Lincoln Can and Will Come Back

[Hugh]

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/04/lincoln-can-and-will-come-back/#more-484205

 

Not a bad article.

[Iiari]

A welcome, if somewhat simplistic, counterpoint to the equally simplistic and more destructive recent Autoblog editorial calling for Lincoln to be axed... I think everyone is waaay too early with these opinion pieces... I think Lincoln is an MKZ relaunch, three more products over 4 years, an additional 4-5 new products over a second generation, and about 10 years away before one can even think about judging how things are going. The autoextremist.com's current editorial is asking the same questions about Cadillac, and they are over a decade into their rebirth.

 

That said, as a Saab owner who watched all of Saab's mistakes take place in slow motion train-wreck style over many years, I still think Ford needs to do some additional things and do them fast in the Lincoln renaissance:

 

• While not a performance brand, you can't be down on HP vs the competition. No matter what excuse you trot out, the media and buyers won't forgive you. No one buys the sissy engine brand, even its its eco friendly and an engineering marvel. You don't have to be class leading here, but you can't be at the bottom of 0-60 and HP contests...
• I applaud Ford's progress with the MKZ's interiors, but it's not enough to have a 98% unique design. It has to be 100% unique in the luxury class. Of all things, grabbing Focus and Fusion column stalks and some switchgear is unforgivable. The MKC concept has bespoke switchgear inside, and I hope that makes it to market...
• Same goes for features and materials. Make a list of what you project the market leaders will have in 3 years, then beat them today.
• The pricing is too high. I know the MKZ undercuts an equivalent Infiniti Q50 or Volvo S60 by a thousand or two and the Germans by more, but if you're not going to do a bespoke platform and instead obviously share one with a volume Ford vehicle, at least make a better value proposition. Look at Cadillac. They gave buyers 5 series size for 3 series prices for years with the CTS. What's the MKZ's value proposition? I think the MKZ is about 2-3K too much. This may be rectified by various incentives eventually, but ask Saab how that went for them. You can't be "price competitive" with the Europeans as a rebuilding brand, as Saab was for years, you've got to be the clear value choice.
• And, continuing the theme, you need to be MSRP competitive, and not make up the difference later with deals and incentives. The media doesn't care and there will be torrents of articles saying, as we've already seen, "51K for a fully loaded V6 MKZ? Vs 36K for a Titanium Fusion? Who would pay that?" Of course, the average MKZ will drive off the lot for, probably, in the high 30's to low 40's, but the media narrative is already set. Competitive MSRP, no deals.

Soapbox mode off...

[2b2]

^ Thanks, Hugh! :D

 

&

before we leave your soapbox, Iiari...
"I think the MKZ is about 2-3K too much."

What would you think about instead of lowering the prices exactly,
upping the features?
something like
(since there're 4 trim levels currently)
eliminating the base trim & charging its price for the level-2
2$ for the level-3
& 3$ for the level-4
?

...and bringing on the Bespoke Program for the higher price(s)

[twintornados]

....."51K for a fully loaded V6 MKZ? Vs 36K for a Titanium Fusion? Who would pay that?" .....

You are aware that Fusion with a V6 is not available at ANY cost...right?

Edited April 12, 2013 by twintornados

[Iiari]

You are aware that Fusion with a V6 is not available at ANY cost...right?

Of course I am aware of that, but you missed the context of what I was saying. I was describing the media drumbeat. I think they need to change that narrative. Many media test drives seemed to be only of the fully optioned V6.

[woodrowwilson]

eliminating the base trim & charging its price for the level-2

2$ for the level-3

& 3$ for the level-4

 

 

This. Power tilt/telecsope should be standard. Heated and cooled front seats should be standard. Power trunk-lid should be standard.

[akirby]

While not a performance brand, you can't be down on HP vs the competition. No matter what excuse you trot out, the media and buyers won't forgive you. No one buys the sissy engine brand, even its its eco friendly and an engineering marvel. You don't have to be class leading here, but you can't be at the bottom of 0-60 and HP contests...

 

Go compare the MKZs 2.0L EB power with Audi's 2.0 turbo A6 and Jaguars 2.0 turbo XF and let us know what you find.

[Iiari]

Go compare the MKZs 2.0L EB power with Audi's 2.0 turbo A6 and Jaguars 2.0 turbo XF and let us know what you find.

[sigh] Very well aware of that, but again, my suggestions to Lincoln were based upon by experience watching Saab's demise, not based on the MKZ now...

[2b2]

Lincoln will soon have gen2 EB engines available

2.0 = upto 280hp

2.3 = upto 325hp

2.7/2.9 Nano = upto 400hp

 

a "confirmed" 490hp-capable 3.5EB will be for RWD(/4WD?) only

Edited April 14, 2013 by 2b2