Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe
Booo paid subscription required lol
Thanks MEDISIN!
|
Got to pay to play
Quote:
Originally Posted by crysalis_01
As to MKZ's pricing aligning with Buick's, I'm not really seeing that completely, there is definitely overlap, but I imagine we'll only see aid overlap get smaller and smaller as Lincoln continues its current trend.
|
Sure the MKZ range travels higher but that is not where the sales are. When you look at the price people are
actually paying and the resulting sales volume, it sits between the ES and LaCrosse in both price and volume.
Lexus ES: ATP: $41,432, YTD Sales: 47,963
Lincoln MKZ: ATP: $39,299, YTD Sales: 25,343
Buick LaCrosse: ATP: $38,679, YTD Sales: 22,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by crysalis_01
Yes there are more fleet involved but sales are sales. And Lincoln at this point need those sales to increase their revenue flow. Building a more "exiting" sedan that sells in fewer numbers, because of the reason you mentioned, does then no good to build a revenue stream...at this point.
|
The goal of an automaker is
not sales. The goal is revenue and subsequent profit. You think Porsche cares it only sold 50k automobiles in the U.S. last year? Lincoln and Ford can chase volume (fleet) all they want but it doesn't make financial sense if you're losing revenue on each sale vs retail. Not only is Cadillac outselling Lincoln handily with their "exciting" sedans, they are making far more money doing it.
To FoMoCo's benefit, the cost of the MKZ and Continental are spread across their platform sharing cousins (Fusion, Edge, Galaxy, Mondeo, S-Max, Taurus, MKS, Explorer, Flex, MKT) so profit margin as a percentage is likely higher on the Lincoln's vs Cadillac's. But brand transaction prices for the two are $15k apart. Lincoln sits closer to GMC in this regard, but trucks are crazy profitable.