Some folks literally worship at the altar of a given brand. Toyota enthusiasts (and yes, they are enthusiastic sorts) usually believe that their cars are the absolute zenith of automotive reliability. BMW, another long time standout, has carefully cultivated a decades long image as an 'ultimate drving machine.' And there are still a few hundred thousand misquided souls who believe that a Mercedes-Benz is engineered like no other car in the world (in the good sense). To convince these people that other cars offer better value in the marketplace is almost as easy as convincing OJ to tell the truth– for free. These owners are true converts. Until of course, something happens that ticks them off.
One lemon, one bad dealer experience, or even a carmaker's loss of product direction can lead to the point of no return and no cash flow. Here are the results of J.D. Power's recent study on customer retention, and my idea of where each manufacturer has gone wrong or right. Admittedly, I'm not a statistician. But I've seen tens of thousands of vehicles come and go through the auction lanes during 2006. If you want to hear about how brands are valued in the largest auction business outside of Wall Street, where public perception turns into cold hard cash, here's the deal.
1. Toyota – 63.9 - Who woulda thunk!
2. Lexus – 63.2 – Ditto.
3. Honda – 60 – I’d love to see the breakdown for the models. My hunch is that the CR-V and the Accord were the top two.
4. BMW – 56.5 – BMW has improved seven percentage points since 2003. Despite their models' controversial styling and iDrive, customers keep coming back to the roundel.
5. Scion – 56.3 – No three model line-up is as close in demographics and income levels as the xA, xB and Tc. Although I still think the Tc should have been sold as a Celica, kudos to Toyota for ignoring the above stats and releasing three all-new Scions in the next three years.
6. Cadillac – 55.5 – Did J.D. Power do an ajustment for all those new car buyers who died shortly after the survey? In the remarketing industry we get a LOT of Cadillacs and Buicks. Repos are often voluntary, due to the prior owner’s demise.
7. Chevrolet – 55.3 – The Impala, Cobalt, Corvette and Silverado have all done a good job over the past couple of years… although only the later two are class leaders. If GM built a minivan that didn’t look like an elongated two-step staircase, Chevy might have been in the top five.
8. Mercedes-Benz – 53.6 – A real shocker. Mercedes-Benz has more lemon law vehicles than all other luxury makes combined (excluding Infiniti). The C, E, and ML classes don’t offer a single class-leading mainstream luxury vehicle.
9. Ford – 53.3 – I don’t see how Ford was able to get here. Oh, wait… the F-150 and Mustang! Never mind.
10. Hyundai – 51.6 – Offer an extended warranty, a lineup that's a good match for Toyota and a heavy value quotient and you get a strong repeat customer base. Slam dunk!
I’ll skip the next four (Subaru, Nissan, Porsche, Hummer). I don’t expect these niche players to enter the mainstream markets in the near future. Subaru is planning to go upscale, Porsche will have to deal with VW and Hummer is nothing more than a special vehicle for those who have always ridden in something yellow. Nissan is already on the highway to mediocrity, but that's a topic for another day.
15. Suzuki – 43.9 – Suzuki's notched up a 23 point improvement since 2003. I’ve seen thousands of Aerios, Veronas, Forenzas and Vitaras go through the auction block; Suzuki is the most underrated automaker today. They're pretty much where Hyundai was in 2001, when vehicle quality and dealer development were improving dramatically. By 2010, Suzuki could well be the next Hyundai.
16. Kia – 42.8 – I don’t have as much hope for Kia. It’s not because their products are mostly uncompetitive, or that that their quality is still in the low second-tier. The biggest problem: they’re now Hyundai’s younger sibling. (Kind of like Plymouth in the '90’s.) I don’t see how they can outdo a sister brand that's holding all the cards.
17 thru 21 are not my cup of tea. Too much badge engineering (GMC, Dodge, Saturn) and an SUV bastard child (Land Rover) whose only fortune in the past 20 years was a brief marriage to BMW. That said, the Caliber would have been a grand slam if gas had gone down to a dollar.
22. Buick – 39.9 – Again, you gotta wonder about the death quotient. Perhaps the Lacrosse really is a dud.
23. Chrysler – 38.2 - Most of Chrysler’s line-up would be close to class leading if it weren’t for the muddleheads at Daimler. I miss the days when Chrysler stood at the forefront of design: the Viper, the LH’s, the early 90’s Ram, etc.
24. Acura – 37.6 – Not a surprising result, given Honda's tendency to leave big gaping holes in Acura's price and market demographics; the RL, RSX, TSX, and MDX appeal to very different buyers. On a side note, I wonder what percentage of these buyers simply decided to buy Accords the next go round.
25. Lincoln – 37.3 – Who cares? Billy really screwed the pooch with this brand.
26. Audi – 35.6 – If VW knew how to build cars that didn’t have the long-term durability of a Kia Rio, they'd be the kings of the North American Yuppie market. Instead they offer the worst warranty in the entire industry and electronics that not even AC Delco would have tolerated back in the '70’s.
27. Volkswagen – 35.5 – Why hasn't TTAC pointed out that VW lost over a billion dollars in the North American market last year?
28. Volvo – 35.5 – What do you expect when Ford decides to have the S60/S80 languish for eternity and makes the S40/V50 as tasteless as the lunch buffet at Shoney’s.
29. Saab – 33.4 – Saab should have been axed ten years ago. A month ago I bought a Saab 900 S that was in pristine condition for $1300. It was built in late '95, had the body of a '96, and had been repainted at the factory with a color that was used only for the '97 models. I wonder if Chrysler will be using a similar formula soon.
30. MINI – 32.4 – I hope BMW makes a second model for this "brand." It needs one.
31. Mercury – 31.9 – Everybody’s late aunt had a Mercury. Unfortunately, when you asked her what type of car she had, she'd say, "Blue!” And there you have it: Mercury’s position in today's marketplace.
32. Mitsubishi – 30.5 – This company shouldn’t exist.
33. Jaguar – 29.8 – Ditto.
34. Infiniti – 29.0 – Finally, a study that exposes Infiniti for what it is: a brand dedicated to winning the hearts of enthusiasts and pissing off long-term owners with inferior quality at all levels. If you’ve ever looked at Lexus, BMW and Infinitis at auction, you'd know who invested money in their powertrains and interiors. I’ll give you a hint: it wasn’t Infiniti.
35. Pontiac – 27.8 – Cheap plastic doesn’t get you far in life and apparently not in an automobile either. Then again, I’m sure all the Aztek owners went over to Buick.
36. Mazda – 26.8 – The Mazda 3 is supposed to be the class leader. So is the MX-5. The Mazda 6 is one of the few midsized vehicles that isn’t an outright porkster and the RX-8 is a true joy to drive. I think a big part of the disconnect must come from all the ticked-off 626 and Millenia owners.
37. Isuzu – 4.7 – Not even Joe Isuzu can save this company from the GM black hole of brand management. Do they still sell the Ascender and Vehicross?
81 Comments on “J.D. Powers’ Customer Retention By Brand...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Rule number one of efficient brand creation: the customers should never be in doubt that you are there for them, and not the other way around.
A lot of carmakers have not understood this. Those that have are on the top of this list.
BMW is hiring hotel and hospitality management educated people to work in their dealerships and develop after-sales customer programs.
The brand is there for me – I am not here for the brand.
BMW is hiring hotel and hospitality management educated people to work in their dealerships and develop after-sales customer programs
I wonder why GM never thought of that.
Couple of questions about JD Powers methodology. How do they count chevy to caddy or scion to toyota jumps? I’m surprised they found enough scion and hummer repeat buyers to survey, scion has been around since 2004?
Steven,
Very insightful analysis. Thanks for sharing.
Interesting to see the difference between Honda and Acura. I think you are right about the lack of cohesion between Acura products. Our family has an Accord and MDX now, and our next car will be an Odyssey or GM Lambda. Acura just doesn’t offer the people mover we’ll need.
Your perspective on Infiniti and Audi is really important — not something that comes out in the usual comparisons the print mags are paid to churn out.
From the J.D. press release:
Now in its fourth year, the study measures the percentage of new-vehicle buyers and lessees who replace a previously purchased new vehicle with another from the same nameplate. As a whole, the industry registers a slight decline in customer retention, falling to 47.9 percent, from 49.6 percent in 2005.
The study finds that of more than one-half of the brands included in the rankings have shown some decline in retention rates since the study’s inception in 2003.
“Declining customer loyalty results from considerable improvements in quality combined with a plethora of choices for consumers,” said Neal Oddes, director of product research and analysis at J.D. Power and Associates. “In some instances, new models, such as those in the rapidly growing crossover segment, can have a significant impact on customer retention for a brand.”
The 2006 Customer Retention Study is based on responses from 138,630 new-vehicle buyers and lessees, of which 82,274 replaced a vehicle that was previously acquired new.
Great article Steven. Some real surprises – particularly Acura and Mazda. To all those contemplating an Audi or Infinity: You have been warned.
Good article with interesting points.
Toyota #1: I now own a Toyota, 1st I’ve owned. I am pleased overall with no problems. One weird thing is that Toyota Service dept’s are *too* nice bordering on creepy! I got a phone call from service manager’s wife asking me how it went.
Chevy: Virtually same as BMW. Much of this is Silverado. Just as the Muslims have Shiite and Sunnis the US-pickup lovers have Ford and Chevy (no insult to Pickups or Islam). Chevy and Ford are sitting on most successful single model lines in the world (full size pickups loyalty + huge volume + high margin per vehicle).
Mini: I’m no mini lover (how can they make a car this small weight this much?! Depleted Uranium?!), however the low retention does make sense. This is stylish car for young people, a fashion statement that will not be repeated.
Mazda: Biggest Surprise – Mazda owners I see seem to be happy. Also my next small car I’d consider one (don’t like the new civic)
32. Mitsubishi – 30.5 – This company shouldn’t exist.
- Evo anyone?
Just as the Muslims have Shiite and Sunnis the US-pickup lovers have Ford and Chevy
I don’t think this is really the case. I used to frequent the full size truck forums when I was thinking about getting a 3/4 ton truck. The guys on there are guys who actually use their truck for work or hauling horses or boats. And there is no brand loyalty at all. They’re always talking about switching among the Big 3 trucks because of quality issues (the two biggies that I’m familiar with are bad Dodge trannys, the Ford Powerstroke having injector or turbo issues). Comments often come up that they can’t wait for Toyota to put a big Diesel in the Tundra.
I think the Ford Chevy rift is just out there as a marketing ploy to make people think they have to be loyal to one brand, but in reality, the guys who depend on their truck use what gets the job done.
Interesting, but not totally surprising, to see Chevy and Ford in the top 10…it would be enlightening to see how these brands would fare if the rankings showed their truck lines versus their car lines. As mentioned in the article, the Silverado and F-150 play key roles in this achievement. There are plenty of people who would gladly own a Chevy or Ford truck/SUV, but wouldn’t be caught dead driving one of their cars.
Miked: You’re right on the mark when it comes to the brand loyalty argument as it applies to full-sized trucks. Sure, there are a few rednecks out there who cling to the image of Calvin pissing on a Chevy or Ford logo, but most buyers are at least intelligent enough to enjoy the fact that the U.S. still produces some of the best – and highly competitive – vehicles in this segment.
Question – do “new car buyers” include rental fleets? That could seriously skew the numbers for the Big 3…
Mazda’s problem might be that the Mazda6 isn’t as good as the Mazda3, so people go to another brand when ready for a larger car. The Mazda6 might be more fun to drive than a Camry, but it lacks the verve of the 3.
The Scion result is surprising–usually when the range is narrow the retention rate is low. Toyota doesn’t want this rate high, they want Scion’s customers to leave it for Toyotas.
For the same reason, I wouldn’t expect MINI’s rate to be higher than it is. The problem for BMW is there’s no obvious migration path. If people want something new and unique, they’re not going to be brand loyal. Instead they’re going to bounce from a Beetle to a PT Crusier to a MINI to the next thing.
I’d expect the highest customer retention with brands that either have a full range of strong vehicles (BMW) or that people buy just because it’s the safe thing to buy, not because it gets them excited (Toyota and Lexus).
The more a brand’s appeal is based on style and excitement, the more fickle the people it attracts will be.
Generally I’m critical of J.D. Power:
http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/jdpower.php
But the customer retention study looks clean and simple enough that I have no problems with it. The stats are widely spaced and they’re providing a useful amount of information to the public.
“Mazda: Biggest Surprise – Mazda owners I see seem to be happy. Also my next small car I’d consider one (don’t like the new civic)”
As a Mazda dealer shop foreman/tech, allow me to post what have seen with Mazda over the past 25 years:
Time was, Mazda was the sporting brand to have. Driver ergonomics, handling, other driving dynamics geared towards the enthusiast.
The RX-7 became a cult classic, the 626, GLC and Protege, MX-6, MX-3 had built up a loyal and devoted following.
The Mazda trucks were inexpensive and excellent workhorses.
THEN…As Ford took over more control of the company, Mazda was positioned to be all things to all people.
The 929–Eunos800 in Japan–an EXCELLENT car was redesigned, and the new model lost interior space, and lost it’s following. After ‘95–GONE.
The 626 gained an excellent V6 engine, but also added weight, became bland, and had quality control issues as production shifted from Japan to the US.
The Protege was and is an excellent car, people LOVE them.
The RX-7 became a supercar with myriad problems, after ‘95–GONE.
Many of the cars were decontented, customers viewd some as they would(at the time) Hyundai.
The B-Series Trucks became Ford Rangers. Enough said.
The Miata has been an outstanding sports car.
I dont believe the lower retention rate of Mazda reflects the new models.
The Mazda6 is now a great driver’s car…and it’s underpinnings are now the basis for most of Fords passenger car line.
The Mazda3 is basically a Volvo S40 with a Mazda engine. Owners love them.
The RX-8 had teething problems early on, but as with the other new models, the owners are extremely enthusiastic about their 8s.
In cases where the RX-8 owner needed an update to their engine control system, Mazda provided a free CX-7 rental car.
The CX-7 has cutting-edge technology,a direct-injected turbocharged 2.3L 4-cylinder whose power has to be experienced to be believed. Same basic engine in the Mazdaspeed 6 and Mazdaspeed3. The 4 that runs like a V8.
The MX-5(Miata) is a leap forward in all areas compared to the previous model, the new retractable hardtop is a work of art.
The Tribute and MPV–GONE(for now)
The Mazda5–in a class by itself, ZERO problems, typical Japanese fit and finish. I like it so much, I bought one for my wife this week. Added to our fleet of ‘92 MPV, ‘88 323. ‘86 RX-7. ‘93 Ford Probe GT(Mazda MX-6), ‘94 Miata, ‘94 Protege, ‘98 Millenia, ‘88 MX-6, ‘91 B2200 Truck, and probably 10 other Mazdas in the families.
Mazda felt they “lost their way”, and has gotten back to their strength–building sporting cars for the enthusiast. The pendulum has swung away from Ford-based cars to Mazda engineered cars and engines.
I’d like to see Mazda’s retention rates 3 to 5 years from now.
Terry
Excellent, excellent point about VW
Farago, die Volkswagen Todesuhr?
Re: Mazda
The 3 is the compact class leader. I’d guess a lot of buyers get it as their first car after college and then trade up to an Audi or Bimmer. Problem for Mazda I think is they don’t have a larger model falling along their discerning buyers’ trade-up curve.
The 3 is blow-the-similarly-priced-competition-out-of-the-water good, as are the sportscars. To get a high retention rate, Mazda needs to take its larger-sized cars from quite good to blow-the-similarly-priced-competition-out-of-the-water good.
Mr. Lang: The Volvo S40 “tasteless”? Really? Funny, I’d rate the exterior as truly artistic and the interior as quite refined. I wonder if something else other than degree of tastefulness might explain the retention rate…anyone have any guesses?
“If you’ve ever looked at Lexus, BMW and Infinitis at auction, you’d know who invested money in their [b]powertrains[/b] and interiors. I’ll give you a hint: it wasn’t Infiniti.”
I will give you the interior comment, but powertrain? Oh, that’s right, the VQ35 is not an award winning engine. It is not a 3.5L 6-cylinder engine pushing out over 300 hp and over 270 ft-lbs of torque. Good call.
I am excited to see the interior of the new G35. Most every comment/review I have seen indicates that Infiniti has been listening.
The acura number was a bit surprising, but I would be curious about how much higher the numbers would go if you removed the integra/rsx from the numbers. You have to assume that most people driving those cars do not have the bank to hop into a TL or even possibly a TSX. Also, I think that mazda has overhauled their lineup and perhaps lost a few customers in the mix. They are a great brand. Though I would like to see the raw numbers for mazda owners in the study. I think a few of these brands may suffer from the fact that low numbers of owners were polled.
I don’t know if it’s just me, but it seems that most of the companies in the lower tier of the rankings suffer from at least one of two problems:
1) A lack of brand identity. Yeah the Evo is a great car, but what do you do when you need more room and your boy racer days are over? Buy a Subaru I guess.
2) A lack of quality/reliable products. This can be seen in pontiac, mistubishi, etc. But the piece de resistance of this is VW/Audi. It’s amazing how the combination of cars with quality problems and a dealer network with unilaterally bad service can turn a company with fairly good products into a big loser. This is the reason I won’t buy a VW gti even though I consider one the best all around everyday driver’s cars there is in my price range and perhaps the perfect car for me.
@HawaiiJim
Volvo, one possible explanation: I met an Englishman who owns two companies that ready Volvos for the British market. His mechanics have been increasingly shaking their heads over how corners have been cut in build quality and parts over the past five years. Given how Volvos are providing a margin to FoMoCo, they may have been tempted to increase those.
Acura/Honda. I am surprised as well. I own 2 Accords. I would like to make a TSX my next car, if, Honda can find some more power for it, preferably the turbo 4 from the RDX.
VW — is in real trouble now. The old boss (I can neither pronounce nor spell his name) is the Porsche descendant who is the Bill Ford of Porsche. When he was running VW he damn near wrecked it (Low quality, phaeton, over-stuffed Golf). He left VW (jumped or pushed?), but he started to buy up VW stock. He is now trying to get the German law that limits changes of control of VW overruled by the EU. If, that happens, hell is out for breakfast.
Most people in the Auto industry will tell you that there is way to much manufacturing capacity. Not every brand will survive. Not every brand deserves to.
I’m not quite sure Nissan was skipped over. It certainly doesn’t seem like a niche player.
I was just wondering why the author felt that a full-line company that has the fifth largest sales volume in the country was not expected “to enter the mainstream markets in the near future.”
I’m not trying to be hyper-critical here. I was just wondering what the reasoning was behind this decision.
One weird thing is that Toyota Service dept’s are *too* nice bordering on creepy!
I know what you mean. I would rather be treated as a “mark” in a con-game than a Sailor that just walked into a bi-sexual brothel.
I am surprised that retension rates are as high as they are with all the great automobile choices on the market.
Peoples needs tend to change in the 3-5 years they own a vehicle and one would think they would cross-shop their next purchase on the Internet. I think retension rates will fall in the future.
I believe you gentlemen are putting FAR too much focus on the idea that people moving "up" the ownership ladder within a brand accounts for brand loyalty.
There are plenty of people– most people– who want to stay with one model, preferably forever. (That specifically does NOT include TTAC'ers.) When it comes time to change, all these sheeple really want to do is change their old car for a newer version of the same thing.
Detroit used to understand this, with their yearly updates to existing models. Today's automakers have convinced themselves that their customers suffer the same ADD that stalks the halls of their bureacratic mazes. They kill old nameplates and models willy nilly, neglect existing models and launch an endless series of new ones– as if every car buyer is also a professional car reviewer.
Your best customer is your existing customer. Which is why The Big Two Point Five's declining market share adds more and more cost to their operations. Some analysts figure it takes four times as much money to conquest a sale as it does to create repeat business. (Stein?)
For example, should Mitsubishi design, build and sell new products for emigrating Evo owners, or try to get more people into an Evo? Or, perhaps, make Evo evolutions more suitable to a comfort-oriented market? What would be wrong with sticking with the Evo?
Another example: Would people have left their Explorers and Tahoes if gas prices had stayed low? Or, if you prefer, would they have stayed with SUV's if the vehicles had increased their mileage by 50%? The tree-huggers might not think so, but I do.
Remember: the more models you make, the more complexity you put into the system, the more chances you have to totally screw up everything.
Good points. A couple of questions, though. You praise Suzuki, but a lot of their current cars (Verona, Forenza) are Daewoos, not real Suzukis. That makes their result a bit surprising, but I agree with you that Suzuki is on the upswing.
You say “Caliber would have been a grand slam if gas had gone down to a dollar”. I don’t get that, because I think the reason the Caliber is doing as well as it is is because of higher gas prices, especially earlier this year, that is driving some typical 2.5 buyers to smaller cars, at the expense of Chrysler’s larger cars/trucks. If gas had been a dollar, the Caliber would have been dead on arrival, and its erstwhile buyers driving Rams and Durangos.
or example, should Mitsubishi design, build and sell new products for emigrating Evo owners, or try to get more people into an Evo? Or, perhaps, make Evo evolutions more suitable to a comfort-oriented market? What would be wrong with sticking with the Evo?
There would be nothing wrong with making a more practical evo, but it is still a niche vehicle. You would have to differentiate the cars for hardcore enthusiats and the one that is softened up a little, much as Honda has with the civic Si. The Evo appeals to younger individuals and most people do need a car that is more utilitarian later on in their lives. Why can’t mitsubishi turn the galant into a more comfortable, slightly larger Evo? It certainly beats the nothing it stands for now. Subaru did so with the legacy and I think it was a great move. Sure there are many people that will stay with the same car for a lifetime, but that car is a camry or some similar utilitarian vehicle. It is not going to be an evo,wrx, rsx, etc. My cousin just bought a camry as her first new car and will likely buy another and maybe move up to a lexus ES later on. A good company will have solid mid range vehicles that are a good compromise for most (a bit sporty, a bit plush, good cargo room) and then build niche vehicles for those who want them, but still have that natural transition. I think mazda and subaru have done this on the sporty side and toyota has done so by giving all its cars that sedate (boring) driving experience and a solid lexus feel, even the scion tc. People who enjoy it will want more of it.
@RF
Some analysts figure it takes four times as much money to conquest a sale as it does to create repeat business. (Stein?)
Or more, depending upon the strength of your brand.
Your point about a wash of new models rather than continuing established lines is an important one.
I have a theory that autoshows are dangerous to carmakers’ bottom lines. Exec’s get all enthusiastic about coming to the shows with something new, and really don’t like to unveil warmed over oldies.
Most drivers seek the comfort of that with which they are well acquainted, and don’t look forward to “retooling” their heads around a “strange” new model.
Rental car companies will tell you stories about people who’ll do anything to get the exact same kind of car they usually drive (and who break down in tears if they don’t get it). They don’t want to drive anything that “feels funny.”
3 out of 5 are Toyota’s now that’s dominance! As a VOW owner, I am surprised the figure is not lower. I will never buy a VOW product again and have written correspondence to VWNA to communicate my dissatisfaction.
Hyundai is very interesting, I would love to see their demographics. I know many middle class families with Hyundai’s as their second cars.
Their quality and image are evolving quiet well.
The problem with Mazdas (and this is coming from someone who owned an FD RX-7, an RX-8, a Miata, and who's girlfriend owned a 3) is that they fall apart. The interior is cheap and of lousy quality. The engines break. My girlfriend's 3 had a "common" fuel pump problem where it would just shut off. At 80 mph. In traffic on 495. My RX-8 would occasionally return 17 mpg, where I would be ecstatic (typically I got 14-15). My RX-7 was solid in the engine department (contrary to popular belief) but the exterior, cooling, electrical and interior would break so frequently I'd fix one thing and another would fall off. And my Miata . . . well . . . . that car was a trooper. No complaints about her. Mazda needs to work on quality as well as fun to drive factor.
I’d like to know how you can get a rental car company to give you the car you want – I’ve never gotten the model I’ve reserved – usually free upgrades, but never the same vehicle.
I’d like to rent a Pontiac Vibe for a trip – not a single rental car company could promise I’d get one – most consider them SUV’s, which is laughable.
RFarago: Maybe it’s the folks you call “sheeple”–those who hope to stick with a brand forever–who REALLY love cars. Kind of like marriage–if you really love someone you want to stick with them forever.
HawaiiJim:
No disrespect intended. I love sheep. (No, not THAT way).
Face it: we can't all be shepherds. It's a big mistake for automotive alphas to assume that the public share their restlessness. In fact, the only thing that can make most consumers change brands is… pain.
Power to the sheeple!
Caddy: some of them might have one foot in the grave, but I’d wager that would not include CTS owners. If Caddy can address the short comings of the present model in the next interation, they will have quite a success on their hands.
Subaru: interesting time for Subbie. A successful upmarket version of the WRX STI could completely change public perception.
Porche: a niche player who may see its niche narrowing and it gets squeezed between the increasing performance of more main stream players, BMW 335i and M Coupe and some versions of the TT, for example and true exotics.
Audi: say what you want, but the company is breaking sales records in the US and worldwide. The company seems to be on a roll right now.
VW: the GTI could be a sign of better things to come. The company will be leading the diesel charge in the US. The question is whether anyone will notice
Mitsu: I guess one model, the EVO, a car company does not make. But building a civilized version of the EVO would be a start. Just ask Subaru
Unfortunately, Nissan is becoming more and more like its main owner, Renault, which means ugly and cheaply made.
Acura, indeed, has holes in its lineup big enough to drive a semi through (pun intended)
Mazda, try as it might, is weighed down by its part-Ford ownership (and all the corner-cutting it brings) and is still not a player when it comes to cost of ownership – compared to Toyota and Honda.
Mazda has become too expensive as well. The RX7 went upmarket and foundered. The Miata went from $13,800 to $20,500 MSRP.
Mazda lost customers to the companies which belong in the higher price brackets. No one buys Mazda for a status symbol.
RF: “Remember: the more models you make, the more complexity you put into the system, the more chances you have to totally screw up everything.”
This point has been lost on most automakers in recent years. Honda has done the best job of not niching itself into a corner. On the other side of the coin, look at DCX, for whom no niche is apparently too small.
VW seems to have devolved the most. Once upon a time the company had an unusually streamlined line up. Now VW looks like GM on uppers — a messy assemblage of overlapping brands and nameplates that makes an already bad cost structure. . . downright unsustainable?
Just to pick up on Robert’s point that most people only switch brands due to pain, I think there are 2 causes of pain.
The most obvious, and the reason Toyota owners are so loyal, is that the majority are ex-2.5 owners who got sick of painful repair bills to the extent they tried Toyota, and now, they are never going back. Nor are they trying anything else — what else could explain the fact that the best selling compact (Corolla) is also one of the worst, in any category except reliability.
The second reason for loyalty is that carmakers are sneaky in the way they approach the driver interface. Over time, they make subtle changes to differentiate themselves, and impose switching costs on drivers tempted to taste another brand.
The most obvious example of this approach is also the most odious: iDrive. I can’t recall a review of a BMW that didn’t mention iDrive and what a PITA it is. But there has to be a reason that BMW has not only persisted with that mess, but spread it like a virus to each new model.
And the reason is that once they’ve converted a luxury car driver to iDrive, it’s just not worth the pain and effort for them to learn COMAND, MMI, etc.
Kind of like the Mac, I guess.
I finally created account after months of good reading at TTAC, usually the editorials are so fair and balanced, that I have nothing to comment about. This editorial was first article I have been confused and kinda frustrated about. Iam a Nissan and Toyota guy. I have 3 infiniti’s had 1 Nissan and a Toyota. Thus, Iam a long term infiniti owner and I have never had unusual problems with quality especially mechanical quality that made me extemely displeased. I know many Infiniti owners who feel the same. If anything I think their retention is a function of brand recognition. For example you get a BMW and it may blow up but you liked the fact that your BMW got you status points, so you get another one to keep the points. On the other hand you buy an infiniti and your status turns to.. “you drive an infiniwhat?”, so you don’t buy another one because you didn’t get the status points you expected from a luxury car. At first I could kind of understand what you where saying about recent quality issues rising from the Renault merger. Before the takeover infiniti may have been boring but the quality was always outstanding mechanical to interior. My 1994 Q45 with 200,000 miles still is without interior rattles. My 2004 G35C on the other hand appears of a lower quality yes. In summary I don’t understand how you claim infiniti to be a low quality car manf. that is exposed by this survey and that somehow nissan is a niche brand. Do you dislike Nissan or is it really a niche brand not to be taken seriously in the automotive industry?
Editor Farago makes a point when he wrote, “The more models, the more complexity you add to the system” the less chances a make has for owners’ continued loyalty. Consider what has happened to Volvo in regards to this list. For years, a Volvo meant one car: series 240. There was a two-door sedan, a four-door sedan and a wagon, all based on the same platform and (pretty much) the same body. Was that for everybody’s tastes? Of course, it wasn’t. But it kept Volvo owners loyal to the marque, probably long after the 240 was past its prime. And of course, before Volvo quit making the 240 in 1993, it introduced other models, which Volvo had hoped to bring in new owners; and the front-wheel drive series 850, in 1993, was supposed to be the home run. When the S80 debuted, it had a plethora of electrical problems. I was visiting my friends at Daisywagen (sic)Foreign Car Service on Tuesday (of the week now ending). They’re a Volvo-exclusive shop. While I was there, the owner of ‘99 Volvo S80 called and said he needed several electrical problems – windows that wouldn’t work, for example – taken care of by week’s end. The shop’s owner told him, “I’m booked for the next two weeks.” And when he put down the phone, he said, “Even dealers can’t figure out all the electrical problems.” So maybe Volvo has kept the S80 around, attempting to get it right. But back in the day, Volvo wouldn’t have shipped a car with electrical glitches. I hate to pile on, but this seems like another problem induced by parent company, Ford. It sure seems that selling Volvo would benefit Ford with some needed cash, and Volvo with getting its act back together.
T. Parkhurst: Selling Volvo is a nice idea, assuming the economics make sense. If that happens, I’d encourage Volvo to work hard toward some real breakthroughs in safety technology, building on their past successes. I’d also suggest that they don’t build anything much lengthier than the S40/V50. They should also work on some of the small things that make a real difference in daily urban/suburban driving, for example a tight turning circle. The tight turns possible in my 2002 BMW 325i constantly bring a smile to my face in crowded parking lots. Finally, I would suggest that their ads be very specific in highlighting those small things.
As Robert mentioned previously, I’m not a journalist by profession. My initial write-up for the ‘Nissan’ section was…
“I’ll skip the next four (Subaru, Nissan, Porsche, Hummer) due to the fact that I simply don’t expect the three niche players to enter the mainstream markets in the next few years. Subaru is planning to go upscale, Porsche will have to deal with VW, and Hummer is nothing more than a special vehicle for those who have always ridden in something yellow. Nissan is already on the highway to mediocrity but that’s for another thread.”
However when you re-edit your own stuff, sometimes the sentences stay in your mind but shift on the screen. My apologies for that.
“Do you dislike Nissan or is it really a niche brand not to be taken seriously in the automotive industry?”
This is an excellent question because it alludes to the fact that Nissan is no longer a sales leader in any single mainstream market segment.
Personally, I don’t dislike Nissan at all. In fact the mid-90’s Sentra SE-R is one of my all-time favorite sport coupes and the Q45 from that era was also quite nice. Unfortunately for the buying public, the build quality of many of their higher end models (Armada, Titan, QX56) have been downright atrocious and the parent organization’s desire to cut corners with design, build quality, materials, and even their entire North American operations, has greatly effected Nissan’s and Infiniti’s customer retention.
That can not be denied. The fact that Hyundai ranked much higher than Nissan in this retention study did not surprise me at all. You have to look at how these ‘brands’ are actually supporting the customer and their dealers.
Do they issue recalls quickly?
Do they provide the customer with continued support after the sale (long-term transferable warranties, free maintenance, reasonable repair costs, free emergency roadside service, easy dealer access)?
Are they supporting their dealer network and building partnerships in areas that require very strong regional coordination (distribution, finance, advertising, recalls and TSB’s..) … or are they nickel-spitting them and possibly forcing them to hold large amounts of dead inventory?
There are literally hundreds of issues that must be addressed if an auto manufacturer wants to build a successful brand.
In short, you need to look at ‘the life cycle development’ of a brand over the course of time. Consider how the top ranked independent brand has performed in this study, Toyota, versus the bottom ranked one, Mitsubishi.
1) Which one built up their dealer network slowly, and regionally, over the course of several decades.
2) Which one was historically conservative with their financing arm? Which one provided financing terms for their cars that were perhaps a bit too lenient? (Hint: People who have no money and are given cars for extended periods of time, tend to trash the cars and the ‘brand’ to all the subsequent owners.)
3) Which one realized the limitations of their own ‘brand’ and decided to cultivate a new one? (Hint: Diamante vs. LS400)
4) Which one partnered with distributors and learned from other organizations (such as GM) who were more experienced in this vital area?
5) Which manufacturer continued to crank out product even after it was obvious that the buying public wasn’t interested in those models?
6) Which one has cut back when faced with this reality rather than selling out to the rental fleets?
7) Which one has been largely unsuccessful in creating a national brand identity? Why was one ‘eventually’ successful while the other ‘eventually’ failed? (Hint: Your products have to tie into each other so that people know what you’re about. Believe it or not, even Honda has struggled retaining new customers with their Acura brand due to this issue.)
People will buy a car for a variety of stupid reasons. Car ads can be funny, credit terms can be lenient, and models can always be ‘value priced’. However many people buy into a brand over the long term because their is an extremely compelling and personal reason to do it.
In the eyes of certain enthusiasts…
The Toyota brand equates to outstanding quality.
The BMW brand equates to a great driving exeperience.
The Mitsubishi brand equates to ????????
In order to truly understand a brand’s health, you have to look at their entire operations.
Problem for Mazda I think is they don’t have a larger model falling along their discerning buyers’ trade-up curve.
Back in the 70s, Mazda produced this;
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_Roadpacer
hey it was the 70s
How about sticking the renesis motor into the panther chassis? that would be a “bold move”.
Some things on Mazda…
Ford on Mazda BAD, Mazda on Ford GOOD.
The previous ones (Protege, 626, 929) were too much bad Ford, and unless you replace your vehicel every 3 years, the 3 and 6 are still too new.
Also, mrybczyn, the Miata hasn’t gone up in price. When you control for inflation, its the same price. Its just that the economy and midsized cars have gone DOWN relative to inflation, not that the Miata has gotten more expensive.
For the last 15 years or so, I bought Canon cameras only, but one year ago, when it was time to get a new digital SLR for under $1000 I choose Nikon, so what if Canon sells more cameras, for that time when I made my decision, the Nikon was the right product to get.
Same with cars, who cares how many people would choose the same brand over and over again and again, that reminds me of those old people that keep going to the same dealer every 3 years to get a new Grand Marquis / DTS / Crown Vic / Town Car.
The best thing about my Mazda 3 is that every time I see one on the road it looks much better than any other BOX name TOYOTA!
“Consider what has happened to Volvo in regards to this list. For years, a Volvo meant one car: series 240. There was a two-door sedan, a four-door sedan and a wagon, all based on the same platform and (pretty much) the same body.”
This is akin to saying that Chrysler was a one car company in the 1980’s with the K-car chassis. Volvo was a substantial car and truck company at that time. In the NA market they did offer the 240, 740, 760, 940, 960 and 780 while in Europe the offerings were even more numerous. With all these models you had different engines (some of which lasted only a year), electric systems, chassis components, and available options. Once you got past the basic chassis the actual manufacturing of these cars was actually quite complex.
“Was that for everybody’s tastes? Of course, it wasn’t. But it kept Volvo owners loyal to the marque, probably long after the 240 was past its prime.”
The 240 virtually killed the Volvo marque in the early 1990’s for NA. It was to the midsized market segment what the Jeep Grand Wagoneer was to the full-sized SUV segment.
The 740/940 was what kept Volvo in the running (barely) until the 850 came out.
“When the S80 debuted, it had a plethora of electrical problems.”
Very true. It was a very sad chapter but those defects were not attributable to Ford’s management. The S80 began production in 1998. Ford bought out Volvo in 1999.
“I hate to pile on, but this seems like another problem induced by parent company, Ford. It sure seems that selling Volvo would benefit Ford with some needed cash, and Volvo with getting its act back together.”
Volvos are known for being durable, but buggy vehicles. Defective ABS modules, broken odometers, electrical gremlins of all sorts that are difficult to diagnose, Volvo’s of that time are not considered to be ‘reliable’ vehicles in the used car market.
However they are extremely easy to repair and the original parent companies strong truck heritage made these cars much more durable than others of that time.
Ironically enough, the very qualities that made it appealing to the station wagon moms and conservative folk of that era now make it appealing to the customizers and sport tuners of the modern day.
Replying to SherbornSean:
what else could explain the fact that the best selling compact (Corolla) is also one of the worst, in any category except reliability.
My explaination is that it isn’t. Corolla may have (one of) the worst handling. But it certainly is above average, if not simply the best, in terms of reliability, build quality, fuel economy, interior space utility and ownership cost.
I have to disagree with the Nissan/Infiniti assessments as well. True, Nissan and Infiniti have cheaper and lower quality interiors than comparable cars in the same class/pricerange. But there is absolutely, positively nothing wrong with their powertrains, handling, or design. I’ve owned 2 Hondas, 2 Nissans, a Toyota, and a Mazda. My dad also owns a Nissan and has owned 2 Hondas and countless Chevrolets. Of all of them, the Nissans have been the most reliable. The interiors may not be as nice in material quality, but they are durable and hold up well. The powertrains have been completely infalliable(we’ve had much more trouble with the Hondas). And the design, performance, and handling has a soul that only Mazda can rival, and boring and staid Honda and Toyota can only dream about. But Mazda doesn’t have anything to rival the VQ35… yet. I’m keeping my eye out to see what a Ford 3.5 V6 powered Mazda 6 will be like.
A well-reasoned article. Nice work!
Hey “Macarose,” thanks for enlightening me a bit and for a really good post. I admittedly don’t know the sales figures, but I still tend to disagree with you about the 240-series. I run into people who still wish the car was being made; however, I live in Seattle WA which is not a town filled with what I’d call automotive enthusiasts, such as frequent this web site. I enjoyed most what you had to say at the end, about tuners of the day. It sounds as if you must know about iPd, the foremost suppliers of the automotive aftermarket for all generations and models of Volvos. I’m running a set of KYB gas shocks on my ‘72 Volvo 142E sedan. Why one might ask? It has that tight turning radius “Hawaii Jim” mentions Volvo needs to get back. It’s amazing what one can do with the old Volvo platforms.
Thanks for the detailed reply macarose. I agree with some things you say about Nissans managment and I do worry about their future. Iam also aware of the crappy Nissan USA made SUV’s and that problem will be delt with by Japan. It will be rough if they don’t fix some internal issues. I just hope they remainan an important player in the auto industry, specially regarding the asian ones. Just think who invented the idea of an exciting Japanese car, before the last gen. Altima most japanese family sedans performed lackluster at best. Know you have highly dynamic 240hp accords and Powerful 3.5L SE camries. What is the motivation for Toyta to possibly come out with a sports car again… to compete with the Z. Now nissan should start looking at Toyota for quality control, and nothing more.
DOn’t copy Toyota or Honda though because that’s what happened to the 2nd gen Q45, we all remeber that car… oh wait, we don’t, exactly. Enough of my Nissan bias, da**it Iam a Toyota engineer.
Volvo went chasing the fashion crowd and left behind their traditional owners. Like most of the European brands, Volvos have become known for very high cost of ownership. My friend who has an S80 loves the car, but says he will probably never buy another. The repeated problems and never ending repair costs are wearing him out. Lexus and Acura are high on his consideration list for the next time around.
Today I can’t really think of a good reason to buy a Volvo instead of a Lexus, Acura or even a Subaru. Personally I replaced my ‘96 Volvo 850 with an ‘03 V6 Honda Accord and feel that I got a lot more car for my money with fewer headaches.