Ford F-150 SVT Raptor sales jumping to new heights

[ZanatWork]

The 300 won Car of the Year, and sold very well indeed for years after introduction, while drawing more attention to Chrysler than the core brand had seen in a long time. GM was too broken to continue the roadsters, which both were reviewed well but couldn't survive the reorganization that killed their brands after years of mediocre mismanagement. Hell, the Solstice/Sky were maybe the best vehicles GM offered at that point, especially with the turbo motors. Their sedans and compacts were awful, their trucks second-rate, and all Caddys were drawn on Etch-a-Sketches.

I notice you didn't mention the T-Bird, the R8, and others that did just fine. I guess you also missed the point that halo products can hurt if the company isn't up to keeping the "promise" shown by the halo product. In that, I'd have faith in Ford's abilities.

Why does it seem like I'm arguing from a position of more faith in FoMoCo than yourself? Hmmm.....

Chrysler 300 is a halo car? Solstice and Sky? How did that work out? I rest my case.

[Marginal Economist]

Just lock this thread as well. Maybe someone could actually start a thread on halo vehicles and their marketing potential.

[jpd80]

Or maybe Ford thinks that selling desirable +$44K trucks is much more profitable than investing in HP luxury RWDs...

Edited September 17, 2013 by jpd80

[akirby]

Just lock this thread as well. Maybe someone could actually start a thread on halo vehicles and their marketing potential.

 

Nah - I'm done. I'm going to go out and hit my head against a brick wall - it will hurt less and be more productive.

[V8-X]

actually Zan, from being on the showroom floor when the GT was avail, I can honestly say it had no effect on Mustang sales, the people coming in SERIOUSLY ( as in buyers ) looking at the GT had ZERO interest in the Mustang, and to Mustang customers the GT was WAY out of their financial window and thus a "novelty" albeit an awesome one. And please, dont mention Saleen, Roush or any other upfit coat-tailers....great cars yes, but showroom anchors that regularly see multiple birthdays, all the time seeing regular Mustangs and GT500s, Boss's etc selling on regular basis.....as you can tell, Im not a proponent of aftermarket Mustangs...stick with factory....

My dealer has a specific webpage for such aftermarket and high end Mustangs. They appear to sell very well, since when I go in every 3-5 months for an oil change, many/most of those vehicles have been sold since my previous visit. My dealer is celebrating their 100th anniversary this year too. So guess they should have shuttered their doors years ago.

 

It's funny how some people make factual statements with no evidence to back it up - not even anecdotal evidence - and then tell us that we have to prove them wrong. Not falling for it again.

It is funny, as you too should take your own advise sometime.

 

Actually, I was able to show the halo vehicle approach in marketing, but you won't back the "bet" you made many posts back. You failed, and now want to distort things...

 

...again.

 

Same song, same wrong lyrics, different thread.

It's par for the course as usual with him.

Edited September 17, 2013 by V8-X

[jcthorne]

That works within the same model but it doesn't necessarily translate across models. Nobody went to a Ford dealer looking for a Ford GT and left with a Mustang GT.

Actually quite a few folks went to Ford dealers to look AT a Ford GT and ended up buying something else. It generated considerable dealership traffic in its day.

 

I would wager that most actual Ford GT clients did not go to a dealer to browse and decided to take home a GT.

[fordmantpw]

Actually quite a few folks went to Ford dealers to look AT a Ford GT and ended up buying something else. It generated considerable dealership traffic in its day.

 

But would those same folks have bought something at the Ford dealership anyway? Who's to say? You really can't prove these things one way or another, IMO. I went to the dealership near me when they had a GT, but I didn't buy anything. So I'm proof the other way, right?

 

 

I would wager that most actual Ford GT clients did not go to a dealer to browse and decided to take home a GT.

 

I'm pretty sure you are spot on there. Just like folks don't go in looking to buy a Super Duty and come home with a Fiesta.

Edited September 17, 2013 by fordmantpw

[ZanatWork]

The GT was and remains a stunner, a car that gets a prime spot on the dealership floor, somewhere easily seen from the street...because seeing comes before wanting. While many customers would have been educated on the GT and know its cost, a vehicle like that is partially created to get bodies in among the more common offerings...because getting potential customers surrounded by your product is among the goals of advertising and marketing, period.

"Come see the new 2013 Ford's at (enter your dealer here)". The GT, by hype and by visual presence, was another way to draw people in, even people without $150K to drop on a supercar. Hell, the GT was made to change perceptions of a reeling FoMoCo for its centennial...something to show the company was NOT dead, could still produce something besides rental cars, and to get people talking about Ford in terms besides quarterly losses and the Firestone fiasco.

Maybe the Audi example in one of the links above is a good approach: let the dealerships advertise the more common vehicles while the company markets its halo offering(s) across a broader audience. Of course, that would require a halo product....

[Deanh]

Audi has played better and uphill than Lincoln has for years, and got their Quattro system popularized how, again?

 

Oh, yeah...a serious racing effort in rallying and Trans-Am, then kicking everyone's ass at LeMans.

 

None of that is new, by the way. The original Quattro is something like 30 years old, a sporting testament that launched the brand's better eras...ass opposed to too-obvious VW remakes.

 

Essentially every link I see talks about halo vehicles (or the halo effect, from which it's derived) showing the POTENTIAL OF THE BRAND. Maybe something that people don't understand is that myself and others believe Lincoln's potential is far above what they're showing.

 

I know that you have to oppose essentially anything I post, and come off the worse for it, even though I can't imagine why you do it...I have to accept that it's part of reality. In any case, halo vehicles seem to have a wide-ranging and considerable history of helping their brands. Denying that...well, would be tragic but completely unsurprising.

heres the catch though, I agree with you about Halo vehicles from a marketing standpoint, however in the GTs case the over $100000 jump from ANYTHING in fords lineup differed somewhat than say the GT500 in the Mustang lineup....it wasnt relevent to anything in fords lineup......to a Mustang customer it was a Novelty as such, and from what I witnessed didnt affect sales of any of Fords lineup...

[jpvbs]

I think if you get someone to come into a showroom, it is a win for a manufacturer. I look at it as similar to other dealership upgrades like remodeled showrooms and free coffee. A halo car is showroom jewelry. People came in to check out the GT, not to just to buy one. If they have a favorable experience (or at least a not shitty experience) in the showroom, they may rememeber that the next time they need a car even if that isn't until a year or more later. Right or wrong, a lot of people have hesitations about going to a dealer. If they have a good experience just coming to look at the halo car for fun, the next time they are shopping for a Focus/Corolla/Civic, going into the Ford dealer might be an easier step since they have been there before and there is a certain comfort level in that.

[rmc523]

The GT was and remains a stunner, a car that gets a prime spot on the dealership floor, somewhere easily seen from the street...because seeing comes before wanting. While many customers would have been educated on the GT and know its cost, a vehicle like that is partially created to get bodies in among the more common offerings...because getting potential customers surrounded by your product is among the goals of advertising and marketing, period.

 

"Come see the new 2013 Ford's at (enter your dealer here)". The GT, by hype and by visual presence, was another way to draw people in, even people without $150K to drop on a supercar. Hell, the GT was made to change perceptions of a reeling FoMoCo for its centennial...something to show the company was NOT dead, could still produce something besides rental cars, and to get people talking about Ford in terms besides quarterly losses and the Firestone fiasco.

 

Maybe the Audi example in one of the links above is a good approach: let the dealerships advertise the more common vehicles while the company markets its halo offering(s) across a broader audience. Of course, that would require a halo product....

I don't believe any of us are arguing that Ford or Lincoln should not create/produce some sort of halo vehicle for the brands. I agree, they can help drive showroom traffic and show off the brand, and would love to see them. I think the argument is that priority should instead be placed on the core lineup right now (especially for Lincoln more so than Ford). Once the core lineup is rounded out with solid/strong products, THEN the possibility of a halo vehicle becomes a more feasible/reasonable option. What good does it do to develop a halo product to drive traffic into a showroom of average products, while those products suffer because resources were spent on the halo product? This is the GM approach. We've had this debate before, and will again.

 

That said, halo products like the Raptor and GT500 fall into a different category, IMO.....they are based upon existing products and compliment existing "brands" (by this I mean the F-150 and Mustang brands), and are not their own entity. This makes them both a potential drive to showroom traffic (oh let's go check out that awesome looking Raptor/GT500!) and a more feasible/reasonable business decision.

[akirby]

I don't believe any of us are arguing that Ford or Lincoln should not create/produce some sort of halo vehicle for the brands. I agree, they can help drive showroom traffic and show off the brand, and would love to see them. I think the argument is that priority should instead be placed on the core lineup right now (especially for Lincoln more so than Ford). Once the core lineup is rounded out with solid/strong products, THEN the possibility of a halo vehicle becomes a more feasible/reasonable option. What good does it do to develop a halo product to drive traffic into a showroom of average products, while those products suffer because resources were spent on the halo product? This is the GM approach. We've had this debate before, and will again.

 

THIS!!!!!!!!!!!

[V8-X]

THIS!!!!!!!!!!!

But your point was that halo vehicles have no place and don't drive in traffic or sales. Not the point RMC is making, which is to concentrate on the improving the existing product and then maybe invest into a halo once those products are all above average quality or good sellers within the market. Two totally different points of view IMO.

Edited September 17, 2013 by V8-X

[Deanh]

I don't believe any of us are arguing that Ford or Lincoln should not create/produce some sort of halo vehicle for the brands. I agree, they can help drive showroom traffic and show off the brand, and would love to see them. I think the argument is that priority should instead be placed on the core lineup right now (especially for Lincoln more so than Ford). Once the core lineup is rounded out with solid/strong products, THEN the possibility of a halo vehicle becomes a more feasible/reasonable option. What good does it do to develop a halo product to drive traffic into a showroom of average products, while those products suffer because resources were spent on the halo product? This is the GM approach. We've had this debate before, and will again.

 

That said, halo products like the Raptor and GT500 fall into a different category, IMO.....they are based upon existing products and compliment existing "brands" (by this I mean the F-150 and Mustang brands), and are not their own entity. This makes them both a potential drive to showroom traffic (oh let's go check out that awesome looking Raptor/GT500!) and a more feasible/reasonable business decision.

the GT was a product on its own, it was related to nothing in the Ford livery....but just imagine if it too had spurned some upper line off shoots....there were some related GLORIOUS concepts.....

[Deanh]

But your point was that halo vehicles have no place and don't drive in traffic or sales. Not the point RMC is making, which is to concentrate on the improving the existing product and then maybe invest into a halo once those products are all above average quality or good sellers within the market. Two totally different points of view IMO.

so next up is an AWD 3.5 eco Fusion ST.................

[V8-X]

so next up is an AWD 3.5 eco Fusion ST.................

Not a huge Fusion fan, but I would have to say that would be badass. Just don't go ricer boy with it, be classy like the SHO. Give it a 6-spd manual and I think I would start getting mighty interested.

Edited September 17, 2013 by V8-X

[SoonerLS]

But your point was that halo vehicles have no place and don't drive in traffic or sales.

No, it wasn't. His point was that a halo car needs to stand on its own (as the Raptor is apparently doing), and that it shouldn't be done at the expense of the vehicles that actually carry the freight for Ford (or Lincoln).

[rmc523]

there were some related GLORIOUS concepts.....

Such as?

[SoonerLS]

Such as?

The Ford Shelby GR-1, for one. I was thinking there was a roadster they did around the same time; I could still be thinking of the GR-1, but I vaguely recall it having a snake-like name.

[Deanh]

Such as?

[Deanh]

Such as?

[rmc523]

The Ford Shelby GR-1, for one. I was thinking there was a roadster they did around the same time; I could still be thinking of the GR-1, but I vaguely recall it having a snake-like name.

Ah yes, I remember that now....forgot about it! Are you thinking of the Shelby Cobra roadster?

 

Nevermind lol. I didn't realize the cobra was based on the GT.

Edited September 17, 2013 by rmc523

[Deanh]

Such as?

[ZanatWork]

But halo products are about drawing attention to the brand, and something I've repeated so many times, and in so many threads, that my eyes are crossing:

I never say to "kill the MKZ to create a new Continental" or whatever...I say Lincoln should have a vehicle that goes above and beyond the perceived limits of the brand. Something to put the whole brand in a new light, to announce the raising of their own bar.

Showing relationship between the GT and other Fords would have been easy for any decent salesperson. The mod engine family relationship by itself would have been effortless.

No, it wasn't. His point was that a halo car needs to stand on its own (as the Raptor is apparently doing), and that it shouldn't be done at the expense of the vehicles that actually carry the freight for Ford (or Lincoln).

[ZanatWork]

Some halo vehicles are more about brand identity than about specific model profitability. Reportedly, every Veyron is built at a loss despite the outlandish price...but the whole VW group benefits somewhat, and the Bugatti brand can be a testbed of extreme technologies. If you can build structures and components that survive 1000 hp and 250 mph speeds, you've got some good engineering information.


And no, I'm not suggesting that Lincoln build a 7-digit car. Don't go there.

No, it wasn't. His point was that a halo car needs to stand on its own (as the Raptor is apparently doing), and that it shouldn't be done at the expense of the vehicles that actually carry the freight for Ford (or Lincoln).