GM Inside News Forum banner

Audi A3...headed to America by 2005

4K views 73 replies 13 participants last post by  mgescuro 
#1 ·
Good news
The Audi A3 will be heading to America by mid-2005. It is a small hatchback based on the VW Golf. VW officials said that the hatchback will head to America soon, and AutoWeek confirmed that VW said that. For more information on Audi A3 pictures: Audi A3 Website It might be in German but they do have pictures.

Bad news
BMW will not release a hatchback version of the 1-Series expected for 2005-2006 model year, though they will release the convertible and sedan
 
#4 ·
a gussied-up Golf doesn't sound good....and a gussied-up Camry doesn't sound good either. I mean, you can load up a Toyota Camry at $30K and get every single good feature in the car that Lexus offers. Hopefully, we'll see a different interior, though!
 
#5 ·
I am glad to hear Audi is bringing more of their line to the USA.

:bounce:
 
#6 ·
Originally posted by gmwsag@Mar 21 2004, 10:06 AM
a gussied-up Golf doesn't sound good....and a gussied-up Camry doesn't sound good either. I mean, you can load up a Toyota Camry at $30K and get every single good feature in the car that Lexus offers. Hopefully, we'll see a different interior, though!
On the Lexus remark:

Yes, you can get about all the same features in the Camry as in the ES but there is a point to the ES330. The 3.3L is standard in the ES(whereas the Camry has it ONLY for the SE), the ES has more sound deadening materials, the ES has more leather inside, and its MARK LEVINSON audio system sounds much better than the JBL one in the Camry, and you get the Lexus "prestige". There is a point to the ES.....
 
#8 ·
One of the key arguments against the VW Phaeton found in the adjacent 17-page thread will carry-over here. That is, if VW should not tread on Audi's turf in the upper-end of the market, then Audi should not tread on VW's turf at the low end. Minimize overlap in the dual-brand portfolio. However, another of their key arguments against the Phaeton would support the A3 in the U.S. market. Namely, that brand image is key, and for those aspiring to a brand, the VW group needs an Audi offering to counter the 1-series. As good as the Golf's perceived quality and performance has become, some need those little rings on the trunk.

We've come to know someone who's been quite outspoken against the Phaeton as :zippy:... Suddenly, :zippy: will have to dismantle one out of two of his key arguments. Should prove interesting.
 
#9 ·
You do have a point desmo...but please do tell Toyota that. They're barging in on Lexus' low market. You can get a full-loaded Camry for $30K and an Avalon for $35K. A Lexus ES300 preferably equipped is about $35K. Don't you think that's too close?
 
#10 ·
Originally posted by gmwsag@Mar 26 2004, 07:02 PM
You do have a point desmo...but please do tell Toyota that. They're barging in on Lexus' low market. You can get a full-loaded Camry for $30K and an Avalon for $35K. A Lexus ES300 preferably equipped is about $35K. Don't you think that's too close?
Toyota has addressed the Avalon problem, which is why the upcoming Avalon is supposed to be "worth it".
 
#11 ·
Originally posted by gmwsag@Mar 27 2004, 01:02 AM
You do have a point desmo...but please do tell Toyota that. They're barging in on Lexus' low market. You can get a full-loaded Camry for $30K and an Avalon for $35K. A Lexus ES300 preferably equipped is about $35K. Don't you think that's too close?
No, not too close, because the Avalon is a bigger car. There will be price overlap between smaller premium models and larger mainstream models. The pricing distinction just needs to exist when comparing cars in the same segment.
 
#13 ·
Originally posted by desmo9@Mar 22 2004, 12:21 PM
One of the key arguments against the VW Phaeton found in the adjacent 17-page thread will carry-over here. That is, if VW should not tread on Audi's turf in the upper-end of the market, then Audi should not tread on VW's turf at the low end. Minimize overlap in the dual-brand portfolio. However, another of their key arguments against the Phaeton would support the A3 in the U.S. market. Namely, that brand image is key, and for those aspiring to a brand, the VW group needs an Audi offering to counter the 1-series. As good as the Golf's perceived quality and performance has become, some need those little rings on the trunk.

We've come to know someone who's been quite outspoken against the Phaeton as :zippy:... Suddenly, :zippy: will have to dismantle one out of two of his key arguments. Should prove interesting.
<_< <_<
You are tiring if not just a bit pretentious sometimes.

1) VW has no business being in the high-luxury segment. They do not have a brand name to do so. They are currently being laughed at in that segment. It's ridiculous. Plain ridiculous to pay $92K for a VW.
2) Audi can move down market because their brand name is synonymous with luxury. People who can afford $20-25K cars generally CANNOT afford a $65-92K car. So they would want a car that is "premium," even though it's a rehashed Golf.

I have no need to dismantle ANY of my arguments because my arguments are based on 2 tenets:
1) People who can afford a $65-92K car don't want a cheapo brand like VW. (ie - the VW Phaeton DEBACLE)
2) People who can only afford a car in a $20-30K range would love an Audi just for the sake of having an Audi and telling all their friends they have an Audi.

I have always said that it is easier for a brand to move DOWN than UP.

Furthermore, don't you believe that VW launching a $50K sedan is eating into Audi's territory? And Audi decides to launch their $25K car in the US, eating into VW's territory. Don't you find it a bit disturbing that Audi gets a rehashed Golf... and VW gets a Maserati?? I mean... which line is the "Premium" brand???
 
#14 ·
Originally posted by gmwsag@Mar 26 2004, 08:02 PM
You do have a point desmo...but please do tell Toyota that. They're barging in on Lexus' low market. You can get a full-loaded Camry for $30K and an Avalon for $35K. A Lexus ES300 preferably equipped is about $35K. Don't you think that's too close?
Toyota has always had problems differentiating ES and CAmry. THough, they have gotten better at it.
Camry's actually MSRP in the low $20s. Avalon is at around $30K. ES starts at $32K. IS starts at $29.9K GS starts at $39K. LS starts at $56K.

Toyota has done a very good job at keeping the overlap at a minimum. They're not launching a $46K Toyota LS430. :blink:
 
#15 ·
Camry's actually MSRP in the low $20s. Avalon is at around $30K. ES starts at $32K. IS starts at $29.9K GS starts at $39K. LS starts at $56K.
mgescuro....no one gets a Camry in the low $20s. They get a Camry for $25K-$30K. Toyota once was the king (after Honda) of cheap cars that wouldn't break into pieces. Now, they're moving the prices up, so customers will stay with them, yet pay a higher price....A Camry is an ES. An ES is a 'gussied-up' Camry, just like you said exactly to tahoe's statement, you do have to believe that Toyota's Camry and Lexus' ES are the same. Toyota did a little over here and there and made each car look different, yet most of the stuff being the same.
And so you know 'feedback', the average car buyer knows that the Lexus ES is the Toyota camry. My proof is a consumer who confronted me with ???'s about the Camry & ES.
 
#16 ·
Originally posted by gmwsag@Mar 28 2004, 10:50 AM
Camry's actually MSRP in the low $20s. Avalon is at around $30K. ES starts at $32K. IS starts at $29.9K GS starts at $39K. LS starts at $56K.
mgescuro....no one gets a Camry in the low $20s. They get a Camry for $25K-$30K. Toyota once was the king (after Honda) of cheap cars that wouldn't break into pieces. Now, they're moving the prices up, so customers will stay with them, yet pay a higher price....A Camry is an ES. An ES is a 'gussied-up' Camry, just like you said exactly to tahoe's statement, you do have to believe that Toyota's Camry and Lexus' ES are the same. Toyota did a little over here and there and made each car look different, yet most of the stuff being the same.
And so you know 'feedback', the average car buyer knows that the Lexus ES is the Toyota camry. My proof is a consumer who confronted me with ???'s about the Camry & ES.
Umm... that's why I said MSRP. No one ever buys a car at MSRP.... it's already assumed you're going to pay more. :rudolph:

As I've also said, Toyota has historically had problems differentiating the Camry and the ES. People who buy the ES typically will pay $5-10K more depending on options over the Camry. But it's still a Camry. It just has better sound inulators, better leather, the bigger engine standard, and a better brand.

Does it really all come down to price? Perhaps. But I think it all comes down to brand.
 
#18 ·
Originally posted by mgescuro+Mar 28 2004, 10:16 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mgescuro @ Mar 28 2004, 10:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-desmo9@Mar 22 2004, 12:21 PM
One of the key arguments against the VW Phaeton found in the adjacent 17-page thread will carry-over here. That is, if VW should not tread on Audi's turf in the upper-end of the market, then Audi should not tread on VW's turf at the low end. Minimize overlap in the dual-brand portfolio. However, another of their key arguments against the Phaeton would support the A3 in the U.S. market. Namely, that brand image is key, and for those aspiring to a brand, the VW group needs an Audi offering to counter the 1-series. As good as the Golf's perceived quality and performance has become, some need those little rings on the trunk.

We've come to know someone who's been quite outspoken against the Phaeton as :zippy:... Suddenly,  :zippy: will have to dismantle one out of two of his key arguments. Should prove interesting.
<_< <_<
You are tiring if not just a bit pretentious sometimes.

1) VW has no business being in the high-luxury segment. They do not have a brand name to do so. They are currently being laughed at in that segment. It's ridiculous. Plain ridiculous to pay $92K for a VW.
2) Audi can move down market because their brand name is synonymous with luxury. People who can afford $20-25K cars generally CANNOT afford a $65-92K car. So they would want a car that is "premium," even though it's a rehashed Golf.

I have no need to dismantle ANY of my arguments because my arguments are based on 2 tenets:
1) People who can afford a $65-92K car don't want a cheapo brand like VW. (ie - the VW Phaeton DEBACLE)
2) People who can only afford a car in a $20-30K range would love an Audi just for the sake of having an Audi and telling all their friends they have an Audi.

I have always said that it is easier for a brand to move DOWN than UP.

Furthermore, don't you believe that VW launching a $50K sedan is eating into Audi's territory? And Audi decides to launch their $25K car in the US, eating into VW's territory. Don't you find it a bit disturbing that Audi gets a rehashed Golf... and VW gets a Maserati?? I mean... which line is the "Premium" brand??? [/b][/quote]
Don't know just what's pretentious about my arguments. Maybe you picked the wrong word?

A whole paragraph from you there with little real info. So you agree with the A3 coming to America or not? Based on your arguments against the Phaeton....

* You would agree with a U.S.-bound A3 because VW needs an Audi compact to take on the 1-series, 9-2 and others. These people savor "brand" and "image", so the VW brand can't do it alone.

but, in contradictory fashion...

* You would NOT agree with a U.S.-bound A3 because it would make the Audi-brand overlap the VW brand all the more. Just as Phaeton muddies the waters at the higher price points, the A3 swould do it at the lower price points.

Yeah, what's tiring about this is wading through all the contradictions.
 
#19 ·
Originally posted by desmo9@Mar 28 2004, 06:47 PM
Don't know just what's pretentious about my arguments. Maybe you picked the wrong word?

A whole paragraph from you there with little real info. So you agree with the A3 coming to America or not? Based on your arguments against the Phaeton....

* You would agree with a U.S.-bound A3 because VW needs an Audi compact to take on the 1-series, 9-2 and others. These people savor "brand" and "image", so the VW brand can't do it alone.

but, in contradictory fashion...

* You would NOT agree with a U.S.-bound A3 because it would make the Audi-brand overlap the VW brand all the more. Just as Phaeton muddies the waters at the higher price points, the A3 swould do it at the lower price points.
Lemme put it to you in simple terms that you can understand... :zippy:

1) A3 should come to the US, if 1-series and A-Class is US bound.
2) Audi, BMW, Mercedes, should realize that a cheapo car bearing their name can cheapen the overall brand. Jaguar can attest to that.

I don't believe these cars should come to the US. The effect is amplified for AUdi because
1) VW occupies that price range.
2) VW is entering Audi's price range.
3) There is now confusion between Audi and VW that won't be fixed any time soon.

And you keep dodging my question. DO you think a $50K VW/Maserati is worth the time and expense to launch as a VW?? Why isn't it being launched as an Audi?

And you're right.. pretentious isn't the word... arrogant is more like it. :zippy:
 
#20 ·
Originally posted by gmwsag@Mar 28 2004, 04:59 PM
Tell that to someone who thinks that way....price is what its all about (and a good warranty, too!)
Getting a good price... in the brand you want is what's paramount.
People don't choose a Daihatsu because it's an awesome car. It's because its cheap. But if this person had the cash, he/she would not choose a Daihatsu. THis person would choose a better brand.
 
#21 ·
Originally posted by mgescuro+Mar 29 2004, 06:38 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mgescuro @ Mar 29 2004, 06:38 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-desmo9@Mar 28 2004, 06:47 PM
Don't know just what's pretentious about my arguments. Maybe you picked the wrong word?

A whole paragraph from you there with little real info. So you agree with the A3 coming to America or not? Based on your arguments against the Phaeton....

* You would agree with a U.S.-bound A3 because VW needs an Audi compact to take on the 1-series, 9-2 and others. These people savor "brand" and "image", so the VW brand can't do it alone.

but, in contradictory fashion...

* You would NOT agree with a U.S.-bound A3 because it would make the Audi-brand overlap the VW brand all the more. Just as Phaeton muddies the waters at the higher price points, the A3 swould do it at the lower price points.
Lemme put it to you in simple terms that you can understand... :zippy:

1) A3 should come to the US, if 1-series and A-Class is US bound.
2) Audi, BMW, Mercedes, should realize that a cheapo car bearing their name can cheapen the overall brand. Jaguar can attest to that.

I don't believe these cars should come to the US. The effect is amplified for AUdi because
1) VW occupies that price range.
2) VW is entering Audi's price range.
3) There is now confusion between Audi and VW that won't be fixed any time soon.

And you keep dodging my question. DO you think a $50K VW/Maserati is worth the time and expense to launch as a VW?? Why isn't it being launched as an Audi?

And you're right.. pretentious isn't the word... arrogant is more like it. :zippy: [/b][/quote]
I appreciate your signatiure in the emails, :zippy: , ... allows me to scan quickly and know who's writing what. I'd probably fit the :afro: character a little better. Bottom line, :zippy: is signature-series Mgescuro.

Frankly, I don't know much about this $50K offering, that's why I have not said much about it. Have had little time to research this stuff lately. But I have said I think the Phaeton would do better as a $50K car, so it's probably not a problem. Now that Touareg is reaching almost $50K, and with Passats hitting $35-40K, a top-line VW at $50K is probably about right. You seemed to be concurring with that argument before.

And I don't see your Jag analogy. The X-type is a class above the 1-series ilk, and was really intended to go after the 3-series class. The pricing and existence of the X-type isn't the problem, I think the problem is that it's a half-baked execution. Mondeo powertrain, FWD configuration (they made it AWD just to disguise the fact it's got a FWD drivetrain). As I said before, it's execution that matters. If execution is good, a premium brand can do cars in all sorts of segments and not worry about diluting its image. If execution is bad, then ANY car can weaken a premium brand, be it a $25K compact or a $50K mid-range sedan.
 
#22 ·
Originally posted by desmo9@Mar 29 2004, 08:49 AM

Frankly, I don't know much about this $50K offering, that's why I have not said much about it. Have had little time to research this stuff lately. But I have said I think the Phaeton would do better as a $50K car, so it's probably not a problem. Now that Touareg is reaching almost $50K, and with Passats hitting $35-40K, a top-line VW at $50K is probably about right. You seemed to be concurring with that argument before.

And I don't see your Jag analogy. The X-type is a class above the 1-series ilk, and was really intended to go after the 3-series class. The pricing and existence of the X-type isn't the problem, I think the problem is that it's a half-baked execution. Mondeo powertrain, FWD configuration (they made it AWD just to disguise the fact it's got a FWD drivetrain). As I said before, it's execution that matters. If execution is good, a premium brand can do cars in all sorts of segments and not worry about diluting its image. If execution is bad, then ANY car can weaken a premium brand, be it a $25K compact or a $50K mid-range sedan.
:argue: :zippy:

Phaeton better as a 50K car? Yes. With the same feature set? Nope. If it did, A8 sales would be cannibalized. But that's not the way VW's treating. Phaeton runs to $92K. And VW is using a Maserati as a $50K car. And as for TOuareg, MSRP starts at $35K and runs to $53K. And I've always said, SUVs cost more and shouldn't be used as comparisons for price, as Toyota has SUV's that run into the high $50Ks, but their cars go no higher than $40K. You will never see a Toyota branded car sell for $50 or 60 or 90K!
That's the point that I continually keep making. If a car company makes a low end brand and a high end brand. Why would you want to bring the low end brand into the high end brand? VW is just wasting money.

As for Jaguar? Selling a car for under $30K? When historically, they sold no cars below $50K? That's synonymous with the German luxury makers selling a car for $20K. Jaguar should have just left well enough alone with the S-Type instead of bringing the line further down with the X-Type.

Tell me... has there been a non-domestic high end car maker that has successfully brought in a low end car and made it truly successful??
 
#23 ·
Originally posted by mgescuro@Mar 29 2004, 09:01 PM

Phaeton better as a 50K car?  Yes.  With the same feature set?  Nope.  If it did, A8 sales would be cannibalized.  But that's not the way VW's treating.  Phaeton runs to $92K.  And VW is using a Maserati as a $50K car.  And as for TOuareg, MSRP starts at $35K and runs to $53K.  And I've always said, SUVs cost more and shouldn't be used as comparisons for price, as Toyota has SUV's that run into the high $50Ks, but their cars go no higher than $40K.  You will never see a Toyota branded car sell for $50 or 60 or 90K!
That's the point that I continually keep making.  If a car company makes a low end brand and a high end brand.  Why would you want to bring the low end brand into the high end brand?  VW is just wasting money.

As for Jaguar?  Selling a car for under $30K?  When historically, they sold no cars below $50K?  That's synonymous with the German luxury makers selling a car for $20K.  Jaguar should have just left well enough alone with the S-Type instead of bringing the line further down with the X-Type.

Tell me... has there been a non-domestic high end car maker that has successfully brought in a low end car and made it truly successful??
SUV is OK at $50K but not a car? So the "brand" can't reach $50K, unless of course they've already done so with good product in the SUV segment... so we need a way to explain it away :zippy: . If people are willing to pay $50K for a VW, Toyota, whatever, then they're willing to pay that much for the brand. Car, truck, van, SUV...who cares, as long as they value the vehicle. People value SUVs now...but if cars get hot again, don't think for a minute a $50K Toyota car is out of the question. Part of market has said it'll drive around in a pricey Toyota...even though they could have had a Lexus for the same scratch. If Buick can push $50K Park Ave Ultras (and they will), then Toyota will be there, too. Buick and Toyota are quite analogous in many ways.

As for Jag "stooping" to $30K. Ohmigosh. The X-type is simply a weak entry, that's why it's faring poorly. Jag was never much higher on the food chain than BMW. As if Jag is defacing itself by competing with the 3-series! That's almost funny. They've had the same old XJ in the lineup for 25 years, that's it. You talk about Jag like it's Rolls Royce. If the X-type were a worthy competitor to a 3-series or G35, they'd be flying out of the showrooms if the brand truly has alot of value. Good product plus good brand equals huge success. The X-type is a mediocre product in a tarnished old brand in need of a rebirth. If anything, an inexpensive premium brand will damage the brand because an EXCESS quantity are sold, diluting exclusivity. If too FEW are sold, that's just bad product or an overrated brand, man.

As for your question? It'd have to be something Euro, because the Asians all started here on the low end. BMW and Audi have always had a smaller stuff here. Jag, as I said, never had the money to do anything but one or two old cars (after 1970). Saab and Volvo have always some smaller, more mainstream entries. Porsche did flop with the 924, but it was a bad car. That simple. Mercedes is about the only other brand that COULD have gone downmarket for the U.S., and did so successfully with the 190 and C-class.
 
#24 ·
Originally posted by desmo9@Mar 29 2004, 08:12 PM
SUV is OK at $50K but not a car? So the "brand" can't reach $50K, unless of course they've already done so with good product in the SUV segment... so we need a way to explain it away :zippy: . If people are willing to pay $50K for a VW, Toyota, whatever, then they're willing to pay that much for the brand. Car, truck, van, SUV...who cares, as long as they value the vehicle. People value SUVs now...but if cars get hot again, don't think for a minute a $50K Toyota car is out of the question. Part of market has said it'll drive around in a pricey Toyota...even though they could have had a Lexus for the same scratch. If Buick can push $50K Park Ave Ultras (and they will), then Toyota will be there, too. Buick and Toyota are quite analogous in many ways.

As for Jag "stooping" to $30K. Ohmigosh. The X-type is simply a weak entry, that's why it's faring poorly. Jag was never much higher on the food chain than BMW. As if Jag is defacing itself by competing with the 3-series! That's almost funny. They've had the same old XJ in the lineup for 25 years, that's it. You talk about Jag like it's Rolls Royce. If the X-type were a worthy competitor to a 3-series or G35, they'd be flying out of the showrooms if the brand truly has alot of value. Good product plus good brand equals huge success. The X-type is a mediocre product in a tarnished old brand in need of a rebirth. If anything, an inexpensive premium brand will damage the brand because an EXCESS quantity are sold, diluting exclusivity. If too FEW are sold, that's just bad product or an overrated brand, man.

As for your question? It'd have to be something Euro, because the Asians all started here on the low end. BMW and Audi have always had a smaller stuff here. Jag, as I said, never had the money to do anything but one or two old cars (after 1970). Saab and Volvo have always some smaller, more mainstream entries. Porsche did flop with the 924, but it was a bad car. That simple. Mercedes is about the only other brand that COULD have gone downmarket for the U.S., and did so successfully with the 190 and C-class.
I do not believe the market will bear a $50K Toyota. Likewise, I don't believe the next-gen Avalon will price much higher than the current model. That's the Park Ave.'s competitor, is it not?
Toyota has always had an expensive SUV. Almost as long as Chevy has had Suburban. And they both price very high. Yet their respective cars do not go over $40K.
I simply do not believe Toyota management will make the mistake of launching a $65K presitge/luxury car for the main reason of "expanding the brand." Why bother, when there is Lexus? That's the question VW management should ahve asked before launching Phaeton.

As for Jaguar? The name is very prestigious... despite its quality issues and lack of product. X-Type is a bad product? Maybe. Not enough content? Not a good value proposition? What makes you think the 1-series can offer a similar value proposition in the low $20K's without making certain cuts? Time will tell. Obviously, BMW management has asked those same questions and has delayed the launch of the 1.

The Merc 190 is a good call... but they did manage to move the 190's back upscale and evolved it into the C class... at $30K. (My C280 was $35K.) I'm looking for the $20K range... the range of A3/1-series/A-Class.
 
#25 ·
Originally posted by mgescuro@Mar 30 2004, 10:48 AM

I do not believe the market will bear a $50K Toyota. Likewise, I don't believe the next-gen Avalon will price much higher than the current model. That's the Park Ave.'s competitor, is it not?
But the Park Ave Ultra fetches well over $40K... seems like a contradiction in what you've written there.
 
#26 ·
Originally posted by desmo9+Mar 30 2004, 04:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (desmo9 @ Mar 30 2004, 04:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-mgescuro@Mar 30 2004, 10:48 AM

I do not believe the market will bear a $50K Toyota.  Likewise, I don't believe the next-gen Avalon will price much higher than the current model.  That's the Park Ave.'s competitor, is it not?
But the Park Ave Ultra fetches well over $40K... seems like a contradiction in what you've written there. [/b][/quote]
Funny. I was comparing Chevy and Toyota.
PA MSRP's at $36. PAU MSRP's at $41. Not "well-over" $40, is it.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top