Click bait R&T article on low selling cars of 2016.

Adrian_Thompson wrote:

Tom_Spangler wrote:

mazdeuce wrote: I agree. I see less automotive "aspiration" than in the past. Not sure why that is.

Could be that "regular" cars are so loaded and refined, there's not that much advantage to a luxury brand these days.

I think it's similar to that but not exactly. [snip]

I think you hit the nail on the head, but I think Tom did as well. I remember when the Saturn Aura (and same generation Malibu) came out and my dad went and test drove them. He drove there in a Mercedes. He ended up in a BMW, because he has been in Mercs and BMW's and the same ilk for most of his adult life and actually could tell the difference, but the average consumer cannot. And a Mercedes/BMW/Infiniti driver actually test drove a Saturn.

Go and compare a new loaded Camry to an older BMW. Camry is nicer and more luxurious in just about every way, and I personally don't think the upgrade to the Lexus gets you all that much. Similar with the Explorer and the Lincoln [random letters]. But when I compare an old Town Car to an old Crown Vic, the Town Car was, IMHO, significantly nicer.

But I don't disagree with anything you said though; I do think the reliability and reputation were huge contributors.

mtn wrote:

Adrian_Thompson wrote:

Tom_Spangler wrote:

mazdeuce wrote: I agree. I see less automotive "aspiration" than in the past. Not sure why that is.

Could be that "regular" cars are so loaded and refined, there's not that much advantage to a luxury brand these days.

I think it's similar to that but not exactly. [snip]

I think you hit the nail on the head, but I think Tom did as well. I remember when the Saturn Aura (and same generation Malibu) came out and my dad went and test drove them. He drove there in a Mercedes. He ended up in a BMW, because he has been in Mercs and BMW's and the same ilk for most of his adult life and actually *could* tell the difference, but the average consumer cannot. And a Mercedes/BMW/Infiniti driver actually test drove a *Saturn*. Go and compare a new loaded Camry to an older BMW. Camry is nicer and more luxurious in just about every way, and I personally don't think the upgrade to the Lexus gets you all that much. Similar with the Explorer and the Lincoln [random letters]. But when I compare an old Town Car to an old Crown Vic, the Town Car was, IMHO, significantly nicer. But I don't disagree with anything you said though; I do think the reliability and reputation were huge contributors.

GM did this to themselves recently. They couldn't figure out why the Caddy XTS was selling poorly. It was because the new Impala, when in full-on LTZ trim, came with all the goodies (except the CUE system, which is worth not getting), the same drivetrain and the same overall size of the $75K Cadillac but for half the price. And the new Impala is a pretty nice-looking car and the interior is far above the rental-grade of the old W-body.

I demand to know why the Fiat 500 did not make that list! Surely people aren't buying that thing?

1988RedT2 wrote: I demand to know why the Fiat 500 did not make that list! Surely people aren't buying that thing?

Personally I think it's mega cool at least in Abarth trim. Best stock sounding engine out there.

I can't find definitive figures, but it looks to be about 20% by month for 16 vs.15.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: 7 Porsche Boxster & Cayman – 5,887. This one honestly does surprise me. I really expected many 10’s of thousands of Boxster Caymans. I see far far more of these than all other cars on this list combined, and they are better cars than any non special (Turbo, GT# etc.) 911 model.

This does not surprise me. I bought a 2014 Cayman last summer, in part because I wanted a six and wasn't ready to deal with the ownership of a Porsche turbo. And I think that a lot of those cars that you are seeing on the road may be 2014-15's. They look very different from the earlier Boxsters and Caymans, but not a whole lot different than the new ones until you see the tail lights.

NickD wrote: GM did this to themselves recently. They couldn't figure out why the Caddy XTS was selling poorly. It was because the new Impala, when in full-on LTZ trim, came with all the goodies (except the CUE system, which is worth not getting), the same drivetrain and the same overall size of the $75K Cadillac but for half the price. And the new Impala is a pretty nice-looking car and the interior is far above the rental-grade of the old W-body.

Especially when Cadillacs are often sold right next to Chevy or Buick cars in the same showroom. That wasn't a big deal when the cars were drastically different. Not so much today. A Camry isn't really that much different than a similar chassis Lexus, but the cars aren't sold in the same showroom, so a potential Lexus buyer might not notice how similar the quality is for substantially less $$.

Woody wrote: This does not surprise me. I bought a 2014 Cayman last summer, in part because I wanted a six and wasn't ready to deal with the ownership of a Porsche turbo. And I think that a lot of those cars that you are seeing on the road may be 2014-15's. They look very different from the earlier Boxsters and Caymans, but not a whole lot different than the new ones until you see the tail lights.

Do you think the 4cyl is killing sales compared to the old six? I have the slowest Boxster in existance, but it sounds glorious. I have a friend with a 6 cyl non S 987 Cayman and honestly it's as fast as you need for a DD and feels faster than the specs say. I'm sure the new 4cyl cars are faster, but they don't sound as good.

nderwater wrote: I feel sorry for the FIAT dealers who invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to remodel and add Alfa Romeo branding to their stores and they only ROI they've seen so far was the sale of a handful of 4C's. The Giulia needs to be a smash hit right out of the gate.

I actually see Maserati dealers (at least around here) merged with Alfa.

But still, Fiat IMO, does not have enough models alone to make it profitable and 4 versions of the 500 doesn't make it compete.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: I also hope the Alfa depreciates like, well an Alfa TBH.

Me too, but it doesn't look good so far. A quick check of autotrader nationwide finds the lowest price 4C out there right now is a 2015 for $50k. I would have thought they would be dipping into the low to mid 40's by now.

I'd like to own a lot of those cars on that list but like many others here said a lot of them are too pricey. I almost bought a new FR-S in 2016 but I couldn't get over the stupid shark fin roof antenna and picked up a lightly used 2013 model for a lot less instead. I guess that makes me part of the problem.

SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote:

nderwater wrote: I feel sorry for the FIAT dealers who invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to remodel and add Alfa Romeo branding to their stores and they only ROI they've seen so far was the sale of a handful of 4C's. The Giulia needs to be a smash hit right out of the gate.

I actually see Maserati dealers (at least around here) merged with Alfa. But still, Fiat IMO, does not have enough models alone to make it profitable and 4 versions of the 500 doesn't make it compete.

I ASSume that it's got to be a long term plan for those dealers. Today they just have Several 500 derivatives, the Fiat Miata plus the Alfa 4C. Let's be generous and call it five models. But the Giulia is coming soon and a cross over Fiat is rumored plus potentially what ever the baby Alfa hatch is called.

NEALSMO wrote:

bmw88rider wrote: BMW sold 112,838 3/4 Series cars in 2015 so for them to only sell 65K is a huge drop here. If 2015 was only 80K no big deal but to drop in half, that is a big loss.

Depends whether R&T's numbers included the 4 series or not. That could be the other half of the sales right there.

It's not - BMW sales overall are down about 10% for the year. Last year BMW had massive incentives on their cars to move the metal. This year, they're using less incentives. The incentives will be back and you will be able to lease your 3'er for $300/mo with $0 down soon.

In reply to Mister Fister:

Do you have global figures?