[Daim]

Originally Posted by Prufrock

Interesting thread.

the automotive industry does not regard Volvo as a"premuim brand", it is often referred to as"sub premium".

This is a particularly difficult area(irrespective of product), and a great deal to to with marketing, but"premium"is in many ways mainstream now.

As the quality of the once premium leaders (Merc, BMW and Audi) declined, and the volume cars improved, the line became blurred: when mercedes was at the top of its game throughout the late 60s, 70s and 80s, neither BMW nor Audi came close - Audis in the 70s and early were no better or worse than re-badged VWs - Audis turnaround came with the 100 and the adoption of"Vorsprung Durch Technic".

BMW throughout the 70s and early 80s sold very few cars in the UK - compared to the last two decades - you see BMWs on every housing estate in the UK these days.

The biggest issue facing the marketing people within any organisation is how they differentiate their products; and nearly always they'll be using intangibles such as lifestyle and all that"flummery". This is because there is very little real differentiation between brands.

With the development of cost effective manufacturing technologies and the concomitant reduction in manufacturing tolerances etc, high quality goods are no longer the preserve of the better off.

Quality products are not always premium products (if you associate premium wih a high price); Heinz beans are a quality,"premium"baked bean, but affordable. A Swatch watch is extremely high quality as are Casio watches. Many high priced, premium items, are vey poorly made.

Cars generally are no longer status symbols, with ever more creative finance packages most people can afford a £20k/£25k car.

I wouldn't buy a BMW because they're common and I've had plenty of them when they weren't, and I don't like modern Mercedes. I always thought Audis were bought by people who had a high opinion of themselves - although I did have a new UR Quattro company car in 1987/88.

Excluding cars that most of us cannot afford (RR, Bentley etc) I believe the"best"car produced today in terms of objective product quality is the Lexus - whether you like them or not is irrelevant, I find myself being drawn to purchasing a GS.

That says something - probably quite a lot - about me, off my soap box now.

Prufrock.

Not quite that with Audi.

The reason Audi all of a sudden "exploded" has nothing to do with "Vorsprung durch Technik". More so with a fantastic PR and ad campaign in the late 80ies and throughout the 90ies.

Audi was the typical "Grandad with crocheted bog roll cover in back" car. A car for people who couldn't afford a Mercedes, a BMW or - yes - a Volvo(!) at least here in Germany. They were in their lineup equal with Ford, though Ford being a tad better.

They then forced themselves into the premium branch by firstly making some "sporty" cars. The Audi "Ur-Quattro" was basically only built, to get the Rallye Quattro into homologation. The first proper "sports Audi" were the S1 and the S4 of the 90ies. Quality slowly improved, but the TV and media ads made you think it was all better before it was. The Hamburger agency did fantastic work - and that worldwide!

Nowadays people believe that Audi has a great buildquality, which they do... For 3 years! And then the interior and exterior deteriorates quickly. And their depreciation here in Germany is rather bad. Volvo's is worse, but Audi is bad. A 4 year old Audi S8 (!) will go for say 1/10th of the original price...

VWs have less depreciation but basically the same problems. Technology problems, engine problems and other simple things, VAG (aka VW and Audi) ist/are not prepared to accept.