steve c

How does this:

Relate to this:

Droves of NSX's, S2000's and Ridgelines? What does that have to do with price premiums? Talk about a tangential response.

Let me use your own quote here:


And yet here we have the NSX, the S2000, the S600, 800 .... Yeah they aren't in the business of doing that alright....

You can sell anything if you discount it enough and offer low enough interest rates. GM has proven this over and over for the past few years.

You contradict yourself, I don't have to do anything but chuckle and point them out.

Someone doesn't like it when their errors are pointed out do they. I've noticed your trend of resorting to name calling ... and personally I'm into it -- but a bit more creativity would go a long way.

Chris Stack

Maybe if you throw enough quotes out there, I'll just start to weep in a fit of confusion, eh?

Good try.

Let's summarize my points so far:
1. Honda primarily makes boring, vanilla cars for the middle market.
2. Honda occasionally makes a great sporty car, but it usually lives on long after it's obsolete.

Good, now that we have my basic theses laid out, let's look at your quotes in depth:

Two different ideas, steve-o. Quote number 2 relates to their bread-and-butter cars that DO sell in large volume. Quote number one acknowledges that A) Honda let the cars wither and die on the vine, but B) they did sell very well at first anyways.


Tangential unless you understand that you took a quote of mine (Honda sells droves of cars), applied it to cars that I already acknowledged are not their bread and butter and are thus not an accurate depiction of their success in doing business. Don't attempt to connect the words "drove" and "NSX, S2k, Ridgeline" and pretend that I made that connection, because it was YOU who put them together, and then you argue against me using them? Nah yo, it don't work like that.

Go for it.

Uh, yeah, they made 4 boutique cars out of what, 46 years of carmaking? Are you trying to say I claimed Honda NEVER made a boutique car, and claiming victory in proving me wrong? Let me repeat myself: Honda's main market is mainstream cars. Do they venture outside of that? Yes. But is it a significant percentage of their business? Obviously not. So in evaluating their business, why would anyone try and weigh their performance at that outlying activity unless they were just desperately trying to win an argument on the internet? Would you base your decision whether or not to invest in Honda on the sales of the NSX?

So it isn't profitable? Got any proof of that?

Not if you look at my ideas as a whole, instead of picking small pieces at to focus on in an effort to prove you are winning the overall argument.

No, I don't like it when my words are chopped up to distort my clearly stated meaning in an effort to debase my arguments. And my insults get plenty more creative, but not on this board because we aren't allowed to talk like growups here without the threat of being banned. [QUOTE]

Christople

So the direction they are going is relating to what they can sell the most of?


So they are going to turn into toyota and make bland cars?

Chris Stack

Someone stayed awake in business 101!


Uh, they've always been there. They've always been just slightly less bland than Toyota. Want character? Buy an MG.

Christople

I never said they were doing poorly, I just commented that the cars in it's class are out doing them while Honda is sitting around doing nothing for the meantime.

How they sell stuff shows what direction they are going. They haven't made any new RWD platform and are just starting to make AWD cars which aren't as good as the competitions awd systems.

So are they going to continue with the same lineup and just boost HP up little by little to those front two wheels till driving them becomes a pain?

I don't care what they sell, how many they sell, and what they have done in the past. I'm talking about what direction they are going to in the future, anybody have a clue? Or are we going to sit here and keep talking about what is going on now?

SilverKnight

yeh after I sell my s2k Im not going back to Honda, just to many choices out there

Christople

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that Honda tries to be the greenest manufacture on the planet but the whole acura line is on par with everybody else.

I'll give another direction example:

Let's say you got your NSX/S2000. You bought it way back when it first came out. Honda wants to keep you buying its cars. So, after you have had enough of the car you bought, you go to the dealership to buy their new modeled car.

Sadly though, you find that your NSX or S2000 is still in it's production with no huge updates.

Unlike a GM/Ford/BMW/Insert most other manufactures... you can buy the new model of the car you bought or an alternative.


Take GM. They you are driving a Camaro, GTO, Vette. You know the new Camaro is going to be here soon, you got the LS1 Powered GTO with a new GTO platform over the horizon, and you got the Solstice/sky. Many options, at least you know your customer type is accounted for in camp GM.

steve c

Read your post.

Which of course is perfectly demonstrated with the S2000 ... the NSX (selling in the dozens here in the U.S. for a while) the Ridgeline ....

To which you responded:

This is not rocket science here -- you are posting nonsensical crap, I'm just pointing it out. Maybe in your head there is some manner of logic and order or ... jesus god forbid you really think this is the case ... but a "thesis" -- but reread what you write sometime -- do us all that favor.

Again, tangential and entirely unrelated to anything I have written.

There is no argument here -- and if there was you can be damn sure I would win -- not through any real effort on my behalf but because you are incapable of forming a coherent statement, you contradict yourself with alarming regularity and what you do attempt to present as an argument is so full of holes and half-assed assumptions I could drive an ocean liner through it. You are lazy or just not very smart, I am bored tonight -- this is a bad combination.

22calbr

steve c are you always a jack ass, or only on this forum?

SDosMil

OK, your re-phrased question is more focused (the thread starter was rather vague).

So apparently Acura is going the AWD route, with attractive and well priced vehicles with interactive electronics that work (excellent navigation units, not the confusing german messy stuff). You say the AWD is inferior to the competition - in what respect? Technically SH-AWD should reap the benefits of AWD without the associated understeer.
So maybe we won't see much RWD, but for the general public, AWD is the magic word, and it works for high-powered cars.

For the Honda line-up, FWD will probably be the bread-and-butter for a long time (except the truck line), and hybridization will continue and be more prevalent in the Honda cars . Other than the V6 Accord, the rest of the line still has a lot of room to grow in FWD configuration. The new Camry V6 is still FWD, so probably no radical things happening in this area. Entertainment and other electronics will also become more mainstream in the 'basic' cars.

There are still is some fun cars for the enthusiasts, and although not the main focus, it's not barren either (now: Civic Si, last stretch of the S2000, last year of the RSX; future: new S2000 or Acura coupe, new NSX)

Any other general possibilities? Electric motors to the four wheels would be interesting (what was the name of the concept?) but I see the clean diesel engines as the 'newest' thing in the immediate future. Well, the 2.3l turbo is a quite radical for the stubborn Honda, isn't it? At least until the V8s roll-out...