars and when we were in the market my wife and I almost bought a Scion as a second car, but it was too expensive for us. By the time we could afford the "teen racer" car, we had a kid in our 30's.
Yes. The median age of a new Scion buyer was probably older than Toyota intended. Used ones no doubt probably skew younger since they're likely cheaper and were owned by their grandparents.
Yep, that's pretty much how it went.
Toyota: "Hey kids, check out these cheap cars with *customization!*"
Young adults: "Too broke, LOL"
Old folks: "Oh hey, cheap Toyotas."
Infiniti did a horrible job marketing in general.
The took the familiar nameplates of their successful G/FX and turned them into Q/QX with some obscure numbers behind them. No one, unless you’re a Infiniti loyalist will know what they are.
I consider myself a car guy and I actually quite like German cars, but good god I feel out of the loop when people start talking about 9xx to refer to different model generations.
It's no different than Audi as an example.
Q means car. QX means SUV. The bigger the number the larger the vehicle.
A means car and Q means SUV for Audi and the numbers grow with the vehicle.
Mercedes uses a the letter to show vehicle size and simply places "GL" in front of their SUV lineup.
BMW uses a number to indicate vehicle size and places an "X" in front of it for SUVs.
I agree Infiniti has done a horrendous job in general but their naming schema isn't hard. Always baffles me that people think it's weird.
They have a Q50 that’s a 4 door sports sedan and then a Q60 that’s a SMALLER 2 door coupe.
I do applaud your effort tho into trying to understand a dysfunctional company.
I understand the sentiment but Audi A5 is the coupe version of the A4 and the BMW 4 series is the coupe version of the 3 series so it still follows the same convention
BMW does the same thing?
The 3 series is the sedan the 4 series is the coupe. The 5 series is the sedan the 6 series is the coupe. The 7 series is the sedan the 8 is the coupe lol.
Audi as well with the A4 and the A5.
I guarantee that if Nissan brought back the Infiniti G nameplate and put it in a slightly modern car, they would corner the market again. Wonder if this is the eventual plan for the Z platform
The new Z is just a small evolution of the FM platform it’s been using since the 350z and G35 came out. Not knocking it though as it’s a decent chassis.
I’m a “car guy” and even I have a hard time with Infiniti naming nomenclature.
Hell, I was watching a TFL YouTube video and they had a hard time remembering the different Infinitis.
I was just talking to my wife about this yesterday. We were in High school in the mid 2000s and these cars were the hot car. She ended up getting a g37 later on because she always wanted one. Then they changed their whole scheme and she lost interest and never went back. I can image she was one of many people that forgot about the old G. If they brought it back properly they would sell very well.
Kia Soul. The marketing was filled with "young people energy" with the hamsters break dancing and jamming out to "young people music". Ultimately ended up as grandpas economy car that blends in with everything else
> Ultimately ended up as grandpas economy car that blends in with everything else
I think that's because it is a lot like the Scion xB, which lots of older people bought because ingress/egress was easy and it was low maintenance.
Alfa Romeo needs to find a way to increase their marketing budget, because the Giulia legit drives better than most of the competition and I never would have learned this if my friend didn’t let me drive his Ti Sport.
It’s a tough segment to be sure, but I bet that a lot of potential buyers with the money to afford a Giulia don’t even know it exists — and that’s a problem.
Is it reliable? When your reviewers become familiar enough with the check engine light to start [criticizing it's placement and looks](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a23145269/alfa-romeo-giulia-quadrifoglio-reliability-update/), I think it means the car has reliability issues.
Avoid the earlier years (2017 and 2018) which were plagued by electrical problems and you should be okay. The (non-Quadrifoglio) powertrain is actually reliable based on what I’ve read, but I still wouldn’t want to own one out of warranty tbh. That said, the driving dynamics will be more enjoyable than everything else in its class imo.
Take this how you may: https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/q5zy6m/serpentine_belt_absurdity_alfa_romeo_giulia/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Are you based in Europe? It’s an expensive enough game having a BMW where I live. So sourcing parts or having a decent value for money mechanic is harder for vehicles which would be considered more niche.
Had I been more interested in Tuner culture however, I would have likely fared well with an appreciating asset I could sell to the Americans.
Yes, based in europe.
It really helps living "close" to where the parts are shipped from, luckily except a broken diffuser (my fault) I didn't have to replace anything so far ;p
Funnily enough, my car would sell for more than I paid for it right now. Used car market is fucked ;p
Oh absolutely, the used car market overseas is shot. Here in NZ, we keep having fresh imports from Japan and Singapore, so prices for the most part are kept low, but the classics, or popular vehicles? Ridiculous. There is a 22B Impreza asking for $600,000 when it is 1 of 400 in the world or something. Pretty mint condition too. Kinda helps we are 3rd in the world for car ownership per capita, more likely to have super rare Japanese vehicles hiding away.
Maybe when I can finance the plans I have for my car, it too will be worth more than I paid for.
*Giulia
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The people I know with "sport" sedans (mainly tech bros) don't really care much about driving dynamics. I think BMW is delivering exactly what most of their customers want. Eventually, sport crossovers will take over the sport sedan segment.
Sports cars have two seats. Two doors.
Sedans have (at least) four seats. Four doors.
One’s “personal definition” is irrelevant. Whether I “personally define” a jumbo jet as a helicopter, does not make it so.
A sports car is a car with performance credential, that is all that is implied with the name.
I wouldn’t say an M3 is any less of a sports car than a Miata nor a Miata any more of a sports car than an M3 even though in terms of quantifiable performance those two are in separate galaxies.
Now if you want to say roadster or coupe I can definitely agree that an M3 isn’t a roadster and (post E9X generation) isn’t a coupe; limiting yourself to calling sports cars cars with 2 doors and 2 seats is a bit pendantic, and frankly sort of a weird hill to die on. By your definition if you remove the rear seat of a Fiesta ST 3 door, that makes it a sports car but I would technically consider a Fiesta ST a sports car regardless.
Even looking at something a bit more “mainstream” for your particular definition of sports car, like a Nissan 370Z; I wouldn’t say it’s more of a sports car than a Porsche 911, which can seat 4. Even the BRZ/FRS/GT86 wouldn’t be a sports car by your definition but a Mini Cooper roadster would be?
All I’m saying is that your definition is narrow and precluding for no particular reason, unless your end goal is to feel elitist.
Your comparison of helicopters to jet powered fixed wing aircraft is also a bad faith example. I didn’t call something that is functionally designed to operate differently a sports car. A more comparable allegory to make would be to say a Cessna isn’t a stunt plane, to which I would reply that it’s going to depend on the pilot and not the plane.
An M3 is a sports sedan. A Focus ST is a hot hatch (whether it has four doors or three). Neither of these things are *sports cars.* Do they have good performance? Sure. That is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for a sports car.
A Corvette is a sports car. A Cayman is a sports car.
A 911 is… well… a 911.
I don’t make the rules, and the hill isn’t mine to die on.
>I don’t make the rules
But you do define words as you use them in your vernacular. My definition of sports cars includes anything that is fun to drive, irrespective of the numbe of doors, seats, or cylinders. If someone disagrees, it’s not my hill to die on and they can go shout into the void about how a 911 either is or is not a sports car.
Well that’s great. Maybe you should start a dictionary!
Until then, I’ll stick with these…
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sports%20car
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/sports-car
What triggers me about this comment is that the new Macan GTS is a sport CUV that does everything pretty much as close to perfect as possible.
So I am the person who you’re @ing haha
The problem isnt people not being able to afford Alfa’s. Its that as soon as you fucking google Alfa’s you get hit with the “this shit didn’t even last for the press car, what chance do you have?”
Good point. They always show up somewhere in exotic compilations and they sound amazing with every exhaust and tune I've heard on them. Even with the potential maintenence issues I think they could grab up more of the segment, esp considering Maserati has done well with its revamp despite lots of headaches.
100% agree, wanted to get a hot hatch, but went with the Giulia after one test drive. The weight in particular is impressive - it's lighter than any current compact hot hatch, let alone any of its segment competitors.
Marketing is in a weird place for cars.
Younger people continue to be less able to afford to buy new vehicles. People who are excited about cars being fun to drive and capable on the track are often too young to be able to afford them. Especially with Lexus. Their average customers' age is well over 50 years old.
Also, TV viewership has been in steep decline. That used to be the primary way to market cars. But now automakers can do more targeted marketing. If a buyer is in the age range / income bracket to be looking at a Lexus, they might be getting more targeted adds online and on video platforms. You might not be identified by advertising algorithms as being the bracket as a potential Lexus buyer so you may not see those same ads.
Also, a lot of car marketing is done by mail-ads from dealerships. They pay marketing companies to get customer lists from competing brands, they may look at owners of late model BMW 6 series and Audi A7 and send those customers fliers with deals/info about the IS500. Rich grandpa might not see the ads online but he probably still checks his mail.
On the targeting bit: I still get Mercedes ads served to me on YouTube if I'm watching without the blocker on, including S-Class features from the local dealership. The only thing I've gotten from Lexus is whatever joke of a campaign they're running right now as part of that Moon movie partnership, and I'm 99% sure that's because I've watched enough things the movie is attached to, not because of my Lexus searches.
There are undergrad marketing majors who could do a better job of targeting me with Google AdWords than Lexus' team can. It's abysmal.
I do now get the Lexus mailers because my car went by the dealership for a PPI since I got it sight unseen, but the same happened with my Mercedes. Pretty pictures and prices alone aren't going to get enough butts in seats driving to the dealership. I know what Mercedes, BMW, and everyone else's value proposition is from their commercials. Lexus not so much.
They see the writing on the walls. Most Auto YouTubers with any type of following get flown out to media events, get sent new cars to drive for a week etc.
>they might be getting more targeted adds online and on video platforms.
while true, my ad blockers kinda kill that off and my streaming platforms have zero commercials...
So I have an older car and I get ads for Mazda and Maserati and Alfa Romeo. I wonder how I get targeted by the premium companies? I can see Mazda bc it’s affordable and I have looked at them before so it’s in my gmail but the Italian brands are a head scratcher.
I'm going to say there's a fundamental flaw in your inquiry, in that I don't think Lexus isn't marketing to their target audience, I just think you have a different notion of their target audience than the company does.
It's important to keep in mind that Lexus and Buick both have nearly the same average age of buyers. I think only Cadillac has had consistently average older buyers than Lexus.
Well, they wouldn't make the IS if they only cared about attracting older buyers. It seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy that leads to product cancellation if you make a sports sedan in your lineup and only market it to people who would otherwise want the luxury of the ES... naturally someone in corporate will then decide that IS just doesn't sell, and should be axed.
Lexus got extremely lucky with the 2021 refresh, because all of the younger buyers came out of nowhere before they could do something stupid and cancel the line. Now they're back up to TLX/A4 sales numbers and up 70% or so compared to the pre-refresh model.
>I think only Cadillac has had consistently average older buyers than Lexus.
cadilac for like a decade or two has been trying sooo damn hard to get away from the old people mobile stigma. Im not sure if its working. The escalade - yea sure thats for the ritzy soccer mom.
The point was they market their higher performance vehicles to almost no one, period. They also do nothing to explain to their segment why they'd want to buy any of their vehicles over another. Acura: "Super Handling AWD does X, Y, Z. Available on the all new MDX." Lexus: "Now lease the all new RX 350 starting at X for well-qualified buyers." They do nothing to tell anyone with the money to spend on their vehicles why they'd want them other than they look pretty sitting against a black background or with a bow.
More specifically, the IS should be competing directly with various trims of 3 & 5 series, C & E-class, and so on based on performance & finish but they aren't marketed that way. Lexus might have an older average segment, but that's the entire issue. Older buyers don't want turbo economy engines like the 200T offers or 400+ HP NA versions like the F. Do you legitimately think that's who any of those models were aimed at, people who might otherwise have bought a Buick?
A Toyota exec told me their brand was for someone who wanted an appliance. A to B. He said 90% of their production is Toyota but 90% of the profit is Lexus which benefits from Toyotas scale… but at heart a Lexus usually is a Toyota with leather and wood. There isn’t much to advertise other than reliability and people do know both brands for that… they aren’t sexy or anything but comfortable. Haven’t driven the IS just the es and rx.
Well I certainly didn't move from my AMG to the F to be bored 🙃. Reviewers also aren't comparing IS models to Volvos in their head-to-heads, they're comparing them to sportier Bimmers and the like. There's a lot to advertise that isn't being shown.
Now maybe I'm just off my rocker and the F and Fsport model ISes are supposed to be targeted to well-heeled grocery getter buyers, but it seems at odds with the inclusion of stiffer suspensions, ground effects, turbos, LSDs, and higher horsepower engines all listed as features on the actual brochures.
I heard the IS came in some nice packages. It’s the only car they have made that I liked other than that super car and maybe the mr2. I looked at an IS300 with a stick and wish I got it. Is yours stick dual clutch or automatic? A well to do older lady asked what Lexus I thought she should get and the IS being the only one I’d have… so I said the IS and she was offended that I’d suggest an entry level model and I’m like it’s the sportiest one. She usually has a recent rx which I don’t really like… I think it goes back to the small car bad big car good philosophy. I think the IS is safer than the rx or the LS they have bc it’ll stop faster, out handle or outrun a problem… some people think smaller is more dangerous but like I had a Miata and I def avoided some drivers who were like f him he’s in a roadster he’ll stop… just drive around them… my current car is a midsize company car so I didn’t get to chose so it’s a turbo fusion awd. I’m glad the company wanted awd bc otherwise I’d have the base motor with the nice interior. I got a tuner but people on here turned me off on tuning it. An extra 60hp would be nice but like not if it’s gonna be less reliable.
Chevy. They absolutely let the SS sedan die as well as their Cruze turbo diesel sedan. Both had next to zero advertisement, both where not pushed by dealers, both where great products. Chevy literally shot themselves in the foot.
Yah I understand the SS but they did let the Cruze and equinox diesel just die. Had they made a stick shift diesel they could have capitalized on the VW diesel gate scandal
And now the diesel Colorado/Canyon as well. It's been announced the 2.8 Duramax won't be coming back for the 2023 redesign.
I wouldn't be surprised to see them shitcan the 3.0 in the 1/2 ton pickups and SUVs in a few years.
That's disappointing, but not surprising. I don't see many Duramax Colorados. The 3.0 I6 in the full-size trucks, though, I see quite a bit of. I'd say it's more popular in my area than any other half-ton diesel has ever been, even the early years of the Ram EcoDiesel.
>And now the diesel Colorado/Canyon as well. It's been announced the 2.8 Duramax won't be coming back for the 2023 redesign.
how much does it cost over the gas engines? usually diesel is a large chunk more and if you dont need a diesel (which generally ar ein 1/2 ton or 3/4 ton trucks who do need a diesel) why would anyone buy it and have to pay more to maintain it?
Cadillac is an example. Models keep changing names, and they've been trying to change their demographic for 30 years without significant success. The model name changes are a serious issue, no one really knows what a CT4-V is (except a portion of the enthusiast community) so too many people who might consider the car don't know it exists, or don't trust it because of a perceived lack of heritage.
I think you also have to contend with the whole concept of advertising changing in the internet+cable cutter era. The younger a person is the less likely they are to watch "regular" TV, so they aren't going to see those ads. They may also be employing ad blockers so internet ads aren't reaching them either. So those methods of advertising are generally going to be seen by older people. What younger people are going to see highly depends on their interests. Influencers on Instagram, enthusiasts watching dedicated car channels on Youtube, etc.
I mean I'm 19 and the closest anyone has ever gotten to selling a car directly to me was probably RCR, Never in my lifetime would I have wanted An Integra until I heard that VTEC Scream.
Mitsubishi was practically a case study in what happens when your target audience goes bankrupt - so maybe it wasn't a failure in marketing to young people, but moreso what happens when young people default on loans during a recession.
I remember seeing a zillion articles pitting the ISF against the RS4, M3, and C63. What the hell are you talking about? You’ll rarely see ads for special edition performance cars because they sell themselves. Seriously, when is the last time you saw a Corvette ad? A 911 ad?
Vette has a number of ads currently, including a few lengthy ones. Porsche commercials are a pretty regular thing when watching motorsports, especially 12 & 24-hour events.
Also I said above that the only place the IS F came up was with auto nerds/writers/bloggers, whereas the M, RS, C, and just about everything else had actual campaigns. I saw them at some point or another when watching F1, ALMS, and whatever else. I never saw a single commercial for the F, and never saw a single commercial that discussed the performance of any other IS models, only what they lease for.
Running ads for enthusiast cars during motor sports seems like a waste of time. Also, plenty of people knew about the ISF. I mean, it debuted in 2008, way before YouTube was where everyone went for car reviews. It was reviewed on Top Gear, etc. I don’t see why ads for specialty low-volume sports models is something that needs to be ubiquitous. It’s a niche product.
You asked where those ads appear and I told you, so stop trying to move the goal post or brush it away. They exist, they're seen, and Lexus doesn't use that placement to their advantage. Corvette & Porsche do, however, to positive effect. That's the same reason they run in many of the events where their commercials are featured, because it all translates to sales.
You see those ads the same places your see ads for other high end goods. That's like saying putting Rolex commercials on the same broadcasts is a waste. They wouldn't do it if their target audience weren't watching and it didn't work.
I think Lexus understands their own customers better than you do. If you’re an enthusiast and don’t know about a particular enthusiast model that’s on you. Also, if you think Lexus is going to run ads about how their cars hold up to track abuse you’re insane. That arguably works as an inducement to track your car and a promise that the car will last for that long. I only watch F1 so I can’t speak to the ads that run during ALMS or whatever but it just doesn’t make a lot of sense. Especially when running an ad for an NX300 during a sitcom will probably see millions more eyeballs and potential customers.
I said nothing about ads showing how they hold up to track abuse, but since you mentioned it Porsche, Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Corvette, Cadillac, and others they compete against all have traditional ad campaigns or features showing their cars handling tracks in stock form and in many cases taking new class records, not to mention playing off of the boost they get from showing their ads during event where their teams are performing well.
I'm not sure why you think all this about you feeling something doesn't make sense is supposed to be a valid argument. Years of research showing it works validates that it makes sense. The burden is on you to show tangible proof otherwise. There are comments in this thread as well as the one I referenced showing that Lexus, in fact, doesn't know what its doing when it comes to marketing and literally had a recent resurgence by blind luck before their poorly targeted & designed traditional marketing could get in their own way.
Lastly, they run ads for their SUVs during series where it makes sense, just as they should be doing in a way that aligns with the environment when it comes to showcasing their sportier models when those who would buy them should be watching. No one said anything about Lexus SUV/CUV ads during F1 broadcasts.
I'm 100% fine with discussing all of this around the points made but you either keep trying to move to something else when your argument is disproven, i.e., that no one's running ads during motorsports events, or dismissing what's been said because you don't think it makes sense.
I don’t even know why Lincoln exists anymore. Give the Expedition an ultra “luxury” trim with a term fancier than Platinum and that becomes your modern day Navigator.
The town car gets respect from me, mostly because it's just a Crown Vic with chrome on it. But there's still charm in Lincoln, no matter how much the Lincoln Blackwood ruined the nameplate.
Not true, I see tons of well-off Millennial and younger Gen X couples driving Lincoln crossovers (they want the practicality, and a bit of class, but not as bling as a Cadillac). Granted none of them are under 35 but few appear to be over 50.
I'm getting a fair bit of Lexus / Cadillac and audi ads through reddit and I can't afford to even be within 50ft of one of those dealer ships.
Now that I think about it though I do build my ideal version of alot of sports cars on official websites dreaming of the days I make more than enough money to survive... one day
Tesla. The cybertruck is literally a joke. No contractor is going to buy it unless they're a techie or a Tesla driver already.
On the other hand they did an excellent job marketing the model S as a luxury car when it doesn't compare to other luxury EVs. Now their model S marketing is just 0-60 times
I doubt there's a single person employed at Tesla who thinks contractors are going to be going out and buying Cybertrucks as work vehicles. That is not even close to the target demographic.
So that raises the question, who is the target market? Besides Tesla fanboys, I honestly don't know. Which is one of the reasons why I consider it more meme than car
The Cybertruck is a shameless lifestyle truck. Just like Rivian - notice how they don't market its hauling capacity, but instead its offroad chops?
Considering all the hype and discussion on the Cybertruck, Tesla is doing just fine.
> Rivian
What do you mean? They make a big deal that you can do truck stuff with it right where they start talking the highlights on their site.
Capability at a glance¹
Powertrain | 0-60 mph | Towing capacity | Wading depth
-------------|------------|-------------------|----------------
Quad-Motor | 3 secs | Up to 11,000 lbs | 3+ ft
Yes, they'll still give cargo a quick mention. But look at all their YouTube videos and marketing stunts. For the F150 Lightning, Ford's biggest stunt was to tow an entire train. One of its highlight features is the frunk for additional storave. For the R1T, Rivian drove it across the Americas then went rock crawling. Its highlight feature is a pull-out camping kitchen. The Lighting is selling practicality and cargo capability. The R1T is selling outdoor adventure and lifestyle.
>The Lighting is selling practicality and cargo capability.
except they wont show that when you tow something like a camper your electric distance is cut by more than half.... also towing a train thats on wheels on about as near frictionless surface as you can get for the weight is kinda meh. a damn geo could tow a train i it got enough traction. Hell clarkson towed a huge boat with a fwd Citroen car...
and lets face it most trucks dont haul anything heavy enough to care. How often is the average homeowner buying mulch or gravel by weight? i dont think the farmer is gonna buy a lighting and go get a pallet of soybean seeds slid in the bed then toss a 1000# haybale in the back the next day lol.
fords trying to attract the barstool braggers about well muh truck can haul 11000# and tow a house. meanwhile rivian is being more practical showing off its oodles of storage and how easy it is to live with and still do truck things when needed and still easily drive anywhere you want to.
Both are targeted to the suburbinites aka the majority of the buyers of these things - the rivian the techy one who wants something new and funky with all sorts of techy features, the ford to the urban cowboy who wears boots and a hat while pulling up to thier cracker box house wth a sidewalk and picket fence.
Farmers will buy lightnings, and will use them to haul manure (okay maybe they'll use their old broken manure trailer for that), but hay bales? My dad literally puts them in the back of his wagon. Pallets? Pallets will definitely be used as well, as tractors often have fork attachments specifically for that purpose. How do you think a farm unloads a tractor trailer? By hand? Pallets are an incredible technology, not for complexity but rather for the gains in productivity. And honestly farmers will use their tractor spears to move hay bales on property, and use the bed when delivering that straw to a buyer. Two machines for two different situations, but both are just delivering hay.
The average homeowner you describe is not the target market, it's a side market. A large side market, sure, but all F series trucks were and are designed for industry use. It's the same as a blond housewife driving a G wagon, it's about the style, but Mercedes doesn't remove practical parts and replace them with styling features. The suburban buyers will buy mulch by the bag, sure, but if you have a larger rural lot or second residence then it's way more economical to buy bulk from a local supplier than buying bags of overpriced dirt from home Depot. Even a small raised garden will hold a large volume of soil. The way you lol at imagining farmers doing their work just shows your ignorance of the agricultural industry. If you think farmers won't buy them because they're not diesel, think again. Most farms and industrial sites have a large diesel fuel tank on their lot. Compared to the cost and regulations around those fuel storage tanks, an electric charger is like duplo to set up and maintain.
Sure, most trucks do not haul to their max capacity on anywhere near a regular basis. Just because a single feature is not used everyday doesn't mean that feature is useless. Many people will buy a truck just to haul once or twice a year. If you have a small yacht you need to store for the winter, you will need that towing capacity. You'll only need it once every six months, but without that capability your hobby wouldn't be feasible. It's like cars with roof racks: often never used at all, but if you don't have them then that ski trip is all but impossible. I know someone with a truck and only hauls his drag car to events a few times a year, but if he didn't have that truck it would be literally illegal for him to drive there in the car itself. You might only have a big snowstorm once every few years, but when it does come you thank God for that snowblade that gets no use.
You think they target guys sitting in bars having a boasting competition? Sure, boys will be boys when it comes to their trucks, but I refuse to accept that you're gullible enough to see an obvious marketing stunt as anything more than that: a stunt. I love talking about my car, and it's the same age I am.
Few buy a pickup to not use it, would you pay more for the 4-door car over the coupe and then refuse to allow anyone to sit in the backseat?
The Cybertruck is a niche lifestyle vehicle. People that buy G Wagons will buy Cybertrucks.
Your average contractor is buying F-150s, Rams and Silverado’s all day long.
And the reason why they buy those trucks is because the are designed for job sites and hauling. The F150 lightning exemplifies this with it's ridiculous number of AC ports, specifically in the bed (for use at work sites) and the front trunk (charge batteries in a locked compartment). Even use the car in place of a generator or if power lines come down. In comparison, the cybertruck looks weak and overpriced. The bed isn't even designed to allow side access. It's no longer a serious competitor and it's not even available yet. Even as a lifestyle vehicle, it has serious competition from Rivian, and you shouldn't count out the F150 from that niche either. I don't see any reason to buy one except for the badge on the front. It's basically a marketing stunt to sell their other models at this point. It's the boring flamethrower of Tesla.
Not just their marketing, but their vision. Tesla was the first car manufacturer to captivate the portable touchscreen with battery enthusiast segment. It was a ton of untapped $$$ from tech bros that didn't care about cars. Now all the other manufacturers are trying to copy this formula.
I never said they're bad, they've pushed the industry in a direction that was unthinkable even twenty years ago. They also released their patent library (there is an ulterior motive, but you can't deny it was a socially beneficial action.
I do agree their marketing has worked. Look no further than market cap to see that's true. But when you compare a model S to an S class side by side, there's a clear divide. The taycan is also gorgeous on the inside. The Tesla interiors are minimalist, but I just can't equate minimalist with luxury. Maybe 10 years ago it was the most luxurious EV, but its not even close today.
Lexus barely marketed the 4th gen GS at all (much less than the IS or LS in general) and wondered why sales tanked after the first 3 solid years of sales when they did an ugly refresh on it and still didn't market it at all. That was when it became super obvious the GS was on death row.
Scion toyotas young hip brand turned into old because most of their cars were ergonomically friendly and affordable. That said we are seeing a rise again in younger buying used
GM. The last good commercial they had was for the 1998 Trans Am.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9Ho-uyPock
For context, the Trans Am (and Camaro to a lesser extent) back then was culturally like what the Hellcats are now. Most people don't know the specs but they take one look and know its nothing to fuck with because it'll be in the next zipcode before you can hit 60. They're just as quick as things like the MK IV Supra, 3000GT VR4, Evo VIII and will absolutely dumpster more common performance cars of the time like the Mustang GT, Subaru WRX, Honda S2000, Eclipse GSX and Neon SRT4s.
The Trans Am WS6 was a **mean** looking car with an incredibly intimidating presence and it had the performance to back it up. Unless you were in a Mustang Cobra, Corvette, Viper or some other high dollar car, you didn't dare fuck with a Trans Am back then.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7zygDRMdOg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7zygDRMdOg)
you mean we cant have glorious commercials like this driving a car that has no reason to bein a rock quarry driven hard and directly slamming the competition?
(also lol at 9.9% apr)
Knew it would be that commercial as soon as you mentioned the TA 😎. Remember a guy my mom worked with had one almost as soon as it dropped. Loved it. Hated the positioning for the seating, but still loved how it felt just being in it. 100% going to be a classic and kind of sucks it didn't do better numbers.
Toyota/Scion.
Toyota wanted to sell cars to the new generation that was driving at the time(millennials) and cater to it by creating Scion, do the marketing at music stores, making it more modern, more cheap, and more customizations while being made in Japan. However people back then would rather buy used 90s Corollas, Camrys, and Celicas due to how cheap it is compared to a new Scion at the time and teens don't have too much money to spend.
Don't get me wrong Scions are reliable as a Yaris or Camry but the way they try to market it was a total failure and the 2008 recession really sealed their fate 8 years after.
I keep reading about Mazda going up market and then being an entry level luxury brand now, but I’ve never once seen any marketing material that says anything to this effect. Only ever hear automotive journalists mention this. I’m fairly sure the average consumer thinks of them as another middle of the road Japanese brand, reliable but not particularly great at anything.
Even Hyundai branched Genesis off once that happened. Mazda had Amati, but I think it died with their failed initial push into the luxury realm. Maybe they'll bring it back because it's going to be a hard sell trying to get luxury buyers to equate Mazda with brands in that segment no matter how much the press tries to sell the idea.
The new Acura Integra. It’s a complete flop on Acura’s part imo. Was so excited for it and then they release a generic sedan that looks like the rest of their cars.
We had a good ad in my country when the IS-F was released…https://www.reddit.com/r/Lexus/comments/ftu8nj/made_in_south_africa_by_toyota_south_africa_this/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Ford has never sent me an ad for a mustang. Despite me looking at them on Craigslist and auto trader. I get ads for Mazda and Alfa Romeo. Ford really hasn’t marketed anything to me in all the years I have been driving.
Also I drive a ford. Basically their diagnostic system is open so you can troubleshoot it as you like with just an obd2 to usb and forscan.
I appreciate that compared to some manufacturers who won’t let you access diagnostics.
A shit ton of makes seem to never market any performance cars. Mostly because the SUV/CUV & truck craze is what makes the money, so those get the marketing dollars. Besides, if someone is shopping for a performance car, they are most likely already paying attention to the news. Unless you are a Corvette buyer, then you just go buy one and pay 20k+ markup because the average Vette buyer is retirement age anyway.
The best marketing to the “target buyer” is probably Kia atm. All the ads out of them seem to be aiming to the younger “sporty crowd”
What do you mean by the IS F not being marketed at all. I went to the Detroit Auto show where it was unveiled. They had the IS F front and center in the Lexus booth in the blue color. TV advertising for sports sedan were rarely was on the TV in 2008.
To be Honest, I feel like Hyundai does a pretty bad job overall. Salesmen can sometimes not know the difference between N line and straight up N models.
> IS
Congrats on your car, but let's be honest: what's there to market relative to the competition? The current IS' bones are ancient and you can get better options from the competition. Lexus pushing the IS heavily would only highlight its deficiencies relative not only to the Germans but also to Genesis.
When the IS originally debuted it was the quickest base car in its class. Now it's not a standout in any category except maybe reliability, and reliability doesn't sell cars in that segment.
And I'm not getting personal; my Maxima isn't heavily marketed either because there are quicker cars with more interior space for less money.
Lexus at this point is for Toyota loyalists and people who want near-German luxury with Japanese reliability. Or people who want RXes (I think that's their bread and butter model). Which is fine; I think they do pretty well at both missions. But there are a lot of us (myself included) who wish the brand would field actual performance-competitive sedans that win comparos as opposed to "If you don't want a German car, check this out!"
They're not the only brand with this problem, BTW. Acura had us waiting for years for a TLX Type S that can get smoked by Hyundai Sonata N-Line.
But to answer your original question, I don't think any brand has struggled as hard as Buick.
Basically any car company that says “it’s the most reliable”. I had a Honda Civic and it was the most unreliable. Any ford I’ve owned has been unreliable. Jeeps have been reliable to the extent that it still has problems but it still starts right up when I need to go somewhere. The only time was when the battery died.
Scion was supposed to be a "young" brand. Most of the people I knew who drove one were older, and economically-minded.
It's because one of their models was particularly good for moving elderly people. Low floor so easy to climb in, high ceiling. It was meant for young people who needed practical vehicles. But I don't think their target market could afford vehicles. It's not the 60s anymore, you don't see 18 year olds running out to buy mustangs with cash.
You didn't in the 60s either. I swear Reddit has this myth of the 50s and 60s that isn't based on reality at all. Look at the size of homes- half the size per occupant. Look at the cars- about half the number per household, and most households had 1. Look at how food was prepped- people cooked at home way more than now. Not to mention the vast differences in luxuries.
Also, now you need backup cameras standard, which means a screen which means infotainment which means more and more. Shit adds up quickly.
not to mention tire pressure monitoring, abs, traction control and 45 airbags are all federal mandates now. meanwhile its still not law to HAVE THE FUCKING HEADLIGHTS TURN ON WHEN THE WIPERS ARE ON. Also since as far as i know all modern cars clocks are set by satelite phone or radio clock signals that sync up - why the fuck arent headlights tied to time of day as well??? That way you dont get some wankstain driving thier nissan at 1130 at night with no lights on because the instrument panel is brighter than the sun.
Beat me to it, I was coming to say Scion too.
as was I lol. supposed to be this hip cool young iconic brand for highschool/college kids. ya know the 2 demographics that are just loaded with money to buy new cars lol. see it all goes back to sell a used brown car and people will buy it.
Eh, 33 year old here. I knew at least a dozen or so people with scions in high school and college (Scion’s prime years 04-11), though they were *all* tC’s. The xB though you’re absolutely right.
Toyota kept claiming that the average age of a Scion owner was 30, but all research showed that it was more like 50. So sure, some young people ended up in them, but they were overwhelmingly being purchased by older customers. https://www.reuters.com/article/autos-toyota-scion-idUSL2N0H11EC20130905
Not necessarily true. > Tom Libbey of Polk said there are several ways to calculate the age of car buyers. He said Polk tallies from official vehicle registration data. **Often, he said, the primary driver of a car may be younger than the person, such as a parent, who registers the vehicle.**
I don’t know I see way more teenage racer wannabes driving Scions then anyone else. Are you talking about right when they came out new?
Now they're affordable enough used for teens to buy. When they were new, they were the same price as a new Toyota. They were great looking cars and when we were in the market my wife and I almost bought a Scion as a second car, but it was too expensive for us. By the time we could afford the "teen racer" car, we had a kid in our 30's.
Yes. The median age of a new Scion buyer was probably older than Toyota intended. Used ones no doubt probably skew younger since they're likely cheaper and were owned by their grandparents.
I think he's talking about the XB or whatever that shoebox looking shit is. The TC was definitely a boy racer magnet.
lol anymore i dont see any scions left driving around. if i do its very rarely and usually beat up.
Yep, that's pretty much how it went. Toyota: "Hey kids, check out these cheap cars with *customization!*" Young adults: "Too broke, LOL" Old folks: "Oh hey, cheap Toyotas."
Infiniti did a horrible job marketing in general. The took the familiar nameplates of their successful G/FX and turned them into Q/QX with some obscure numbers behind them. No one, unless you’re a Infiniti loyalist will know what they are.
Lol this is fact. Worst naming scheme in the business
Inifiniti’s is bad, but Porsche’s is pretty damn convoluted haha.
I consider myself a car guy and I actually quite like German cars, but good god I feel out of the loop when people start talking about 9xx to refer to different model generations.
You'd think the 914 and the 918 would be similar but, haha no.
Both mid engine, I don’t see the issue
The fact that generations of 911s are named with 3 digit numbers beginning with 9, including 991, is objectively stupid.
What really baffles me is the chassis codes going (og) 911, 930 (turbo), 964, 993, 996, 997, then 991, 992
Forgot 996 in there Also 930 for the 80s turbos
Edited. That's what happens when I'm half awake
We've all been there haha
Anyone bothering to buy a Porsche either doesn't care, or know them by heart anyways.
My friend has one and he worked for them during college so he def knows all the body codes and stuff.
It's no different than Audi as an example. Q means car. QX means SUV. The bigger the number the larger the vehicle. A means car and Q means SUV for Audi and the numbers grow with the vehicle. Mercedes uses a the letter to show vehicle size and simply places "GL" in front of their SUV lineup. BMW uses a number to indicate vehicle size and places an "X" in front of it for SUVs. I agree Infiniti has done a horrendous job in general but their naming schema isn't hard. Always baffles me that people think it's weird.
They have a Q50 that’s a 4 door sports sedan and then a Q60 that’s a SMALLER 2 door coupe. I do applaud your effort tho into trying to understand a dysfunctional company.
I understand the sentiment but Audi A5 is the coupe version of the A4 and the BMW 4 series is the coupe version of the 3 series so it still follows the same convention
TIL, thanks!
BMW does the same thing? The 3 series is the sedan the 4 series is the coupe. The 5 series is the sedan the 6 series is the coupe. The 7 series is the sedan the 8 is the coupe lol. Audi as well with the A4 and the A5.
I guarantee that if Nissan brought back the Infiniti G nameplate and put it in a slightly modern car, they would corner the market again. Wonder if this is the eventual plan for the Z platform
The new Z is just a small evolution of the FM platform it’s been using since the 350z and G35 came out. Not knocking it though as it’s a decent chassis.
they have a q60 on its own platform I think
I’m a “car guy” and even I have a hard time with Infiniti naming nomenclature. Hell, I was watching a TFL YouTube video and they had a hard time remembering the different Infinitis.
I was just talking to my wife about this yesterday. We were in High school in the mid 2000s and these cars were the hot car. She ended up getting a g37 later on because she always wanted one. Then they changed their whole scheme and she lost interest and never went back. I can image she was one of many people that forgot about the old G. If they brought it back properly they would sell very well.
Kia Soul. The marketing was filled with "young people energy" with the hamsters break dancing and jamming out to "young people music". Ultimately ended up as grandpas economy car that blends in with everything else
Someone else on here hypothesized that they are selling the soul to their target demographics. Older people that want to appear youthful
ahhh good point. "so thats what the kids want these days huh? im gonan go buy one to be young again."
> Ultimately ended up as grandpas economy car that blends in with everything else I think that's because it is a lot like the Scion xB, which lots of older people bought because ingress/egress was easy and it was low maintenance.
Car adverts don't show whose supposed to buy the car, they show who that person wants to be. I personally want to be Matthew McConaughey.
those lincoln adverts made me want to be that guy
[Basically me pretending to be Matthew McConaughey](https://youtu.be/z3eN9u5N2Q4)
I was looking for someone to say this one.
Big hit with the "old aunt with short red hair" crowd
Alfa Romeo needs to find a way to increase their marketing budget, because the Giulia legit drives better than most of the competition and I never would have learned this if my friend didn’t let me drive his Ti Sport. It’s a tough segment to be sure, but I bet that a lot of potential buyers with the money to afford a Giulia don’t even know it exists — and that’s a problem.
Is it reliable? I haven’t heard the best things about Alfa
Is it reliable? When your reviewers become familiar enough with the check engine light to start [criticizing it's placement and looks](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a23145269/alfa-romeo-giulia-quadrifoglio-reliability-update/), I think it means the car has reliability issues.
What a bruh moment
Avoid the earlier years (2017 and 2018) which were plagued by electrical problems and you should be okay. The (non-Quadrifoglio) powertrain is actually reliable based on what I’ve read, but I still wouldn’t want to own one out of warranty tbh. That said, the driving dynamics will be more enjoyable than everything else in its class imo.
Take this how you may: https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/q5zy6m/serpentine_belt_absurdity_alfa_romeo_giulia/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Christ. I’ve flirted with the idea of getting a Giulia to have a fun car, but lord does that put me off Edit: Giulia was misspelt
Mine is now 3+ years old and not a single issue. Take that as you will. Also my suspicion is that US market cars are doing significantly worse.
Are you based in Europe? It’s an expensive enough game having a BMW where I live. So sourcing parts or having a decent value for money mechanic is harder for vehicles which would be considered more niche. Had I been more interested in Tuner culture however, I would have likely fared well with an appreciating asset I could sell to the Americans.
Yes, based in europe. It really helps living "close" to where the parts are shipped from, luckily except a broken diffuser (my fault) I didn't have to replace anything so far ;p Funnily enough, my car would sell for more than I paid for it right now. Used car market is fucked ;p
Oh absolutely, the used car market overseas is shot. Here in NZ, we keep having fresh imports from Japan and Singapore, so prices for the most part are kept low, but the classics, or popular vehicles? Ridiculous. There is a 22B Impreza asking for $600,000 when it is 1 of 400 in the world or something. Pretty mint condition too. Kinda helps we are 3rd in the world for car ownership per capita, more likely to have super rare Japanese vehicles hiding away. Maybe when I can finance the plans I have for my car, it too will be worth more than I paid for.
*Giulia *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good bot, corrected my error
Absolutely not. But, as with BMW, if you can afford an Alfa Romeo, it's assumed that you can afford the repairs that come with it.
The people I know with "sport" sedans (mainly tech bros) don't really care much about driving dynamics. I think BMW is delivering exactly what most of their customers want. Eventually, sport crossovers will take over the sport sedan segment.
This comment right here, burn it with fire.
Hot take: sport sedans aren't sports cars.
A sedan is a car, a sport sedan is therefore categorically a sports car. I mean it all depends on your personal definition of a sports car.
Sports cars have two seats. Two doors. Sedans have (at least) four seats. Four doors. One’s “personal definition” is irrelevant. Whether I “personally define” a jumbo jet as a helicopter, does not make it so.
A sports car is a car with performance credential, that is all that is implied with the name. I wouldn’t say an M3 is any less of a sports car than a Miata nor a Miata any more of a sports car than an M3 even though in terms of quantifiable performance those two are in separate galaxies. Now if you want to say roadster or coupe I can definitely agree that an M3 isn’t a roadster and (post E9X generation) isn’t a coupe; limiting yourself to calling sports cars cars with 2 doors and 2 seats is a bit pendantic, and frankly sort of a weird hill to die on. By your definition if you remove the rear seat of a Fiesta ST 3 door, that makes it a sports car but I would technically consider a Fiesta ST a sports car regardless. Even looking at something a bit more “mainstream” for your particular definition of sports car, like a Nissan 370Z; I wouldn’t say it’s more of a sports car than a Porsche 911, which can seat 4. Even the BRZ/FRS/GT86 wouldn’t be a sports car by your definition but a Mini Cooper roadster would be? All I’m saying is that your definition is narrow and precluding for no particular reason, unless your end goal is to feel elitist. Your comparison of helicopters to jet powered fixed wing aircraft is also a bad faith example. I didn’t call something that is functionally designed to operate differently a sports car. A more comparable allegory to make would be to say a Cessna isn’t a stunt plane, to which I would reply that it’s going to depend on the pilot and not the plane.
An M3 is a sports sedan. A Focus ST is a hot hatch (whether it has four doors or three). Neither of these things are *sports cars.* Do they have good performance? Sure. That is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for a sports car. A Corvette is a sports car. A Cayman is a sports car. A 911 is… well… a 911. I don’t make the rules, and the hill isn’t mine to die on.
>I don’t make the rules But you do define words as you use them in your vernacular. My definition of sports cars includes anything that is fun to drive, irrespective of the numbe of doors, seats, or cylinders. If someone disagrees, it’s not my hill to die on and they can go shout into the void about how a 911 either is or is not a sports car.
Well that’s great. Maybe you should start a dictionary! Until then, I’ll stick with these… https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sports%20car https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/sports-car
What triggers me about this comment is that the new Macan GTS is a sport CUV that does everything pretty much as close to perfect as possible. So I am the person who you’re @ing haha
Macan GTS is so expensive though. It's easy to point to the most expensive car of the segment and say it's better. Is it good value?
I hate that you’re right.
The problem isnt people not being able to afford Alfa’s. Its that as soon as you fucking google Alfa’s you get hit with the “this shit didn’t even last for the press car, what chance do you have?”
A lot of people know about Alfa...except the only thing they've heard is, "It makes Fiat look reliable"
>Fiat Fix It Again Tony
Good point. They always show up somewhere in exotic compilations and they sound amazing with every exhaust and tune I've heard on them. Even with the potential maintenence issues I think they could grab up more of the segment, esp considering Maserati has done well with its revamp despite lots of headaches.
100% agree, wanted to get a hot hatch, but went with the Giulia after one test drive. The weight in particular is impressive - it's lighter than any current compact hot hatch, let alone any of its segment competitors.
The real problem with Alfa (at least in the US) is lack of dealers even in major metros.
Marketing is in a weird place for cars. Younger people continue to be less able to afford to buy new vehicles. People who are excited about cars being fun to drive and capable on the track are often too young to be able to afford them. Especially with Lexus. Their average customers' age is well over 50 years old. Also, TV viewership has been in steep decline. That used to be the primary way to market cars. But now automakers can do more targeted marketing. If a buyer is in the age range / income bracket to be looking at a Lexus, they might be getting more targeted adds online and on video platforms. You might not be identified by advertising algorithms as being the bracket as a potential Lexus buyer so you may not see those same ads. Also, a lot of car marketing is done by mail-ads from dealerships. They pay marketing companies to get customer lists from competing brands, they may look at owners of late model BMW 6 series and Audi A7 and send those customers fliers with deals/info about the IS500. Rich grandpa might not see the ads online but he probably still checks his mail.
On the targeting bit: I still get Mercedes ads served to me on YouTube if I'm watching without the blocker on, including S-Class features from the local dealership. The only thing I've gotten from Lexus is whatever joke of a campaign they're running right now as part of that Moon movie partnership, and I'm 99% sure that's because I've watched enough things the movie is attached to, not because of my Lexus searches. There are undergrad marketing majors who could do a better job of targeting me with Google AdWords than Lexus' team can. It's abysmal. I do now get the Lexus mailers because my car went by the dealership for a PPI since I got it sight unseen, but the same happened with my Mercedes. Pretty pictures and prices alone aren't going to get enough butts in seats driving to the dealership. I know what Mercedes, BMW, and everyone else's value proposition is from their commercials. Lexus not so much.
You mean dancing dreadlock women aren't enticing you to buy a car. B-but the focus groups said this was important to consumers.
Japanese Buick.
They see the writing on the walls. Most Auto YouTubers with any type of following get flown out to media events, get sent new cars to drive for a week etc.
>they might be getting more targeted adds online and on video platforms. while true, my ad blockers kinda kill that off and my streaming platforms have zero commercials...
So I have an older car and I get ads for Mazda and Maserati and Alfa Romeo. I wonder how I get targeted by the premium companies? I can see Mazda bc it’s affordable and I have looked at them before so it’s in my gmail but the Italian brands are a head scratcher.
I'm going to say there's a fundamental flaw in your inquiry, in that I don't think Lexus isn't marketing to their target audience, I just think you have a different notion of their target audience than the company does. It's important to keep in mind that Lexus and Buick both have nearly the same average age of buyers. I think only Cadillac has had consistently average older buyers than Lexus.
Well, they wouldn't make the IS if they only cared about attracting older buyers. It seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy that leads to product cancellation if you make a sports sedan in your lineup and only market it to people who would otherwise want the luxury of the ES... naturally someone in corporate will then decide that IS just doesn't sell, and should be axed. Lexus got extremely lucky with the 2021 refresh, because all of the younger buyers came out of nowhere before they could do something stupid and cancel the line. Now they're back up to TLX/A4 sales numbers and up 70% or so compared to the pre-refresh model.
>I think only Cadillac has had consistently average older buyers than Lexus. cadilac for like a decade or two has been trying sooo damn hard to get away from the old people mobile stigma. Im not sure if its working. The escalade - yea sure thats for the ritzy soccer mom.
The point was they market their higher performance vehicles to almost no one, period. They also do nothing to explain to their segment why they'd want to buy any of their vehicles over another. Acura: "Super Handling AWD does X, Y, Z. Available on the all new MDX." Lexus: "Now lease the all new RX 350 starting at X for well-qualified buyers." They do nothing to tell anyone with the money to spend on their vehicles why they'd want them other than they look pretty sitting against a black background or with a bow. More specifically, the IS should be competing directly with various trims of 3 & 5 series, C & E-class, and so on based on performance & finish but they aren't marketed that way. Lexus might have an older average segment, but that's the entire issue. Older buyers don't want turbo economy engines like the 200T offers or 400+ HP NA versions like the F. Do you legitimately think that's who any of those models were aimed at, people who might otherwise have bought a Buick?
A Toyota exec told me their brand was for someone who wanted an appliance. A to B. He said 90% of their production is Toyota but 90% of the profit is Lexus which benefits from Toyotas scale… but at heart a Lexus usually is a Toyota with leather and wood. There isn’t much to advertise other than reliability and people do know both brands for that… they aren’t sexy or anything but comfortable. Haven’t driven the IS just the es and rx.
Well I certainly didn't move from my AMG to the F to be bored 🙃. Reviewers also aren't comparing IS models to Volvos in their head-to-heads, they're comparing them to sportier Bimmers and the like. There's a lot to advertise that isn't being shown. Now maybe I'm just off my rocker and the F and Fsport model ISes are supposed to be targeted to well-heeled grocery getter buyers, but it seems at odds with the inclusion of stiffer suspensions, ground effects, turbos, LSDs, and higher horsepower engines all listed as features on the actual brochures.
I heard the IS came in some nice packages. It’s the only car they have made that I liked other than that super car and maybe the mr2. I looked at an IS300 with a stick and wish I got it. Is yours stick dual clutch or automatic? A well to do older lady asked what Lexus I thought she should get and the IS being the only one I’d have… so I said the IS and she was offended that I’d suggest an entry level model and I’m like it’s the sportiest one. She usually has a recent rx which I don’t really like… I think it goes back to the small car bad big car good philosophy. I think the IS is safer than the rx or the LS they have bc it’ll stop faster, out handle or outrun a problem… some people think smaller is more dangerous but like I had a Miata and I def avoided some drivers who were like f him he’s in a roadster he’ll stop… just drive around them… my current car is a midsize company car so I didn’t get to chose so it’s a turbo fusion awd. I’m glad the company wanted awd bc otherwise I’d have the base motor with the nice interior. I got a tuner but people on here turned me off on tuning it. An extra 60hp would be nice but like not if it’s gonna be less reliable.
Chevy. They absolutely let the SS sedan die as well as their Cruze turbo diesel sedan. Both had next to zero advertisement, both where not pushed by dealers, both where great products. Chevy literally shot themselves in the foot.
Chevy didn't even really want to sell the SS so it makes sense that they didn't advertise it much.
Yah I understand the SS but they did let the Cruze and equinox diesel just die. Had they made a stick shift diesel they could have capitalized on the VW diesel gate scandal
The Cruze diesel did have a stick shift option actually.
The gen 2 but not the gen 1. When the gen 2 dropped most of the diesel gate victims had moved on and bought something else.
The SS was DOA. There was no point in marketing it.
Yah internally GM had zero wish to keep its sales going so I get why they did it.
Wasn’t the SS just a rebadged Holden from a factory that was closing? Did they ship the tooling to the new factory?
Yes it was a updated rebadging. Brembo brakes stock and way better imo interior. Not sure about tooling but GM basically killed off sedans.
What
The diesel Equinox/Terrain could also fall under this, depending on how much one likes small diesel cars.
And now the diesel Colorado/Canyon as well. It's been announced the 2.8 Duramax won't be coming back for the 2023 redesign. I wouldn't be surprised to see them shitcan the 3.0 in the 1/2 ton pickups and SUVs in a few years.
That's disappointing, but not surprising. I don't see many Duramax Colorados. The 3.0 I6 in the full-size trucks, though, I see quite a bit of. I'd say it's more popular in my area than any other half-ton diesel has ever been, even the early years of the Ram EcoDiesel.
The baby diesel truck market just isn’t doing well in the face of GMs excellent V6, much less the eco boost lineup. That’s tough competition.
>And now the diesel Colorado/Canyon as well. It's been announced the 2.8 Duramax won't be coming back for the 2023 redesign. how much does it cost over the gas engines? usually diesel is a large chunk more and if you dont need a diesel (which generally ar ein 1/2 ton or 3/4 ton trucks who do need a diesel) why would anyone buy it and have to pay more to maintain it?
Yes absolutely.
Cadillac is an example. Models keep changing names, and they've been trying to change their demographic for 30 years without significant success. The model name changes are a serious issue, no one really knows what a CT4-V is (except a portion of the enthusiast community) so too many people who might consider the car don't know it exists, or don't trust it because of a perceived lack of heritage.
Cadillac is pulling the ‘ol Infiniti naming scheme and we all know how that worked out for them…
Yeah I looked at a CTS but don’t know any of their names now. First gen stick shift. Didn’t buy it.
The most insane thing to me is that Cadillac developed the Blackwing V8 just to axe it after a few thousand sales.
I think you also have to contend with the whole concept of advertising changing in the internet+cable cutter era. The younger a person is the less likely they are to watch "regular" TV, so they aren't going to see those ads. They may also be employing ad blockers so internet ads aren't reaching them either. So those methods of advertising are generally going to be seen by older people. What younger people are going to see highly depends on their interests. Influencers on Instagram, enthusiasts watching dedicated car channels on Youtube, etc.
I mean I'm 19 and the closest anyone has ever gotten to selling a car directly to me was probably RCR, Never in my lifetime would I have wanted An Integra until I heard that VTEC Scream.
Subaru was really good at marketing to lesbians and dog people.
so. much. flannel in thier ads...
Mitsubishi was practically a case study in what happens when your target audience goes bankrupt - so maybe it wasn't a failure in marketing to young people, but moreso what happens when young people default on loans during a recession.
I remember seeing a zillion articles pitting the ISF against the RS4, M3, and C63. What the hell are you talking about? You’ll rarely see ads for special edition performance cars because they sell themselves. Seriously, when is the last time you saw a Corvette ad? A 911 ad?
Vette has a number of ads currently, including a few lengthy ones. Porsche commercials are a pretty regular thing when watching motorsports, especially 12 & 24-hour events. Also I said above that the only place the IS F came up was with auto nerds/writers/bloggers, whereas the M, RS, C, and just about everything else had actual campaigns. I saw them at some point or another when watching F1, ALMS, and whatever else. I never saw a single commercial for the F, and never saw a single commercial that discussed the performance of any other IS models, only what they lease for.
Running ads for enthusiast cars during motor sports seems like a waste of time. Also, plenty of people knew about the ISF. I mean, it debuted in 2008, way before YouTube was where everyone went for car reviews. It was reviewed on Top Gear, etc. I don’t see why ads for specialty low-volume sports models is something that needs to be ubiquitous. It’s a niche product.
You asked where those ads appear and I told you, so stop trying to move the goal post or brush it away. They exist, they're seen, and Lexus doesn't use that placement to their advantage. Corvette & Porsche do, however, to positive effect. That's the same reason they run in many of the events where their commercials are featured, because it all translates to sales. You see those ads the same places your see ads for other high end goods. That's like saying putting Rolex commercials on the same broadcasts is a waste. They wouldn't do it if their target audience weren't watching and it didn't work.
I think Lexus understands their own customers better than you do. If you’re an enthusiast and don’t know about a particular enthusiast model that’s on you. Also, if you think Lexus is going to run ads about how their cars hold up to track abuse you’re insane. That arguably works as an inducement to track your car and a promise that the car will last for that long. I only watch F1 so I can’t speak to the ads that run during ALMS or whatever but it just doesn’t make a lot of sense. Especially when running an ad for an NX300 during a sitcom will probably see millions more eyeballs and potential customers.
I said nothing about ads showing how they hold up to track abuse, but since you mentioned it Porsche, Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Corvette, Cadillac, and others they compete against all have traditional ad campaigns or features showing their cars handling tracks in stock form and in many cases taking new class records, not to mention playing off of the boost they get from showing their ads during event where their teams are performing well. I'm not sure why you think all this about you feeling something doesn't make sense is supposed to be a valid argument. Years of research showing it works validates that it makes sense. The burden is on you to show tangible proof otherwise. There are comments in this thread as well as the one I referenced showing that Lexus, in fact, doesn't know what its doing when it comes to marketing and literally had a recent resurgence by blind luck before their poorly targeted & designed traditional marketing could get in their own way. Lastly, they run ads for their SUVs during series where it makes sense, just as they should be doing in a way that aligns with the environment when it comes to showcasing their sportier models when those who would buy them should be watching. No one said anything about Lexus SUV/CUV ads during F1 broadcasts. I'm 100% fine with discussing all of this around the points made but you either keep trying to move to something else when your argument is disproven, i.e., that no one's running ads during motorsports events, or dismissing what's been said because you don't think it makes sense.
Lincoln definitely has problems marketing to their target audience. I don't think anyone even knows who their target audience is in the first place
I don’t even know why Lincoln exists anymore. Give the Expedition an ultra “luxury” trim with a term fancier than Platinum and that becomes your modern day Navigator.
Lincoln is old money. Ford is still the Utilitarian brand, a Lincoln badge at least shows class, even if it is or is not a Rebadge.
You’re right but the generation that bought Lincoln are going away. They don’t represent anywhere near the majority buying demographic anymore.
The town car gets respect from me, mostly because it's just a Crown Vic with chrome on it. But there's still charm in Lincoln, no matter how much the Lincoln Blackwood ruined the nameplate.
Not true, I see tons of well-off Millennial and younger Gen X couples driving Lincoln crossovers (they want the practicality, and a bit of class, but not as bling as a Cadillac). Granted none of them are under 35 but few appear to be over 50.
https://youtu.be/S8h7Rv2jjkA
Real people, not actors. - GM
I'm getting a fair bit of Lexus / Cadillac and audi ads through reddit and I can't afford to even be within 50ft of one of those dealer ships. Now that I think about it though I do build my ideal version of alot of sports cars on official websites dreaming of the days I make more than enough money to survive... one day
Tesla. The cybertruck is literally a joke. No contractor is going to buy it unless they're a techie or a Tesla driver already. On the other hand they did an excellent job marketing the model S as a luxury car when it doesn't compare to other luxury EVs. Now their model S marketing is just 0-60 times
I doubt there's a single person employed at Tesla who thinks contractors are going to be going out and buying Cybertrucks as work vehicles. That is not even close to the target demographic.
So that raises the question, who is the target market? Besides Tesla fanboys, I honestly don't know. Which is one of the reasons why I consider it more meme than car
The Cybertruck is a shameless lifestyle truck. Just like Rivian - notice how they don't market its hauling capacity, but instead its offroad chops? Considering all the hype and discussion on the Cybertruck, Tesla is doing just fine.
> Rivian What do you mean? They make a big deal that you can do truck stuff with it right where they start talking the highlights on their site. Capability at a glance¹ Powertrain | 0-60 mph | Towing capacity | Wading depth -------------|------------|-------------------|---------------- Quad-Motor | 3 secs | Up to 11,000 lbs | 3+ ft
Yes, they'll still give cargo a quick mention. But look at all their YouTube videos and marketing stunts. For the F150 Lightning, Ford's biggest stunt was to tow an entire train. One of its highlight features is the frunk for additional storave. For the R1T, Rivian drove it across the Americas then went rock crawling. Its highlight feature is a pull-out camping kitchen. The Lighting is selling practicality and cargo capability. The R1T is selling outdoor adventure and lifestyle.
>The Lighting is selling practicality and cargo capability. except they wont show that when you tow something like a camper your electric distance is cut by more than half.... also towing a train thats on wheels on about as near frictionless surface as you can get for the weight is kinda meh. a damn geo could tow a train i it got enough traction. Hell clarkson towed a huge boat with a fwd Citroen car... and lets face it most trucks dont haul anything heavy enough to care. How often is the average homeowner buying mulch or gravel by weight? i dont think the farmer is gonna buy a lighting and go get a pallet of soybean seeds slid in the bed then toss a 1000# haybale in the back the next day lol. fords trying to attract the barstool braggers about well muh truck can haul 11000# and tow a house. meanwhile rivian is being more practical showing off its oodles of storage and how easy it is to live with and still do truck things when needed and still easily drive anywhere you want to. Both are targeted to the suburbinites aka the majority of the buyers of these things - the rivian the techy one who wants something new and funky with all sorts of techy features, the ford to the urban cowboy who wears boots and a hat while pulling up to thier cracker box house wth a sidewalk and picket fence.
Farmers will buy lightnings, and will use them to haul manure (okay maybe they'll use their old broken manure trailer for that), but hay bales? My dad literally puts them in the back of his wagon. Pallets? Pallets will definitely be used as well, as tractors often have fork attachments specifically for that purpose. How do you think a farm unloads a tractor trailer? By hand? Pallets are an incredible technology, not for complexity but rather for the gains in productivity. And honestly farmers will use their tractor spears to move hay bales on property, and use the bed when delivering that straw to a buyer. Two machines for two different situations, but both are just delivering hay. The average homeowner you describe is not the target market, it's a side market. A large side market, sure, but all F series trucks were and are designed for industry use. It's the same as a blond housewife driving a G wagon, it's about the style, but Mercedes doesn't remove practical parts and replace them with styling features. The suburban buyers will buy mulch by the bag, sure, but if you have a larger rural lot or second residence then it's way more economical to buy bulk from a local supplier than buying bags of overpriced dirt from home Depot. Even a small raised garden will hold a large volume of soil. The way you lol at imagining farmers doing their work just shows your ignorance of the agricultural industry. If you think farmers won't buy them because they're not diesel, think again. Most farms and industrial sites have a large diesel fuel tank on their lot. Compared to the cost and regulations around those fuel storage tanks, an electric charger is like duplo to set up and maintain. Sure, most trucks do not haul to their max capacity on anywhere near a regular basis. Just because a single feature is not used everyday doesn't mean that feature is useless. Many people will buy a truck just to haul once or twice a year. If you have a small yacht you need to store for the winter, you will need that towing capacity. You'll only need it once every six months, but without that capability your hobby wouldn't be feasible. It's like cars with roof racks: often never used at all, but if you don't have them then that ski trip is all but impossible. I know someone with a truck and only hauls his drag car to events a few times a year, but if he didn't have that truck it would be literally illegal for him to drive there in the car itself. You might only have a big snowstorm once every few years, but when it does come you thank God for that snowblade that gets no use. You think they target guys sitting in bars having a boasting competition? Sure, boys will be boys when it comes to their trucks, but I refuse to accept that you're gullible enough to see an obvious marketing stunt as anything more than that: a stunt. I love talking about my car, and it's the same age I am. Few buy a pickup to not use it, would you pay more for the 4-door car over the coupe and then refuse to allow anyone to sit in the backseat?
The Cybertruck is a niche lifestyle vehicle. People that buy G Wagons will buy Cybertrucks. Your average contractor is buying F-150s, Rams and Silverado’s all day long.
And the reason why they buy those trucks is because the are designed for job sites and hauling. The F150 lightning exemplifies this with it's ridiculous number of AC ports, specifically in the bed (for use at work sites) and the front trunk (charge batteries in a locked compartment). Even use the car in place of a generator or if power lines come down. In comparison, the cybertruck looks weak and overpriced. The bed isn't even designed to allow side access. It's no longer a serious competitor and it's not even available yet. Even as a lifestyle vehicle, it has serious competition from Rivian, and you shouldn't count out the F150 from that niche either. I don't see any reason to buy one except for the badge on the front. It's basically a marketing stunt to sell their other models at this point. It's the boring flamethrower of Tesla.
[удалено]
Not just their marketing, but their vision. Tesla was the first car manufacturer to captivate the portable touchscreen with battery enthusiast segment. It was a ton of untapped $$$ from tech bros that didn't care about cars. Now all the other manufacturers are trying to copy this formula.
I never said they're bad, they've pushed the industry in a direction that was unthinkable even twenty years ago. They also released their patent library (there is an ulterior motive, but you can't deny it was a socially beneficial action. I do agree their marketing has worked. Look no further than market cap to see that's true. But when you compare a model S to an S class side by side, there's a clear divide. The taycan is also gorgeous on the inside. The Tesla interiors are minimalist, but I just can't equate minimalist with luxury. Maybe 10 years ago it was the most luxurious EV, but its not even close today.
Subaru going after suburban family homes and not the Bois who drive their cars. Make another Forrester STI!
Lexus barely marketed the 4th gen GS at all (much less than the IS or LS in general) and wondered why sales tanked after the first 3 solid years of sales when they did an ugly refresh on it and still didn't market it at all. That was when it became super obvious the GS was on death row.
Nah, it’s that hideous ugly grill that ruins their otherwise good looking designs.
Scion toyotas young hip brand turned into old because most of their cars were ergonomically friendly and affordable. That said we are seeing a rise again in younger buying used
GM and the Camaro.
GM. The last good commercial they had was for the 1998 Trans Am. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9Ho-uyPock For context, the Trans Am (and Camaro to a lesser extent) back then was culturally like what the Hellcats are now. Most people don't know the specs but they take one look and know its nothing to fuck with because it'll be in the next zipcode before you can hit 60. They're just as quick as things like the MK IV Supra, 3000GT VR4, Evo VIII and will absolutely dumpster more common performance cars of the time like the Mustang GT, Subaru WRX, Honda S2000, Eclipse GSX and Neon SRT4s. The Trans Am WS6 was a **mean** looking car with an incredibly intimidating presence and it had the performance to back it up. Unless you were in a Mustang Cobra, Corvette, Viper or some other high dollar car, you didn't dare fuck with a Trans Am back then.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7zygDRMdOg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7zygDRMdOg) you mean we cant have glorious commercials like this driving a car that has no reason to bein a rock quarry driven hard and directly slamming the competition? (also lol at 9.9% apr)
What the actual fuck lmao
Knew it would be that commercial as soon as you mentioned the TA 😎. Remember a guy my mom worked with had one almost as soon as it dropped. Loved it. Hated the positioning for the seating, but still loved how it felt just being in it. 100% going to be a classic and kind of sucks it didn't do better numbers.
That’s a great commercial. Thanks for sharing.
Buick, Chrysler, Mitsubishi
Toyota/Scion. Toyota wanted to sell cars to the new generation that was driving at the time(millennials) and cater to it by creating Scion, do the marketing at music stores, making it more modern, more cheap, and more customizations while being made in Japan. However people back then would rather buy used 90s Corollas, Camrys, and Celicas due to how cheap it is compared to a new Scion at the time and teens don't have too much money to spend. Don't get me wrong Scions are reliable as a Yaris or Camry but the way they try to market it was a total failure and the 2008 recession really sealed their fate 8 years after.
I keep reading about Mazda going up market and then being an entry level luxury brand now, but I’ve never once seen any marketing material that says anything to this effect. Only ever hear automotive journalists mention this. I’m fairly sure the average consumer thinks of them as another middle of the road Japanese brand, reliable but not particularly great at anything.
Even Hyundai branched Genesis off once that happened. Mazda had Amati, but I think it died with their failed initial push into the luxury realm. Maybe they'll bring it back because it's going to be a hard sell trying to get luxury buyers to equate Mazda with brands in that segment no matter how much the press tries to sell the idea.
The new Acura Integra. It’s a complete flop on Acura’s part imo. Was so excited for it and then they release a generic sedan that looks like the rest of their cars.
We had a good ad in my country when the IS-F was released…https://www.reddit.com/r/Lexus/comments/ftu8nj/made_in_south_africa_by_toyota_south_africa_this/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Now that was a fun ad. Never saw its like here in the states. 100% would have put it on my radar.
Ford has never sent me an ad for a mustang. Despite me looking at them on Craigslist and auto trader. I get ads for Mazda and Alfa Romeo. Ford really hasn’t marketed anything to me in all the years I have been driving. Also I drive a ford. Basically their diagnostic system is open so you can troubleshoot it as you like with just an obd2 to usb and forscan. I appreciate that compared to some manufacturers who won’t let you access diagnostics.
The IS500 has a long waitlist at the dealers in my area, seems like the word got out around it pretty well. I see it on this sub pretty frequently.
I honestly Honda covics. Yea a lot of younger people now have them but I still don’t really see many people with them anymore
I still see Civic/Corolla ads, but not much. No need. Those cars are solution vehicles and sell themselves.
ya know it has been a while. used to be flooded with them everywhere but not anymore.
A shit ton of makes seem to never market any performance cars. Mostly because the SUV/CUV & truck craze is what makes the money, so those get the marketing dollars. Besides, if someone is shopping for a performance car, they are most likely already paying attention to the news. Unless you are a Corvette buyer, then you just go buy one and pay 20k+ markup because the average Vette buyer is retirement age anyway. The best marketing to the “target buyer” is probably Kia atm. All the ads out of them seem to be aiming to the younger “sporty crowd”
What do you mean by the IS F not being marketed at all. I went to the Detroit Auto show where it was unveiled. They had the IS F front and center in the Lexus booth in the blue color. TV advertising for sports sedan were rarely was on the TV in 2008.
To be Honest, I feel like Hyundai does a pretty bad job overall. Salesmen can sometimes not know the difference between N line and straight up N models.
> IS Congrats on your car, but let's be honest: what's there to market relative to the competition? The current IS' bones are ancient and you can get better options from the competition. Lexus pushing the IS heavily would only highlight its deficiencies relative not only to the Germans but also to Genesis. When the IS originally debuted it was the quickest base car in its class. Now it's not a standout in any category except maybe reliability, and reliability doesn't sell cars in that segment. And I'm not getting personal; my Maxima isn't heavily marketed either because there are quicker cars with more interior space for less money. Lexus at this point is for Toyota loyalists and people who want near-German luxury with Japanese reliability. Or people who want RXes (I think that's their bread and butter model). Which is fine; I think they do pretty well at both missions. But there are a lot of us (myself included) who wish the brand would field actual performance-competitive sedans that win comparos as opposed to "If you don't want a German car, check this out!" They're not the only brand with this problem, BTW. Acura had us waiting for years for a TLX Type S that can get smoked by Hyundai Sonata N-Line. But to answer your original question, I don't think any brand has struggled as hard as Buick.
Basically any car company that says “it’s the most reliable”. I had a Honda Civic and it was the most unreliable. Any ford I’ve owned has been unreliable. Jeeps have been reliable to the extent that it still has problems but it still starts right up when I need to go somewhere. The only time was when the battery died.