Talk:Luxury car/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Further Vandalism by Zouf
Zouf, I am leaving this automobile section and possibly the entire wikipedia. You have a free hand now to vandalise as much as you want. I have also read some of your edits on other pages, serious readers will know from reading these edits what their quality is. Samstayton 00:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Acura - Not a proper luxury brand
Though Acura is often seen as a luxury brand, it is actually only a semi-luxury brand. The vast majority of Acuras sold were not proper luxury vehicles. While the majority of Acura's sales used to be proper luxury cars, the company has been in decline for almost a decade. Today Acura is by technical defenition is not a luxury brand rather it is a semi-luxury brand. Due to its past prestige as the luxury brand it once was I listed it in italized writing at the bottom of the luxury brand list. Thank you Gerdbrendel 17:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that the user with the IP 66.75.124.134 has removed the notice concerning Acura not being a proper luxury brand, it is not-that's proven by indisbutable sales data but if he or she has a valid concern fell free to mention it on my user page, please get an account first though. Thank you for your interest Gerdbrendel 03:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
I pulled "Some critics have speculated that Asian manufacturers do not have any presence because they fear no one will accept their products in this category." out of the ultra luxury segment because it is a weasel statement that has no backing. If someone can cite the "some critics", then it should be returned. Elijahmeeks 04:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
It seems like your statement is the weasel. Unless you can point out a single successful asian brand in Ultra-Lux, this statement goes back. Asian brands are not accepted by Caucasians even in high-end and middle end easily. Lexus is the only successful asian brand to date. Look at Infiniti sales, it will be very revealing to you. The flasgship Q45 sells may be thousand cars a year if that. Also Lexus is successful because its prodcucts are superior to germans by a wide wide margin. Massive! So as you see in Europe, no caucasian drives EVEN Lexus. Their sales are pathetic. Samstayton 07:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Okay but that doesn't relate to Acura not being a luxury brand. It's true though that statement is POV. Signaturebrendel 04:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
As I stated, the phrase "Some critics" is not going to fly unless you can cite those critics. If you can, then this statement is perfectly fine. If not, then it's not suitable for an encyclopedia.Elijahmeeks 18:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, you could certainly call the sales numbers critics. Signaturebrendel 20:58, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
General definition
This does seem to be a very narrow definition, seen through the eyes of a US buyer? Arguably, all cars are a luxury to the vast majority of people as they can not afford to own one. However, in the range of cars that are available clearly there are some that are considered to be luxurious, but I don't think that the MSRP in the USA can be taken to be the definition of luxury globally. Perhaps the article should be retitled "Luxury car in the USA"?Markb 09:52, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well, the Western European defenition of a luxury car is pretty close, check out the VDA annual report, besides I should know-I'm German. But of course the situation looks a lot different in developing countires but considering this issue it would be plain IMPOSSIBLE to have a defenition of what a luxury car is. But also consider the following if you apply the General Defenition on any market it will point out the luxury cars in that market. Even in developing countires such as Russia no one calls an Escort a luxury car, even if they themselves can't afford it. But the cars that fit the criteria outlined in the "General Defenition, and most propbably only those, will be identified by the people of that particular developing country as a luxury car. Even though I'm gonna think of a way to create a sperate defenition for developing countries, it really does seem to be impossible. Thanks for being concerned though, Gerdbrendel 05:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
- understood, Gerdbrendel. Perhaps making clear the MSRP only refers to the USA? If the VDA report has a specification, then include that to cover Western Europe?Markb 09:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, for now I have added "(U.S.}" above all sections that relate to the U.S. market. I will later add a section for Western Europe. Thanks for the input. Gerdbrendel 19:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Difference between luxury and non-luxury brands
Hi, there needs to be differinciation between cars made by luxury brands and car made ny mainstream brands. For cars made by luxury brands the threshold for them to be considered entry-level luxury cars lies at $29k, to include the Lincoln Zephyr, Cadillac CTS, Lexus ES etc..., all of whom are condifered to be entry-level luxury cars by kbb, nctd, forbes and all other leading publications. For non-luxury brands the same threshold lies at $36k, as to include the Volvo S80 and Buick Lucerne (which are entry-level luxury according to kbb, forbes, etc...) but exclude the Yukon which is not considered to be a luxury vehicle by leading media. Thanks. Gerdbrendel 20:12, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
We should also change the heading from "luxury Car" to Luxury Vehicle" to give it a broader focus. Samstayton 01:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Luxury car was moved to Luxury vehicles as to include light trucks. Signaturebrendel 00:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the Legitimacy of this Article
I am somewhat of a car fan, to say the least. I read up on new cars, and research older ones. However, upon viewing this article, I have to say that I have never heard of these terms used ever before. I find this article to be almost completely illegitimate, in that it is almost completely unsourced. Who made up this info? I would comment out the parts of the article that I feel were unsourced- therefore illegitimate, but I'm afraid I would have to comment out the entire article. Having over half the edits done by an IP might also explain this.
Firstly, would someone please explain to me where this superior definition of luxury car came from? Who thought up that terminology about the MSRP. I admit, maybe there's something I didn't read, something major that I'm missing, but I don't know. Even if there was, please, someone cite it! I don't quite see the point of the entire article. Basically, you're categorizing cars into their MSRP classes, and then claiming this to be be the definition of what type of luxury car it is. I have found an interesting morsel of truth while researching the claims of luxury found in this article. Zouf
This, beyond a doubt, proves that the number to classify luxury cars is completely illegitimate. The luxury car market is not determined by User:samstayton. Furthermore, what about the problem of every antique / old luxury car? How are they classified? Clearly, a 1990 Caddy Eldorado is a luxury car, and a 1980 Rolls is a luxury car- but how on earth would they be classified in this system?
This article needs major revamps, but more than just copyeditting, but in the actual content of it. There is more absurd info in it, such as the "10% of vehicles sold by price" for the mid-level, and the "1% of vehicles by price sold in the US" for the high-end" and the "0.1% of vehicle market" for the ultra. Now, unless this is the most freakish- logarithmically perfect- setup of numbers ever, I think these numbers are slightly fabricated, to say the least. Also, these numbers don't fit with the luxury's definition of the "10% of cars sold by price", as if you add the entry-level, the number goes far higher than 10%, thus eliminating its own definition.
O, another thing, "vehicles"- what is that supposed to mean. Since the people who made this article wikilink it to the automobile article, that must mean it accounts for all automobile. Do you mean to include trucks and buses in these percentages- I'm sure you didn't. And if I am misunderstanding these numbers, which are most likely fabricated to begin with, they could sure use a bit of work to make them clearer and not be ridiculous to understand.
This article needs even more work than what I have just said. In fact, this aritcle is so undercited, and even makes derogatory claims (Jaguar X-Type attack?), that it honestly should have its entirety commented out. Will someone please message me back, or make another post. This article is beyond repair- because I do not feel that it makes any substantiated claims. (by the way, anything above the S500 Mercedes (S55, S600, S65 would be an "ultra" luxury; and so would a 750 and 760 Bimmer) Zouf 02:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
It is not beyond repair and info is NOT MADE UP. I will add a reference section. Yes a 1990 El Dorado is a luxo car and fits the cateogries if you consider inflation. If you're really such a car fan, than you'd have heard these terms before. High-end lux, Mid-lux, Entry-level- You never heard these before????? Look up Forbes, edmunds. And yes the S600 is ultra but not he S430 or S500. I edited out the POV. The defenition is simple. Comfort + $38k MSRO = Luxo car OR Comfort + $29k + Luxo brand = Luxo car. Very easy. As I said, I'll add my references in the next few weeks, but I tell again the info IS NOT MADE UP! Thank you. Signaturebrendel 04:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Answer to Zouf
Zouf, may be you are the fabricator here. The 0.1%, 1% and 10% precentages are based on mathematical analysis and strong evidence. The ultra luxury category includes vehicles above 100K . Now lets count year 2005 sales in US:
| Rolls Royce | 400 |
| Bentley | 3000 |
| Aston Martin | 900 |
| Ferrari | 1500 |
| Maserati | 2000 |
| Maybach | 150 |
| Porsche (Turbo + GT3+ Cayenne Turbo) | 2000 |
| BMW: (760i and 760Li) | 550 |
| Mercedes: (CL + SL-AMG + S600) | 3000 |
It comes to about 15-16,000 cars. Which means 0.1%. So before you start bad-mouthing others check your mind.
The 1% market-share for high end Luxury can be proven in the same manner.
Also Jaguar comment is not POV I will add reference now. Samstayton 06:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I just added the Jag reference and this should vigorously shut your mouth full of illegitimacy. Samstayton 06:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Rebuttal from Zouf
Hmmm.... interesting, I think that this proves my point quite well. Note the self-induced reducing of the MSRP for luxury cars. O, so this number is from other car sources according to Brendel? Apparently not, unless Samstayton is the author of Forbes magazine. Furthermore, in your little number count, you include Ferrari. O, thats interesting... its not a luxury car!!!!!! Neither are all Aston Martins (some are, I do not doubt that). Also, those Porsches (except for the Cayenne) you listed ARENT LUXURY CARS. CLEARLY, it is illegitimate. YOU NEVER LIST THOSE CARS OR COMPANIES IN THE ARTICLE!!!!!!! I'm glad though that you are able to add up cars to make 0.1%. What about the 1% and 10%? Unable to back it up? HM, thought so. Again, you did not explain what a "vehicle" is either... hm, another glitch? You also forgot some models of Audi in your little bit of math there.
Again, let me re-emphasize that, as of yet, there is still no substantiated claims. As I have proven, the numbers are fabricated. IT IS MADE UP IN THE COMMENT LEFT ON BRENDEL'S DISCUSSION PAGE! Also, I have heard of the terms before, (entry, mid, high, ultra), but I've never seen it defined in such concrete and, frankly, fabricated terms for the sake of a nice definition. This article might be a nice personal reference for car shopping, but it is not substantiated (in the manner you made it sound) in any car mag I've read. Maybe it is, but, again, PLEASE cite it. The comment that I previously left is 100% correct, in that everything I said is coherent. You have done nothing to correct what has been mentioned except cite the Jag reference and do some shoddy, half-job math to try and substantiate the one claim of 0.1%. Again, PLEASE define vehicles, AND FIX ALL OF THE NUMBERS. They do not make sense. There are still quite a few sport cars that would skew this freakishly (I'm sure not coincidental) system of percentages. Fix it, please.
I have people look at this article who are not only confused by the definition of vehicle, but are amazed at the way in which a luxury vehicle is classified. This is before I can let them know that it is NOT legitimate, because the claims are NOT PROVEN. THere's no citing, and I even checked www.kbb.org to see if the categories exist, and surprise to me, they don't.
You dare call my mouth full of illegitimacy Samstayton, when I have proven that you made up those numbers? When I proved to you that you did not cite your jag comment? When I proved to you that your math is almost completely incorrect because you add things and leave them out?...hm...time for some introspection? This is not meant to be a personal attack on anyone, and I don't intend it to be. However, this is an attack on the falsified, and unsubstantiated claims made on this article.
You shall silence me when you give me physical evidence that these numbers are legitimate terms (if they are not, say so in the article), and that these percentages actually exist.
Yours truthfully Zouf 13:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Read up! No the Corvette isn't a luxury car. Just because its expensive doesn't make it lux. That's why we have a prestige car article. Prestige car is any car that gets a wow! when coming down the street like Corvettes and Vipers. The don't offer comfort! Come on, luxury implies comfort and opulance. Read Forbes, its not marxist, but a good place to read up on cars and its where I've done most of my research. The Jag wasn't successful, it just wasn't. An article on Forbes clearly stated that a HIGH LEVEL OF COMFORT is part of luxo car. Surely you have heard the difference between a super preformance car and a luxury car. The math is correct, how exactly is Sam's math wrong, his numbers are pretty sound. Let me be frank here, you havn't proven anything. You have made angry, non-productive claims but not proven anything! Please do some research whie I add more refs and then AFTER you've done some research and I some adding refs, see if you still have a problem. Signaturebrendel 15:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Restatement of Argument
OK, I never said Vettes were luxury cars. Vettes are among my most favorite cars, and I know they aren't luxury cars. Look at the graph of Sam's comment. He includes Ferrari in his lux car argument. THATS NOT WHAT IT SAYS IN THE ARTICLE. Sam's numbers are unfounded, they are based off of expensive cars. We're not discussing expensive cars, we're discussion luxury cars. I do know Forbes, and I agree with their definition, it is a high level of comfort. However, where is this MSRP definition coming from? As I clearly showed in my rebuttal, it is a fabricated number by Sam... I showed it with the provided quote. Is it not clear? The quote explicitly states that he/she made the number!!! So, again, where is the justification of that random MSRP used to define a luxury car. Again, Sam answered the Jag comment with a link and a reference, the proper way to go about proving his comment about Jags. You must have not read the above rebuttal, because much of your argument is not in attack of anything new... it was what was said last night.
I will reiterate my argument, so that there is no confusion in what my argument is
- The definition of a luxury car is not sourced. There is no proof, not even in the provided reference, of the precise number used to define a luxury car. Please provide me with concrete evidence that $38K is the defined price for a luxury car. If this is provided, this part of the argument shall be resolved.
- Define vehicle. It is very unclear what a vehicle is...just a car? or all automobiles (trucks, cars and buses) as the wikilink implies.
- The percentages are clearly fabricated. User:Samstayton provides a graph that is intended to prove that ultra-luxury cars are 0.1% of the market. However, this number is clearly forced... as he includes Ferraris and Porsche super-cars... which are not in any way luxury cars. He also does not inlclude any Audi's (where a few deserve to be included).
- Samstayton proves that 0.1% of the automobile market is ultra-luxury cars. He says nothing about the other percentages which were haphazardly thrown into the argument. It is surely not a coincidence that high end cars are 1/10 of mid-level cars and ultra-cars are 1/10 of high end cars. PROVIDE EVIDENCE FOR THESE CLAIMS!
- The article provides very few references and the one referring to luxury cars brings one to a website that is almost impossible to navigate (I am not the only one that had trouble determing what the page is trying to do, other than list somewhat random information about everything from cars to jewelry). Please link the article to the proper part of that website.
- This article is unfounded, and the vague reference to www.kbb.org proves nothing (there is no mention of prices set on entry, mid...etc.)
Let me make it clear. I know cars very well. I do not doubt that Samstayton and Brendel also know cars very well, they seem to be very knowledgable. I, in fact, have seen the use of entry, mid, high, and ultra. However, in the magazines I have read, I have never seen such a set price and definitive cut off as Brendel and Samstayton seem to suggest. While I do not doubt that there exist levels of luxury cars (and I, by the way, never said anything about vettes or vipers being luxury cars), I do not think that your methods of determination are true. MSRP does NOT define the price of cars. PROVE (with legitimate quotes) that $38,000 is not made up by Samstayton (as my quote proves [see quote at top of rebuttal]). Until then, as I have evidence that the information is falsified, and you have no evidence that it is true, this article is illegitimate.
I rest my case by claiming that you have provided no substantial, clear, and consistent evidence to the length and duration of the debate. Your claims are clearly wrong, and there has been no rebuttal to what I have said other than a somewhat of a non-sequitur (clearly Brendel did not read my post).
On another note, stop personally attacking me. "shut your mouth full of illegitimacy", "Zouf, may be you are the fabricator here", "Read Forbes, its not marxist" are unnecessary comments to make in an argument regarding cars. I did not call any of you fabricators or acutally illegitimate. I do claim this article to be illegitimate. My political should have nothing to do with this article. You are going "below the belt" to mention anything of the sort. Let's keep this business... please.
Yours truly, Zouf 17:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm trying to keep this professional as well, sorry if the "Forbes, its not marxist" comment offended you. Okay here's how the MSRPs came to life. I look at all the different car publications in the US and Germany. I made a long, long list of all the lux vehicles. Then I checked with Forbes and Kbb whether or not these vehicles are really lux. By doing so I already establisahed what brands were luxo brands and what cars were luxo cars. Now I looked at the segment they were put in. Alright, now I had a list of all luxo cars in the US and Germany as well as their marketing classification (Entry-level, High-end, etc...). Okay so besides just putting this list up I started looking at why these vehicles were called luxo cars. Then I made a list of all the things these vehicles had in common. All the cars had a high level of comfort (that was stated in Forbes). According to KBB the cheapest luxo car was the Volvo S80 with a $38k MSRP; thus, setting that treshold. I also found that Forbes, edmunds and NCTD differntiated in their defenition between non-luxo brand and luxo-brand. So, I found that the leading car mags classify all luxo-brand cars between $29k and $40k (BMW 3-Series etc...) as luxo cars. Then I found that for mainstream cars the treshold was set higher ($38k). For the guidelines of High-end, I again looked at the prices of cars who according to Forbes, edmunds, NCTD, and KBB were said to be high-end. All of these vehicles had MSRPs ranging from $60k to $100k. A Forbes article then stated that all cars above $100k are Ultra-lux, so I just took their word for it. Then I triple checked my tresholds and found that the information I had gathered was correct. Now I will go back and try to gather all the articles I have look at over months in order to build a reference section. This project, however, will take a bit of time, so please bear with me. Also, I'm saying this with all due respect, but no, your argument wasn't very clear (now it is) and the qoute you selected from my discussion page didn't really get the message through. Again, please bear with me until I gather my srouces, alright? Regards, Signaturebrendel 18:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
(Sigh of Relief) Finally, there seems to be some kind of conclusion to a very long and drawn out debate. The MSRP issue is starting to make sense. I would like to clarrify that small correspondence with Samslayton though... and how the threshold was moved based on Samslayton's own preference. I feel much better that the MSRP issue has been resolved... it certainly makes this much more understandable. A few loose ends remain. The comments about percentages need to be removed until Samslayton can substantiate them (In my above argument, I show that they aren't as legitimate as they should be), and vehicle needs to be better defined. I don't mind if you take your time doing the references... so long as they are going to be done. Thanks for joining me in this very lively debate about luxury cars, it certainly was interesting. Yours truly, Zouf 18:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Massive Vandalism by Zouf
Zouf, considerbale amount of time has been spent by Me and Gerd to write this article. Your arguments should be brought on talk page first. You are simply editing the article on some whims which is not acceptable. Also, it is not allowed that you edit data and text without any basis. If you think I am wrong or the data is in correct, you should point with with your caluculations on Talk page first. Vandalism has serious repurcussions. Also, your articulation is one thing and writing fact based article is another. Samstayton 01:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Article 1 from User:Samstayton's talk page
I just read quite a bit of interesting stuff. Some of my facial expressions includes "hm, interesting", and others included a writhing face that was appalled at what was said.
- First off, I would like to refute the claim, "Only mercedes was considered traditional luxury". Cadillac? Lincoln? Rolls Royce?...yes, enough said
- "As I said earlier, brands like Ferrari and Porsche and bentley rapidly evolved in the 90s and are even evolving now." Well, Bentley? How can you categorize Bentley with that group? It's nearly impossible. Unlike Ferrari and Porsche, they've moved from luxury to performance, not the other way around!
- "In the 80s even BMW was not considered luxury"... Wow, I almost broke the computer reading that one. Just look at pictures. My friend, who knows that cars have engines, and that "hp" is a unit of power, knows that BMW is lux. Even he was surprised at this comment.
- "Besides in next 10-15 years when European Union moves closer" I don't know where Sam lives, but from an international POV, I don't quite know what that means. "moving closer". Perhaps you meant becomes stronger...expands?...develops?... but certainly not "move closer". I don't quite know what that means.
- Why do we mention suspension and cargo space at all. This is obscene. These just plain aren't luxo cars factors. They aren't. A good ride, yes, that's luxo car factor. Comfortable interior room, yes thats a factor. But, to measure cargo space? and to claim anything about the suspension itself is absurd. If these factors are allowed to apply- what? is an 18-wheeler more of a lux car than a BIMMER (note its not BEEMER...arg...) because it has a softer suspension and way more cargo room. I'm not refuting any one particular claim here. I'm just saying that let's leave these factors out in discussion of luxo car. Let's keep it to head/leg room (etc.) for the "cargo" and the comfort of the ride for the "suspension".
- "Its like Theory of Relativity which uses Speed of Light as constant and other variables revolve around that constant "c" ". I swear, I was granted some kind of higher power to resist my temptation to destroy the computer screen in front of me. I'm going to study physics throughout college, and it is quite the interest of mine. This analogy is wrong, let's not refer to this ever again, especially in reference to cars. (btw, A professor at my school saw this and screamed "What the hell is this crap" when eh saw it... continuing to use this as a claim to destroy the legitimacy of all of wikipedia...arg... disbelievers)
- Sam:"Definitions based on "constants" are stable defintions"
Sam:"As I said we don't need constants."
Should or should not a constant be used?
Now, to build my case. Clearly, as a wikipedia article, it is not intended to be too subjective, as it is supposed to be factual. However, as we have seen in the pages of discourse, it is a very "split" field, in terms of opinions. I do agree with Sam on the contention that some kind of constant is necessary. This is true for all factually based arguments. Therefore, using as legitimate sources as I could find, I would like to provide a defintion that I think would fit best with a luxury car... then continue to clarify it.
Merriam Webster defines "luxury" as "a condition of abundance or great ease and comfort : sumptuous environment". Car is easy enough to figure out. So, by extension, I combine the phrases by claiming, according to M&W a luxury car is a car which provides a great abundance of ease and comfort (Now, this is based on M&W's definition. You can refute this by claiming it as a biased source... but its M&W... let's not go there.) (N.B. when I say car, I mean the the traditional sedan, coupe, hatchback, roadster, station wagon, etc. in addition to SUVs and light trucks (e.g. luxo pickups like Lincoln LT.) Now, the crux of this debate doesn't lie in "ease" and comfort". Alone, those are easy enough to understand. The crux is the "abundance"... and this is the debate that permeates our arguments, believe it or not. M&W defines "abundance" as "relative degree of plentifulness". In this case, can be extended to a relatively plentiful degree of luxury.
I have narrowed this debate, without using any obsequious sources, to defining relative. And clearly, since luxury is higher than, we are referring to a "higher degree" of luxury. This is where the classes fit in perfectly! Entry Level could be defined as anything that has a higher degree of luxury relative to any average passenger car or SUV (done by nation). (e.g. In the U.S., entry level would be a smooth ride (not seamless), CD, power windows, locks, leather standard, etc.). Mid Level would then follow suit, as would high end and ultra. Again, as I have clearly demonstrated, there are strong opinions as to what relative even refers to. Therefore, I claim that we should dump the "cut-off" MSP and go for a guide. For example, if Company X makes a car that offers all the luxuries found in the average Mid-level car, but sells it for 36K... why shouldn't it be includes... just because of price!? That's ridiculous! By the same token, the Ferrari argument would be solved. Yes, Ferrari has made leaps and bounds in luxury. But, does it have anything on a Bentley or Rolls Royce... or an S65 (no more!!!! =( )... ASBOLUTELY NOT! Therefore, even though its more expensive than every mid-level car... it should still be put into the same class because that is all of the creature comforts it offers... those of a mid-level car.
In this case, my "constant" actually contains a variable...eww... I know! I am going by a defintion here... but how else can we go about it? Hyundai just made the beautiful Hyundai Azera... but its very cheap! I don't know the exact stats of it, but just because Hyundai can produce a car for a cheaper price than a Bimmer... should it not be considered a luxury car!?
The Prestige Car article is for the designation of the little horse (Ferrari, Porsche, etc.) on the front of the car, the luxury car article is about how relatively comfortable someone is inside of the car.
Despite this, I do not propose that everyone hop onto Wikipedia and spew out their emotions on the newest Bimmer, fighting over what class it should be. I do, however, feel that in order to properly classify cars, we need to use general guidelines. Sam, you are completely right... the car market is changing, we need to account for it. We cannot use percentages, and I shall explain why:
- Country A has a per capita that is substantially higher that of country B. In Country A, 1% of the cars might be all supercars, and in Country B they might be all entry-level sedans.
- Luxury cars manufacture the same cars despite the economy of other countries. If Mercedes always puts out the same amount of the S class every year, but if country C's economy increases substantially one year, then more people might be able to buy S classes. Does this make it any less of a luxury car... certainly not. Percentages would require a reassessment of a country's economy as well as the success of each car company to be legitimate.
To conclude, I would like to emphasize that there needs to be a general guide where...yes... MSP is included. But, it should not be the sole factor. Instead of developing a system where we have to convene to make an exception (e.g. H1), we should make a system where it can work on "auto pilot". Of course, as things develop and become more common, they move farther down the "list of luxury" until they become almost universally standard (e.g. power steering), but it should be able to function based on round-about numbers. Your designation of MSP's is about right, but it is to finite. Let's open the field to allow cars to move out of certain levels because of the features they have. In essence, we are not allowing a company to produce a "high end" car, if it has a <$60K MSP. Absurd. Also, this guideline can be used to incorporate older cars by adding in inflation (since it is just a round number, this is much easier). Actually, now that I think of it, the way of dealing with older cars is a major factor in this article.
Thank you for your patience and cooperation in this long and drawn out debate. By the way, my name is "Zouf" (nickname... my real name is Matt), and I live in New York City... in case you wanted to know. Ironically, I'm not a major fan of American cars... as there are frequently stupid problems with the cars that GM, Chrysler and Ford make. They, annoyingly, range from little engine problems to major ones as well as problems with overall quality. I look forward to engaging in more discussion about this topic (which has now become uniquely interesting solely because of the heated debate attached with it). Peace!
Article 2 from User:Samstayton's talk page
Again, the argument about expensive comes back to my defintion argument. In essence, "relative" is what makes something "expensive". Again, I dont claim Azera is luxury... first, I havent sat in one yet, second... it most likely isn't. My argument about the price, as you can see in my example is to take the price as a "threshold" out, and make it a guideline. For example, the avg. high end car has "x" amount of luxury features and a price of "y". If a mid-level car (by your price thresholds) makes "x" amount of luxury features and has a lower price, it should still be a luxury car (within reason). I'm sure you understand that companies do weird pricing options, for example, you know you pay a couple thousand dollars when you buy a Ferrari for the emblem. I'm saying, break away from the "prestige" idea, and focus on the aspects of a luxury car. I do not doubt it should be expensive. But, two situations that I commonly see are perfect examples here:
- A car has an MSP of 55,000 but offers all of the same features that a 75,000 car does. I mean, exactly the same. Except, the 70,000 is a "prestige car". Shouldn't both be "high end"? If not, than is it fair to keep the first out soleley because its 5000 under? Again, a guideline would allow for this.
- A car costs 75,000 dollars but since it is so rare/uncommon/ "hot", it offers nothing that the other high end luxo's offer. Shouldn't it be a mid-level?
The argument I made supports everything you said, especially about being expensive. But, I think that the numbers should be slightly more flexible than such a swift cut off. BTW, when GM offered employee discounts, it lowered many of the MSP's (for a given set of months) from over 60K to under 60K. So, based on your current model ( and being a stickler, =P) they all went from high-end to mid-level... and then back again. This happens a lot, in different ways.
I'm starting to see a trend between the arguments. Threshold vs. Guideline... It'd be nice to get some 4th party input here. Clearly, you and Sam feel that it's threshold, and I clearly feel its guideline. .. hmm...
Yea, sorry about the bimmer thing. Bimmer is such a common spelling and sooooo many kids spell it "beemer" because they don't know any better. I didn't realize that it was a language thing... usually its just an incompetency thing, ha!!
BTW, I saw a marauder today. Seeing as your a TC fan, I'm sure this is your favorite car...ever? If it isn't, I'd be interested to hear why not. Peace! Zouf 04:53, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Rebuttal of Vandalism
Uhm, both of you need to stop double-teaming me. You might have spent time on the article, but it certainly does not perfect the article. First off, my edits changed some typos... but Samstayton reverted those...nice job Sam. Secondly, I doubt Sam read my comment on his MSP graph, and so he put it back without looking at the comments... nice job Sam. Thirdly, I took off the unsourced percentages because they were clearly fabricated, or based off illegit numbers... and he reverted it... nice job Sam. I would really like to deal with Brendel... not Sam in terms of this article. I do not mean this to be personal, please don't make it to be that. But, you are not structuring your argument or particularly watching what you are doing.
My evidence, definitions, and sourcing is sound. I use legit dictionary sources for a definition, I use common sense, I use proper grammar, and I also clean up unsourced info. I have articulated my argument quite clearly, with numbering and bulleting. There is no need to recite it, it can be found above. Although the majority of what is stated in the article is "right", there is a substantial number of things that are wrong. Since when is BMW's flagship sedan under $100,000? Are you outright insane?... is the 745 flagship over the 760! Not all SUV's offer more luxury than their sedan counterparts... the QX56 is the most "luxurious" car by Infiniti in terms of features and overall comfort... as is the Cadillac Escalade ESV. Ferrari's are not luxury cars. This is heresy to speak of. Every single person I have talked to has backed me up on this. That is absurd... they are performance. Also note their location on this graph...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Prestige_cars_copy.png... made by Brendel himself. You have ommitted innumberable points of my argument... and I have consistently responded to each of your contentions. Some of them have been just outright... almost hilariously... wrong. Please respond back in a way that disproves me. In sheer logical formulas... I have not yet been disproved... many of my arguments have not been refuted.
I would also like to point out the true vandal here. If Sam has reverted changes back to a "typoed" state... if he has replaced faulty information (information like the BMW's 745 being flagship), and adding information that is unsourced ALL AFTER it had been fixed... who is the true vandal? Let Brendel take care of the rest, User:Samstayton, please. I do not mean it to be personally offensive, but Brendel has been much more reasonable and understandable in his arguing.
As described in my argument, I will again revert this article. Further action to revert again to information that has been clearly disproved will most likely result in my talking to an administrator. If you feel it should be reverted again, destroy my argument, I welcome you to.
Even though I have already used one of your sources to prove my own argument, I will use another. Car.com (the source used to define class) states
- Entry luxury cars usually cost between $25,000 and $40,000, and they don’t always have a luxury brand attached to them. Mid-luxury cars typically run between $40,000 and $60,000, and always carry a nameplate that resonates with image-conscious Americans. Super-luxury cars cost upwards of $60,000 but less than $100,000, and inspire envy in both friends and enemies. Ultra-luxury cars are six-figure expenses guaranteed to land the hottest date in town and the best parking spaces at the trendiest nightspots.
Semantics, gentlemen, semantics. They are not defining a threshold... but a general number to go around. If theres a $59,999 Benz... according to you two, its mid-level. This is ridiculous. I will only stand to hear a structured, legitimate debate. Until I do, the person who has best proven his point (the best structure argument) will have the correct version posted. Please take none of this personally. Thanks! Zouf 04:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I see you found the pricing guideliness. As to SUVs, there probably the same in terms of comfort when compared to their full-size sedan counterparts. A Navi probably is little less lux than a TC, smaller seats and not quite the same ride. Nonetheless any statement saying sedans are better than SUVs or SUVs are better than sedans is POV, and doesn't actually belong here to begin with. The pricing guidelines you have found are the same ones we currently use, so there shouldn't be a problem with them, if there is let me know. There are however two problems:
- In the entry-level segment there is a difference between cars made by a luxo brand and non-luxo grand. See, if you say all cars upwards of $25k you're opening the door for cars that are priced below the average MSP in the US of $26k. $26k is the average price paid for a car in this country, $25k would be below that. Besides is the Mercedes-Benz C-Class really in the same class as the Buick Lacrosse?
- A rather minor thing, above $60k they're called High-end not super because on wiki supercars are an entirely different class of vehicle. We don't want to confuse articles so we call 'em High-end Luxury vehicles. Thanks. Ragards. Signaturebrendel 22:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Revert Comment
I didn't see Brendel's edit before Samstayton's. I like Brendel's much better. I read over his comments, and I decided to add some of his info to the revert I made. If anything, I would like to work with his minor reverts of mine more than working with the article's original text. Thanks again! Zouf 05:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Actually there is a $3,500 tolerance. That's why the $58k LS430 is high-end. So the $59,995 Benz would still be a luxury vehicles. Thought you might want to know. Regards, Signaturebrendel 21:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Continued Vandalism by Zouf
This new preson has started vandalising the article with impunity. He has also started childish threats of referring others who do not agree with him to the Administrators. His juvenile prank has degenerated into lengthy and baseless arguments. I have worked a lot on this article just as Gerd and do not wish to see this vandalism continue. Because of the nature of wikipedia, a well-sourced, well referenced article can at once be vandalised by persons like Zouf. I have plenty of energy but no time to keep reverting like he is doing and fixing the mess he creates. This is also because of the R&D work I am doing and the projects I am involved in at the moment. The future of this article looks very bleak and will likely loose its authority because of this person's careless and juvenile attitude and messy involvement. If he continues this low quality modification and vandalism, this article will loose its flair, sophistication and factual base. Samstayton 06:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Well that's very unfortunate Sam. However, I will not let this article sink like the Titanic. I will make sure that this article remians a respectaple source for those wishing to statisfy their curisosity. I will take into consideration each user's proposal, and will do my best to keep this article a "sophistication and factual base." Thank you. Signaturebrendel 01:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, a couple of ground rules:
- 1. Please try to be more civil. Try to discuss the contents of the article, rather than discussing individual editors.
- 2. Please don't refer to good-faith efforts to improve an article as vandalism. Consensus may decide that specific edits don't improve the article, but edits made in good faith should not be dismissed as vandalism. If you disagree with specific changes, you should discuss the changes rather than simply reverting.
- 3. Nobody owns an article.
- Regarding the content specifically, I think that the term "luxury car" is defined slightly differently by different manufacturers, car magazines, and individuals, and trying to pin down a specific price cut-off is probably not productive (or if specific price cut-offs are to be stated, it would be better if they're backed up with far stronger sources, the current sources seem to be along the lines of "for this specific article, we define luxury to mean ..."). Cut-off prices may be defined for legal purposes, and those should be mentioned in the article, but most car magazines and manufacturers most likely don't adhere to legal definitions when using the term for marketing or journalism purposes. It's probably much better in the long run to state at the top of the article that the term is subjectively defined, and then procede from there. --Interiot 22:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
ANswers: 1. I am probably as civil as any wikipedia contributor has ever been. So I believe I do not need these lessons. 2. The changes by Zouf were outright vandalism. He deleted graphs and large amounts of texts without any reason. Before going ahead with the vandalism, he did not discuss it properly on talk page. This seems like a clear case of favoritism by you, since it seems like Zouf is your buddy. Wikipedia is and will loose more authority with time, or at the very least poison the readers mind if persons like zouf continue to edit it. 3. You are right nobody owns the article, but very few people can contribute genuinely and from what I see, the edits made by persons like Zouf are so far away from it, it does not need any further proof. Anyone can read the article for themselves and see the poor writing and references. 4. At this point I do not even feel like contributing to automobile section anymore. This article has more or less lost its authority and valadity. 5. Wikipedia will have to seriously re-think its policies and code of conduct and distinguish serious contributors from those who write lengthy juvenile trolls, otherwise this giant exercise will fail and countless hours of efforts by serious people will be lost with a click of a button. I now feel I wasted countless hours of my own and I will never be able to recover those because of the lack of safeguards. More than three days were exhausted in painstakingly making the chart and collecting the data and confirming it several times (the sales and the selling prices). In one minute this vandal deleted it, because of some whims. 6. I think you have the upper hand here. You are administrator and can do whatever you wish. But my time is precious, and I do not intend to spend it anymore answering your comments or anyone else on this talk page or any other page. Readers will be able to judge from the history the level of my contribution. 7. I do not have anything else to add further. Good night and good luck
Samstayton 00:24, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, it is subjective but there are guidlines, and this article simply presents them. Signaturebrendel 23:49, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Sam's referencing demands 22 March 06
Hostility
In your comment section Gerd has called me frustrated because I have flagged this article for its obvious lack of references. This article is therefore illegitimate and should be deleted. The "frustrated" comment is derogatory and a personal attack against me. Samstayton 00:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- No Sam. Its an observation and expession of concern on my side. FYI: Please don't assume that a user name is the real name of the person behind the account of that particular user name. Regards, Signaturebrendel 00:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Gerd, a wikipedia editor has attacked me personally. He accuses me for being "angry" and "frustrated" and he is repeatedly using these words despite my cautionary statement indicating to him not to do so.
- I have not attacked you, but wanted to bring it to your attention that you have insulted me, as you have perviously done with other users. You have exhibited nothing but direct and indirect hostility towards me since you reappeared from your hiatus. Signaturebrendel 07:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I have provided the follwing points as proofs that this article is not citied, it contains POV, and the citations are not in line with statements made.
Wikipedia administrators, please look into this matter immediately before these valuable comments are archived. Gerd, please do not archive the follwing point by point comments without addressing these. Samstayton 01:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
There is nothing wrong with archiving such a large discussion. Please be reasonalbe. I know you think I am wasting your and everyone's time, you clearly said so in your first post to me on the Lexus LS talk page, but please don't try and make me look like the bad guy. I have been nothing but professional, and have meet the insluts coming from you with nothing but an outmost professional manner of conduct. Thank you. Best Regards, Signaturebrendel 05:57, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Lack of References
This article does not cite its references and mainly POV. Here are the following examples:
- 1. The first statement itself is unreferenced : "...A luxury vehicle is a vehicle which provides a great abundance of ease and comfort. Although there can be a great range of "vehicles" that offer luxurious settings, a true luxury car will be a car (sedan, coupè, hatchback, station wagon, roadster, etc.), a light truck (light pickup trucks), or an SUV..." ??? Ref. missing
- 2. "...Luxury vehicles place more emphasis on comfort, appearance, and amenities than on performance, economy, or utility...." ??? reference is missing again.
- 3. "...Furthermore, they usually offer more modern technology, higher quality materials, and are often built in smaller numbers than more affordable mass-market vehicles..." ??? Again the reference is missing. Where is the reference to support "furthermore".
- 4. "...While a luxury car is difficult to define as it is somewhat subjective, there are certain guidelines by which the luxury cars are defined. Currently, that means its Mean Selling Price (MSP) is excess of roughly US$36,000 or higher..." ??? reference missing from this statement.
- Common knowledge and you created that threshold. My data indicated $40k to be the treshold and I have refs for that. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- 5. "...In addition to being relatively expensive, luxury cars also offer a higher degree of comfort than their mainstream counterparts as well as a highly sumptous interior with a strong emphasis on design and beauty..." Ref# missing
- 6. "...A vehicle may still be considered an entry-level luxury vehicle if its base MSP is in the general range of $29,000 and $36,000, it features a strong emphasis on comfort, and it is manufactured by a luxury car maker..." ref missing again from this statement.
- 7. "...Luxury car makers are companies which produce cars at approximate price of $36,000. In order for a vehiclemade by a non-luxury marque to be considered a luxury car, it should have a base MSP of roughly $36k..." ref# is missing.
- You came up with this, where did you get the info; tell me so I can add it. This info comes from the graph, over which you according to your previous statements "spend two days creating." Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- 8. "...In addition to featuring a high base price and high levels of comfort luxury, cars typically carry prestige. Although this cannot be measured in finite quantities, "prestige" usually refers to the allure which the car carries. From prestige, people get the idea of "paying for the emblem"...". Again the reference is missing.
- 9. "...For example, because of its prestige, the BMW 3 Series might cost more than if the same car if it was sold under a non-luxury marque. Also, it is important to note, that in no way are all prestige cars actually luxury cars (e.g. the Dodge Viper is certainly not a luxury car)..."
Samstayton 00:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Sam, general knowledge is a ref as well. That you pay more for a brand image is well known fact and that the Viper isn't luxury is well known as well. The word luxury implies comfort and the refs at the bottom back it up. Also this is not an appropriate outlet for your anger and frustration. So please, you put some of the info in here such as the $36k treshold. And no. saying that you are frustrate is stating an observation, not a personal attack. Thank you. Signaturebrendel 00:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC) Dear Gerd, please add citations or this article should be deleted. All statements and sections "must" have references. This is "wiki-policy", isnt it?? Please cite references and tag them to the statement you are refering to. Samstayton 01:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Not it isn't you don't need tags for everything you say. You simply don't. No offense but I think you need to read the wiki manual more carefully. Regards, Signaturebrendel 05:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Continued Lack of References
- 10. "...In the car market of the new millenium, it has become rather difficult to determine whether a vehicle is indeed a luxury car or not. Many vehicles such as the GMC Yukon or the Chevrolet Suburban fit the price criteria to be considered luxury vehicles, yet they do not have many of the amenities of other luxury vehicles..."
This statement is total POV. Phrases such as "Car market of new millenium", "rather difficult", "whether" and "indeed" are not in good taste and are "weasel" phrases. Wikipedia has itself used the word "weasel" to describe such phrases. Nope, they arn't. Thanks Signaturebrendel 01:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- 11. "...There are quite a few vehicles who have luxury car-like prestige and/or pricing but do not offer the degree of comfort required for them to actually be considered luxury vehicles; these vehicles include the Hummer H1, the Chevrolet Corvette and the Dodge Viper. All three vehicles have base MSPs of above $36,000 and the Hummer H1 is made by a company whose entire lineup, with exception of the Hummer H3, features base MSPs in excess of $50,000. Yet all three lack the comfort needed to make them luxury vehicles..." This statement has no reference.
- 12. "...Further, many non-luxury prestige vehicles with über-high prices, such as the Porsche 911 and many Lamborghinis are often mistaken as luxury vehicles, however in comparison to the other luxury cars (even in the mid-luxury segment) they are not luxury vehicles..." This statement is again highly potent POV. The authors have not provided any reference to support this statement.
- This statement is not found in the article. Please abstain from making grossly false accusations; this only sustains my concern over your editing being the result of you expressing your frustrations. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
The pricing of the cars prove this please tell me whether or not you want me to include the manufacturer's web-sites to ref this statement. Thanks. Signaturebrendel 01:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- 13. "...Other vehicles, such as the Mercury Grand Marquis, are not considered to be luxury vehicles due to their relatively low MSPs, despite their high degree of comfort..." Why so? How can we know whether its fraud or a verifiable statement. No reference has been provided.
Yes, look closely. Its not on kbb's list not on that of any other publication. Thanks. Signaturebrendel 01:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- 14. "...Note that the following classifications of cars does not include certain packages that come with the car that might raise the car into a higher level. For example, the average BMW 3 Series sells in the "entry level" category. But the M3 is certainly part of the mid-level category. Also, vehicles such as the Lincoln Town Car or Cadillac DTS feature interiors as plush and luxurious as those of the Mercedes-Benz S-Class or BMW 7 Series, yet are classified as mid-luxury due to their relatively low MSPs...". Again, no reference has been provided to verify why M3 is "certainly" a part of "mid-level" category. Also, the insert "such as lincoln town car or Cadillac DTS feature interiors as plush and luxurious" and so on.
- Manufacturer's web-sites, New Car Test Drive, and common knowledge. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- 15. "...The entry-level luxury forms the beginning classification of the luxury vehicles; competition in this segment is typically fierce. It features vehicles with an MSP approximately between $29,000 and $36,000, a relatively high degree of comfort and is manufactured by luxury brand. If the vehicle is manufactured by a non-luxury marque its base MSP should exceed approximately $36k and it must place an emphasis on comfort...".
Very strong language has been used which is clearly POV. "fierce" and "relatively high degree" have been used but are not verifiable. No references have been linked to this statement. You put in the term fierce. If you consider your writing POV than quite frankly, that's not my problem and not anything I should be accused of writing. Please don't accuse me of putting in POV writing that I didn't write, please don't try to "frame" me. We have history and your talk page is still accessible over its history, no word on wikipedia is ever lost, so please don't try and frame and intimidate me. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
My earlier comment: Yeah, well. You wrote more than half of that so... out goes everything except for the pricing guidelines which are referenced. Signaturebrendel
Further Lack of References
- 16. "...This segment mostly includes the bottom vehicles in the line-up of luxury brands as well as the top-of-the-line models of some non-luxury brands. Vehicles in this segment include the Lincoln Zephyr, BMW 3 Series, Lexus IS, Audi A4, Mercedes C-class, Infiniti G35, Acura TL, and the Jaguar X-Type. It should, however, be considered that some of entry-level luxury vehicles have upgrades which put them into the class above them. For example, while the Lincoln LS V6 is an entry-level luxury vehicle, the LS V8 is due to its pricing a mid-level luxury vehicle...".
The pricing of the cars prove this please tell me whether or not you want me to include the manufacturer's web-sites to ref this statement. Thanks. Signaturebrendel 01:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
This statement is illegitimate until a reference citing it is provided. No it isn't. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
My earlier comment: The pricing of the cars prove this please tell me whether or not you want me to include the manufacturer's web-sites to ref this statement. Thanks. Signaturebrendel 01:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- 17. "...A luxury SUV much like a luxury car is a relatively expensive vehicle that features a higher emphasis on comfort and quality than its mainstream counterparts. Even though luxury SUVs do not necessarily feature more comfort or a higher quality than sedans, they tend to be more expensive than luxury sedans. The top-of-the-line SUVs of American and Japanese luxury car makers out price their flagship sedans. The flagship SUV Cadillac Escalade, for example, has a base MSP of approximately $57,280, versus $41,991 for the flagship DTS. This scenario, however, does not hold true for European automakers, where the flagship sedans are still priced above the top-of-the-line SUV..."
This paragraph under "Luxury SUV (United States)" is again not referenced and is therefore illegitimate until it is cited by a reputable and verifiable reference.
In Western Europe, different classifications are sometimes used than in the US. While most luxury cars are considered luxury cars in both Europe and the US, the entry-level segment is not. In Germany cars with MSPs of approximately over $20k are classified as "Mittelklasse" or Middle-Class, "Obere Mittelklasse" or Upper-Middle-Class, and "Oberklasse" or Upper-class.
Middle-Class vehicles are the equivalent of entry-level luxury cars in the US such as the BMW 3 Series, Mercedes-Benz C-Class or the Audi A4. These vehicles are not considered to be luxury cars.
Upper-Middle-Class vehicles are the equivalent of mid-level luxury cars in the US. They include vehicles such as the BMW 5 Series, Mercedes-Benz E-Class, and the Audi A6. These vehicles are considered to be luxury vehicles.
Upper-Class vehicles are the equivalent of high-end and ultra luxury vehicles in the US. They include vehicles such as the BMW 7 Series, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, and the Audi A8..."
- German wikipedia, and ADAC (German Automobile Club) as well as VDA (German association of car manufacturers). Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
This entire section is not cited and is therefore illegitimate at the moment. No reference has been provided. Samstayton 01:15, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Not ture, please see the comments above I added today; they should address all concerns. Thank you. Best Regards, Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Archiving of parts of the discussion page
This discussion page will, to say the least, make a very undesirable imprssion on visitors. I would hereby like to delete or archive it. Any objections, or thoughts? Thank you. Signaturebrendel 06:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- I was thinking about that... I agree, it wouldn't come out great for readers. I was going to have it archived for length anyway. I think it would be best to archive it, in the chance that someone else might have a similar discussion. So, I vote archive. How do you feel about it? I hope you have no hard feelings in this wiki-editting war. I was trying to just make the article more encompassing and legitimate. I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings... in case I did. Zouf 21:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Sections with references
The sections with references are okay. They can be included. But the other statements in this article are illegitimate and need immediate attention. Samstayton 01:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- All lists of vehicles are refernced. There is reference to prove that the Entry-level segment starts and ends at the indicated tresholds and we have a complete list of all entry-level luxury, mid-level luxury as well as high-end and ultra-luxury vehicles and the guidlines by which to define these segments. I think I have addressed all your concerns. If you have any further questions please reply below. Thank you. Best Regards, Signaturebrendel 02:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
No, this article needs all the references, which have not been provided. This article is illegitimate and should be deleted. Samstayton 02:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Deleted? Just because it needs some references doesn't mean it needs to be deleted, you know. --ApolloBoy 02:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Please be more specific. You have to discuss the points you made, point by point. Okay you said there is nor reference for the BMW 5-Series being mid-level but there is. We have defenition of what Mid-level mean, between $40k and $60k right. So if you go to BMW.com you'll find that the 5-Series mtaches that category. Alrighty? Then you said the statement that a top-of-the-line 5-Series (M5, which well is actually its own model) might reach up into the High-end segment is unrefernced, but it isn't. Go to BMW.com and you will see how expensive the M5 gets. See, the 5-Series is an example, but the status of all vehicles mentioned is referenced. Please tell me how your concern have not been addressed poroperly and please be specific. You might find it to be easiest if you reply to the comments I made regarding your 16 points above. We gotta go trhough this point by point if you want to make this a better article. Also one template is enough, eh? And no we don't need to use footnotes for every statement like you did for the X-Type. We just need some general refs at the bottom of the article. Thank you. Best Regards, Signaturebrendel 02:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
ENTRY LEVEL LUXURY CARS
Just see this site that includes a guide for entry level luxury vehicles... [1]
- Yes, those are all entry-level luxo cars. I'll incoperate this into the article as a reference for the entry-level section. Rergards, Signaturebrendel 23:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Upon the guidelines set by the source mentioned both S40,S60,9-3,159,A4 are entry-luxury sedans.You mention in the article that the US prices set the guidelines on wether a company is luxury or not.So Acura is not a luxury brand and Audi is... As all of these companies' sales come from cars of more than 25000 Euro,they are all luxury makes.All of them!Mercedes or Jaguar are not the same as Audi or Volvo but that does not change that all are luxo brands.Just see that only 10% of vehicles sold in Belgium in 2005 cost above 24000 Euro.The true middle class that can buy luxury vehicles is the wealthiest 20% of a society.Just see the definition for true middle class in the Wikipedia.The belgians are not poor,they have the same income as germans.So definetely these cars are luxury ones...
- I wrote the article on middle class here on WP ;-) That aside the S40 is not a luxo car in the US. The S60 may be seen as an entry-level luxo car. Audi is above Volvo in the US, on the same level as MB. Remember that all sections of this article regarding different segments only talk about the US. Also, Volvo does not have one car starting above $40k in the US. In Eruope that may be different. So feel free to edit the section regarding the European market. Also in Germany the medain price was 24,000 Euro, meaning that half of all cars sold in Germany were over 24k E. In the US the median was $26,000. Perhaps, Belgians are smarter and don't waste so much money on cars ;-) Signaturebrendel 01:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
As Audi is above Volvo and Acura in the same level as Volvo why in the article you mention Audi as a near luxury maker and Acura a luxury maker?
Finally give me references for 24000 Euro for Germany or 26000$ for the US....I gave you the reference for Belgium...And why we should take into account Germany and not e.g. France?Germany is not the same as the whole of Europe in the car market.Germany is the only European country that there are no speed limits in Autobahns,there are no toll stations.They also buy bigger and more expensive cars than all the other Europeans(compressors,turbos,big engines etc).Go to the same income big countries such as Italy or France and you will change your mind.... You also mentioned Forbes Autos.See the closest competitors of Volvo S40 [2] Eventually a luxury car is not only defined by its price but by its refinement,quality perceived etc....
- You didn't give one for Belgium. I'll check the listings that must be an error Audi should be above Volvo and Acura. Also, please add, she should take into account all we can! I just added Germany and the US because thet's the two markets about which I know a lot. I don't know much about the French market and am thus not able to write about it. If you know something I don't add it! Also maybe your right that "Germans buy bigger and more expensive cars than all the other Europeans(compressors,turbos,big engines etc)." Yes that's true-Germans do own more cars than any other Eruopean country. The price guidelines I provide apply only to the US and Germany. Again, if you know more markets and the corresponding price guidelines for these markets add them. BTW: A luxo car is about price and comfort, but mainly price, read the article of luxury good. Luxury is defined economic pheonoma. Regards, Signaturebrendel 03:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I am an economist and I know what a luxury product is.And for Europe all these european car brands described as near luxury are luxury brands..I mentioned the classification of car registrations in Belgium in price categories above our Buick discussion.If you have not seen that,here it is:[3]. "Just see the average car spending in Belgium,a country that has the same household income as Germany...it's much lower although Belgium is a car producing country... The biggest price category is that of 14673-17352(19.3%) and if you make the statistics the geometry median(50%)is at this price tag(14763-17352Euro)... The higher 20% of car sales comes from cars that cost more than 22310 Euro."
- Well that's fine, then perhaps in Blegium the definition of a luxury car is different. Also you provided me with a "median." I, however, provided you with an average. I think as an economist you are well aware of the difference. As I said before, different markets, different guidelines. In Germany a Passat is seens as the average joe car. Maybe Germans just spend more of their income on cars that the Belgiums. But Volvo is not in the same category as BMW. And in the US where Volvos are apperantly quite a bit cheaper than in Europe, Volvo isn't yet a luxo car maker. It might be in Belgium, but not in the US. So, add a section for Belgium. Here's what the average American spends: [4] But remember just because Volvo isn't lux in the US, doesn't mean that it is not a luxo brand somewhere else. BTW: I wrote the article on Household income in the United States and am trying to make international comparisons, so could you give me a link to those household income statistics you have. Thx. Regards, Signaturebrendel 17:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
The median is always better than the average,I hope you know it... Here is the average disposable income of households in Nordic countries [5]
For Sweden look at[6] or [7] for household finances in Sweden.As I am greek and I live in Greece here are the greek statistics.Unfortunately there are no data in english for 2005.So i give them to you... Households' month total expenditure UP TO 750€/month: 408917 households(10.24%), 751-1100 €/month: 564531 households(14.13%), 1101-1450€/month: 522860 households(13.10%), 1451-1800€/month: 480402 households(12.03%), 1801-2200€/month: 471172 households(11.8o%), 2201-2800€/month: 538062 households(13.48%), 2801-3500€/month: 421341 households(10.55%), higher than 3500€/month: 585689 households(14.67%), Total households :3992964(100%) Generally ou should have in mind that black market in Greece consists 40% of GDP(not included in GDP).It has to be mentioned that 80,05% of Greeks live in their own home.In rural areas this comes at 96.96% ownership-occupancy.In rural areas live the households with the lowest incomes but there is no need to pay for rent...In urban areas it is eliminated at 73.53%(mainly foreign immigrants do not own a house)
As you understand the median household income in Greece is at about 24000€/year.
For Austria see [8]and here [9] You may also find more information here:[10]
- Thank you very much, I apreciate it. I will use this data on my Household income in the United States article for the purpose of international comparison. Look for in about two days, when I have some more time. Thanks. Signaturebrendel 15:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Why have you put Alfa Romeo among the luxury brands and not Volvo.Alfa rommeo has not a car costing more than 50000Euro.Volvo has cars that cost up to 90000Euro(XC90 4.4 V8 in Greece) or 53965£ in the UK!Saab the same with 9-7X9-5 is also costlier than Alfa 166 and accounts for abig part of Saab sales.The same for V70 of Volvo.The demand for these two brands increases with the rise of income,so they are luxury brands,not the same as Jaguar,Mercedes or BMW but comparable with Audi,Alfa Romeo,Acura and Infiniti.I have seen a new source for car sales in Europe.Austria boosts a bigger GDP per capita than Germany,just see the rankings...According to the greek magazine 4troxoi which is the most prominent in its sector magazine in Greece and analyses the car sales in each country says that 36.7%of car sales(2005)represent cars with horsepower between 92-120hp,20.9% for cars with 55-74hp(there are such cars in Europe,you may ignore it)and only 24.1% for all cars above 120hp!!!!!The category between 74 and 92hp is not mentioned but it must be the remaining 18.3% of total Austrian sales for 2005.
- Well GDP per capita isn't a very good measure of wealth, nonetheless Austria is a wealthy as Germany. In the US there are no Volvos hitting the $90k mark, not even close. Again, perhaps it is different in other markets, so feel free to mention that in the article. You are right if strictly following the definition of a luxury good, Volvo and Alfa would qualify. But with cars one needs to consider more than that. And in the US, according to the most prominent authority on what is a luxury car, KBB and other press publications, Volvo, Saab, and Alfa are semi-lux because they are not put in the same field as Cadillac, Lincoln, Mercedes, BMW, Jaguar, Infiniti, or Lexus. Of course you may put in a new section where you dicuss all those statistics you are mentioning and where you can describe the relationship between a luxury good and a luxury car. (I did put Alfa back under semi-lux) Regards, Signaturebrendel 17:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello Brendel,here is the site from the 'NEW YORK TIMES' suggesting that both S40 and S60 are luxury cars in the US.Just respond me responsibly because you insist on KBB...I think that NEW YORK TIMES are a much more reliable source...Itis mentioned that S40 has a lower price but it can be equipped with luxury items as it is built by a luxury car maker.The fact that a car is not the same as Cadillac does not mean that it is not a luxury car.And there are no semi-luxury products,there are only normal and luxurygoods.Semi-luxury is an invention of your own in the economic theory!
Just see:[11]
- The term near-luxury is not my invention. Google it, there are 266,000 hits. Please note that the definition of luxury car and luxury good are not quite the same. Also the NY Times is my national newspaper of choice but it isn't where I'd go for car pricing. That's KBB, which only does car pricing and isn't a newspaper-car dealers use it to determine their prices.
That said, Volvo is not in the same league as Lincoln, Cadillac or Jaguar. I think we agree on that. Now, what should be call Volvo then. Volvo certainly is above the mainstream, I have never argued it isn't. I just think the US section of this article should reflect that Volvo isn't quite in the same league as Audi or Cadillac. So, I called it what the press tendes to call the S40 or S60, near or semi-luxury. What is your proposal? Signaturebrendel 17:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
The fact that you do not trust when buying a car the New York Times is something subjective and no objective,as my opinion is.Even in one site that the car is mentioned as luxury then it is unfair to have a subjective point of view,thus the classification would be false.We should not start arguing wether a site is good or not. My proposal is to gather all the brands at the luxury nameplate and avoid semi-luxury definition.The semi-luxury defintition should be used only for cars and not for brands.Volvo,Saab and Alfa Romeo are all luxury brands but Volvo C30 or S40,Alfa Romeo 147,Audi A3 and BMW 1 are not proper luxury cars as their price is too low for being considered as luxury cars but they carry luxury brands,so they are semi-luxury cars.I have already proved you that for example Volvo sales come in majority from cars costing more than 30000$.Its model with the highest sales is the Volvo XC90,a luxury SUV.Do you think that one would buy a Volvo XC90 at the same money as Mercedes M or BMW X5 if (s)he considered that the product he would buy was not as good as the others.Noway!Think of it.Americans buy Volvo XC90 instead of buying the US made X5,M at the same price!They would not do it if they thought that Volvo products are inferior to them.The same happens with Volvo cars generally.So we should put all the brands refered at the article as luxury brands and make a sub article refering to cars that are not luxury(they are premiums though) but carry luxury brand names.
- Okay, how about we add the sentence "These marques may be refered to as luxury brands:" at the top. This way, the subjective nature of the listing is shown. I guess if you can reference it, then go ahead and merge the semi and full luxo brands lists. But please add the by me proposed sentence at the top. Signaturebrendel 19:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Where exactly at the top you want me to add the phrase?Finally I have already given you some references for luxury makers.I should also add that Volvo prices are similar with that of Audi in the US.The only exception is only S40 with the 2.4l(170ps) engine wich costs 24000$ but without the geartronic(automatic transmission) which is popular in the US.With that added it costs 25500$...Audi e.g. has not such an engine imported car in the US.The S40 T5(218ps) has the same price as the Audi A4 2.0T(200ps) although Volvo S40 is 4inches smaller in length!In the same length as A4 is the Volvo S60(180inches) which costs 30885$ for the equivalent engine(2.5T,208hp) when the Audi A4 costs 28240!!!!!Volvo is undoubtedly at the same level as Audi even in the US,so it deserves to be called a luxury maker even for the US!!!
- Well add the references to the section and I'll add the phrase "These marques may be refered to as luxury brands." I wouldn't say Audi is at the same level as Volvo, it has a more prestigous image and its Median Selling Price is quite a bit higher ($38k vs. $34k). Nonetheless, go ahead revise the luxo car list according to your sources. I will, however, add a note that according to KBB Volvo isn't at the same level with Cadillac, BMW or Lincoln. Signaturebrendel 18:35, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Why this stance towards Volvo?Audi is also not the same as BMW or Cadillac but you did not make such reference...Please do not add such a subjective note.You may add that some luxo companies are more prestigious than the others in general...and that's objective
SEE here the main competitors of Volvo C70 according to the british Autocar [12]
You may also see this Top Gear article for the all new Volvo C30.See at this page its main competitors:Audi A3,BMW 1,Alfa GT... [13]
You may also see Volvo XC90 Top Gear review which had been given the BEST PREMIUM SUV PRIZE from Top Gear.You are conspicuous against Top Gear?I have to mention that XC90 is Volvo's best selling car(more than 20% of Volvo sales)...
Finally something that you do not want but it really is especially for Europe.Volvo S40 refered as a compact executive car at Top Gear car's review!! See : [14]
- "You may add that some luxo companies are more prestigious than the others in general...and that's objective"- That what I intended. I have nothing against Volvo, they do make a fine car. I just don't see it up there with Jaguar, Lincoln or BMW. I do think we have found a compromise though, right. Signaturebrendel 05:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Here I'll add some quotes. From What Car?: "The Volvo is not cheap for a small family car but the S40’s quality and high levels of standard equipment justify the price tag" [15], "[...] good enough to tempt buyers out of compact execs." [16] From Auto Express: "The S40 is a slightly strange car. Volvo say it has been designed to battle with the Audi A3 and BMW 1-Series, but the saloon bodystyle pushes it into the compact executive sector - competing with the BMW 3-Series, Audi A4 and... the Volvo S60!" [17] 4Car says on the S40 "It looks like a Volvo S60 - or does it? Volvo's new S40 is slightly smaller, fitting just below a BMW 3-Series while the S60 slots in above." [18] Besides, this page talks about the C30 as a "premium compact hatchback" and adds: "The Volvo C30 is that new car, designed to steal buyers from the A3, the BMW 1-Series and the Alfa 147 (or its replacement) [...] In essence the C30 is an S40 saloon with 22cm chopped off the tail, reclothed in a three-door body with all-new external sheet metal." [19] On the S60, 4Car writes: "Model-for-model, it's largely in line with the BMW 3 Series - a little dearer than an Audi A4, but cheaper than a Mercedes C-Class." [20]
Another hint: in Spain, the C-Class 200 CDI (122 hp) goes for € 34.150, the S60 2.4 D5 (126 hp) for € 31.400, the 318d (122 hp) for € 31.000 and the A4 2.0 TDI (140 hp) for € 31.150 — the C-Class is slightly better equipped than the other three. In contrast, the S40 2.0 D (136 hp) costs only € 28.700. [21] Considering the lower trim levels, the S40 2.0 D starts at € 26.500 and has another close rival, the Jetta 2.0 TDI (140 hp) at € 26.100.
What I suggest is to refer to the Volvo C30 as a premium small family car, the same as the Audi A3 and BMW 1 Series; to the S40 as its saloon derivative and to the V50 as its estate derivative. Remember that it is said the 1 Series may spawn a saloon version, which would compete directly against the S40. Finally, I see the S60 as the "natural" compact executive car, as it is sized, powered and priced similarly to the German trio, the Alfa Romeo 159, Lexus IS, Jaguar X-Type, Volvo 9-3 and the kind. -- NaBUru38 20:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- An another verification of the fact that entry level luxury cars in the US are real luxury cars in Europe is the fact that Mercedes won't introduce small luxury cars in the US market.Here is an article from Reuters saying that "Maier said a 6-cylinder C-Class Mercedes-Benz -- a posh car in Europe -- was seen as an entry-level model for the brand in North America." [22] (This post was left by 87.203.140.1)
- Perhaps, that's ture in some parts of Europe. But in Germany the C-Class is a Mittelklasse wagen or "Middle class car." Few in Germany see a C-Class as posh. Also keep in mind that at current conversion rates, the average German who spents roughly $23k € on his or her car, may outspend the average American who spent $26k USD on a car with a sticker of $31k. Not all European markets are the same-economics as well as culuture play a role. The people in some countries may very well spent a larger percentage of their income on cars than in another. The article you cited is interesting and refers to the prestige of MB. Mercedes has perhpas more prestige in the US than in Europe (incld. Germany). Here you must also consider that Europeans, or at least Germans, are used to seeing Mercedes-Benz police cars, ambulances, gargage trucks, and big rigs, all w/ the 3-pointed star up front-this already reduces the prestige of the brand to the point where the A-class and B-class are no longer seen as faux-pas. Regards, Signaturebrendel 21:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Paying for the Emblem (BMW example)
"For example, because of its prestige, the BMW 3 Series might cost more than the same car if it was sold under a non-luxury marque"
- I think this is the least appropriate example to give. The engine technology, no front-wheel drive and overall build quality make the 3 series (and probably all BMW's) one of the (if not "the") top cars in its segment, regardless of the badge. An example about platform-sharing cars would be more meaningful; like one about "prestige" Audis and their significantly cheaper cousins Skodas, [despite the almost same build quality, or one about a Jag X-Type and a Mondeo or Mazda 6. 85.108.52.116 12:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- See Veblen good. That the BMW 3 Series is superior to the competition is your opinion, and we can't have opinion on WP (including those of press reviewers' unless they're citing facts). The BMW plaque does add to the price becuase of BMW's image, whether that's a justified image or not. Pricing and prestige may have little to do with the acutal quality of the product. Hypthetically, if Skoda was to build a car as good as the 3-Series, it would still cost less-despite the same quality. BMW has an image and that image drives up demand, and thus price. How don't get me wrong, I am a luxury car owner myself and do beleive that there is a world of difference between luxury and non-luxury cars, but I also know that a certain desirable "brand" image drives up the price. Signaturebrendel 15:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- I know what a Veblen good is, i'm an economist myself :) You're right, we're are all in the same game, willing to pay more for some particular badge (I'm considering buying an A4 - a car not actually better than the Skoda Superb materially). I don't deny the existence of the "BMW badge premium" on the price of a 3 series. What i'm trying to point out is that a 3 series car is one of the least appropriate examples to give here. You say "...unless they're citing facts"; well if you really know about cars (the technical aspects) you'll understand i'm talking about facts. The examples I proposed are plainly stronger examples because the cars I mentioned there are technically identical. Again, I don't deny the effect of the badge on a car's price, but the badge is not the only reason behind the price difference; "if Skoda was to build a car as good as the 3-Series...", well it can't or at least won't.. :) - By the way, we don't really disagree, right?! Mine is just a tiny suggestion. 85.107.25.15 20:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying, the BMW 3-Series might not be the best example, even though the concept still aplies to it. Okay, we can also use the Audi A4 if you think its more appropriate. BTW: The things is that the word "best" is always kind of POV, yes you cite facts, like the decibel noise level, etc... but still best depends on the consumer's preverences. So, as we agree on the badge effect I replaced BMW w/ Audi. Regards, Signaturebrendel 21:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- I completely agree.. :) Thanks for the nice discussion by the way.. 85.108.54.73 19:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Virtually all opinion and little can be done about it?
I don't believe this article provides any reliable insight without being opinion based. There are marques that people (myself included) consider luxurious that others may not. There will be some that many consider luxurious vehicles, but by and large if somebody believes a Volvo is, no amount of numbers or comparatives will truly change the perception - since that is what luxury is.
I think the Volvo and Saab brands are luxury vehicles as much as Mercedes or BMW. This is opinion, but then so is the notion that Mercedes or BMWs are luxurious. One could say the Ford 'ghia' range that were available in the Uk were previously a 'luxury' model of their car.
If we are to call luxury are specific series of features (sat nav/heated seats/electric seats etc.) then the ballpark moves on continuously - remember when only luxury cars had multiple airbags/power steering). If we are to go on price-range then we are merely pointing out expensive cars and calling them luxury by value alone. If we are to go by 'prestige' then we are entirely in the territory of opinion.
I'm open to suggestions (not that they are particularly needed the article is quite lengthy) but as it stands I don't personally feel the article is like that of an encyclopedia.
Anyhoo good chat everybody some impressive stuff above! ny156uk 19:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I wrote this article a long time ago (in WP time). Back then WP poloicies were not applied as strictly and another users was involved in the process with mean many parts of this article are the results of compromises. The ballpark does move, as the market is dynamic and, yes, some Fords and VWs (e.g. Touareg & Pheaton) may be considered luxury vehicles. As for prestige, you're right there is not even an objective definition of what prestige is. So, we go by pricing and media releases, that state certain cars to be luxury vehicles. We then mention those brands and vehicles and try to identify common pricing trends between these vehicles. Price is so important here because the idea or a luxury good is an economic concept; thus the concept of luxury cars is mostly based on pricing-as it is too an economic concept. See the luxury good article. Hope that answers some of your concerns. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 20:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
MERCEDES BENZ C-CLASS
Mercedes-Benz c-class is a posh car even for Germany.Germany is not the wealthiest country in Europe as you may think.The UK,Norway,Switzerland,Ireland,Denmark,Sweden,Luxembourg,Austria and others are much wealthier.It is a common car in Germany as many buy it used in lower prices as it is a posh car for the whole of Europe.When the GDP per capita of the US is 40000$ and that of EU-15 average is that of 29000$(22857Euro) you understand that things are much different than the US and that US prices should not be considered as benchmarks for luxury cars.As an economist I know the difference between GDP and household income but I have given you data for household income and average purchase for cars in some countries...Is France a poor country?It has the same income as Germany.And there Mercedes is a posh car.No matter the sum of money they spend on a car.
- I know Germany isn't Europe's wealthiest country. But I have lifed there 60% of my life-time and no one refers to the C-Class as a posh car. (It certainly isn't average, but it isn't posh either) Also GDP per capita is not a good reflection of income, A) its an average, B) Its the economy divided by the number of poeple, and has nothing to do really with how much people actually make (You're an economist you know that). The median income for an American male is $33,000 USD. Beleive it or not rural England has a comparable median household income to the US. France isn't a poor country, but maybe they just spent less on cars, maybe the view their cars differently... there could many non-economic reasons why a car is viewed in a certain way in one country and viewed in another light in another country. In Germany a C-Class is classified as a Mittelklassewagen "Middle class car," an E-Class is a "Obere mittelklasse wagen," Upper-middle class car, an S-Class is a "Oberklasse wagen," upper-class car and a Maybach is a "Luxusklasse wagen," Luxury class wagon. Regardeless of economics, the C-Class which is no more expansive than a nicely equipped VW Passat (the average German car) is not seen as posh car. There could be other reasons, besides income, why the French press consideres the C-Class and posh and the German doesn't-maybe France isn't as much of a car-crazed country?... there could other sociological reasons, apart from economics. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 15:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Editing is necessary for the section describing European SUVs:
Mainstream Japanese manufacturers such as Honda, Nissan and Toyota have slightly more expensive prices than European manufacturers like Ford, Opel, Peugeot and Renault, but are considered to be in the same category as them. Automobile makers like Lancia, Saab and Volvo would fall into the near-luxury manufacturer category , as these brands build cars with better qualities than usual.
As we know Ford is an American manufacturer.
Ford is widely considered in Europe as a german firm although everyone knows that it's an american one.That happens as design,build quality etc of European Fords are similar to that of German Cars.Even in advertising here in Greece they are connected with German superior quality etc...
Chrysler 300 C and Hummer H2
Are they luxury vehicles? Some source says they are. Some says not. I'm confused. Is there any affirmative answer? --Mato Rei 13:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- No there is no affirmative answer. Deciding what vehicle is and isn't a luxury car is a highly subjective topic- it all lies within the eyes of the beholder. Signaturebrendel 16:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Will the entry-level luxury solve the problem? I know 300C can be considered as entry-level luxury. How about H2? Will it be disputed even as an entry-level luxury vehicle? Or it has enough prestige to be an entry-level luxury vehicle? Which answer will that be? --Mato Rei 05:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- It still depends on your view-point. A 300C may be called a luxo car, or not. There arn't any definite guidelines. The H2 may not at all be seen as a luxo car as it is not comfortable-though others only take price into consideration and do see it as a luxo car. I think many publications will probably mention the 300C as an entry-luxo, but unfortunately there are no definite answers. Signaturebrendel 05:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. It's enough for me to know the general views about the cars above. --Mato Rei 12:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Help
The gallery isn't working
- ...and it isn't needed either. A bullet-fomrat list is easier to read and more professional in apperance. All that's needed is picture of a traditional luxe car, a modern luxe car, one from the Eastern Hemisphere, one from the Western Hemisphere (preferably American and European -66% of readers are in the U.S., and around a quarter are in Europe). Signaturebrendel 15:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Untitled section
I took out "geriatric" and wrote "American" instead, since it sounds degrading and unprofessional. Lithdoc 20:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
In what country is this a legal term? Rmhermen 00:56 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
I believe its some sort of legal term in the United States, both for tax and insurance purposes. But, then again, I am a lifetime supporter of the internal combustion boycott; so I don't have a car and don't really know. Pizza Puzzle
This is a strange little article, really just a stub, and needs revising. I don't know why sports cars are listed here, and I doggone sure wouldn't call a Humvee one. "Luxury car" in the US, as far as I know, just refers to a vehicle marketed to buyers who favor comfort over economy or performance. I've never heard of a luxury car tax. There is a gas guzzler tax, but it usually falls on performance models. RivGuySC 03:04, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
The luxury was removed by the Clinton Administartion and the Gas Guzzler Tax applies to all gas guzzling cars regarding whether or not luxury. Gerdbrendel 02:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Chrysler?
Now, I know that the defenition of a "luxury car" is by its price, but Chrysler makes luxury cars at "family prices", as stated in the Chrysler article. Shouldn't we define a luxury car by the amneties it provides and its styling rather that its price? Many of Chrysler's cars CAN be considered luxury cars, not just near-luxury, because of their styling. For example, the Chrysler 300, Chrysler Pacifica, Chrysler Aspen and the Chrysler Crossfire can all be easily considered luxury cars because of their amneties (power seats, wood paneling, DVD players, sunroof, ect.) Chrysler was on the list before it was taken down because of its price. The pricing rule seems a bit unusual, because luxury cars are defined by quality and not just price. — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 16:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
- May I also add that these Chrysler cars have been called "upscale," "Mercedes-like" and "luxury" vehicles by professional car critics? See: [23] (Pacifica), [24] (300), [25] (Crossfire).
Also, the 300 and PT Cruiser are also sold in limousine versions, along with other luxury vehicles like Lincoln's Town Car.
Evidence:
- — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 01:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Links
What is with the whole link business? When I first added my link to Ultraluxurycar.com on this page, there were four other links, all of which directed to magazines. My link was to an informational site. I am not saying information that was lacking in the page, but I am saying that it would be good for further research. Ten minutes later my link was removed. After three days, I added it back in. The next day, the whole "Link" section was gone. Is it the work of Wikipedia fanatics who don't want Wikipedia to be a "directory of links"? Sure, I could go through and remove every link on every page I find, but what have I accomplished? Absolutely, nothing! Yes, Wikipedia would have no spam links, but all the valid ones would be gone too. I sincerely think that my link is valid and should be used on this page. Zach4636 12:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- I guess I'm the Wikipedia fanatic, here. I'm enforcing the guidelines for external links We already discussed your case on your talk page. I think you have a conflict of interest regarding that link. It should not be added by you, else it just looks like spam. Aside from the COI, we add information to Wikipedia by adding content, not links. --Mdwyer 19:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Joke image
User:71.234.11.63 is adding the image of the Oldsmobile Achieva coupe -- describing it as the pinnacle of luxury! Including this car of course is a good joke! — CZmarlin 12:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thank for your being a good sport and appreciating my humor. Achieva's are truly crapmobiles.--71.234.11.63 20:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Car Pictures
If anybody has a picture of a "Luxury crossover SUV" or a "Luxury pickup truck", I think that this page could really use them. Right now there are pictures of every other type of luxury car except them. I will also try to find applicable pictures. Zach4636 12:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
A Link Section
I think that there should really be an external link section. Not having one detracts from the integrity of the page. Zach4636 21:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Clarification needed
Whoever wrote this sentence really needs to clarify it because it does not make sense:
For vehicles such as smart fortwo, although the base model costs more than the 4/5-door subcompact or compact cars (in some cases, even compact cars loaded with factory options) for the same market, and was sold through luxury brand dealers, are not commonly regarded as luxury vehicles.
Thank you. Zach4636 14:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Arbitrary divisions/ original research?
This whole article seems to be based on rather arbitrary unsourced definitions of what a luxury, ultra-luxury etc car is. I would suggest that the whole article is bordering on original research WP:OR. There is no accepted universal definition of what constitutes a 'mid-luxury', 'high-end luxury' or any other type of luxury vehicle and it's not Wikipedia's job to create one. I think it should be rewritten to reflect this rather than attempting to state as a matter of fact that car X is 'entry-level luxury' and car Y is 'mid-luxury'. As it stands, the article is a collection of opinion presented as fact. Dino246 (talk) 07:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Renewed discussion about what a luxury car is
See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Luxury_Cars. Ros0709 (talk) 17:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up. Anyone who's been involved or observing the arguments here over the last few months should click above and vote 'delete'. The only thing we've basically all agreed on here is that there is no accepted definition of what a luxury vehicle is so to attempt to make a list of them is ludicrous.Dino246 (talk) 18:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
What the hell is wrong with you people?
There used be a huge article on luxury vehicles a few months back, why did it get downsized into something useless and completely amaturely made???
- Please bring back the old article, we're not going to debate what a luxury cars is because it's a waste of time, everyone today has a pretty clear perception of what a luxury car is, like Mercedes, BMW, Audi or Rolls Royce. Now you want to debate if a luxury car is a tree or a rock or any type of concept you deem fit...
- Please bring back the old article. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.162.63.62 (talk) 22:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- From article history I can see that User:842U was one who downsized the article in April 2008. From his edits you can see that 842U just does not like the term claiming it is not official and subjective. This is very
NPOV (sorry, typo). Downsizing article from 22 kb to 1 kb looks almost like vandalism. 842U, be aware that term "luxury car" is used by motor press in very objective meaning. See a section below for more information. I would agree with 62.162.63.62. Netrat (talk) 13:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
This is a good discussion. NPOV means: neutral point of view. So thanks. The article can always be reverted. This isn't a power struggle. There had been much of discussion on this page regarding the original research nature of the old article. There were no references, no objectivity, nothing to verifiably define a "luxury" vehicle. In fact, there appear to be very few definitions around the world for what defines the term "luxury" when applied to a vehicle. And that is the bottom line about what a Wikipedia article is supposed to be about: verifiabilitiy, and reliable reference material. Where is that?
The revision reflected that consensus. Anyone who wants to work on the article, providing clear, verifiable, information based on strong third-party independent source... is welcome to.
If the "motoring press" uses this term objectively... where is the "motoring press'" definition? That should actually be a very easy to find answer if it is in fact available. Who is "the motoring press?"
Look at this statement: "everyone today has a pretty clear perception of what a luxury car is" from above. OK, who is this everyone? Show us a reference. Where is this so called "clear perception?" Show us a reference. What makes an Audi a luxury car? A Suzuki SX4 with standard Naviagation system, arguably high build quality... is that not a luxury car? Where is the cut-off? 842U (talk) 14:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- K. "where is the "motoring press'" definition?" - I believe the motoring press definition is pretty obvious. "Who is "the motoring press?" - how about European Car of the Year jury? You probably know that this council includes top industry journalists only. "There were no references, no objectivity, nothing to verifiably define a "luxury" vehicle. In fact, there appear to be very few definitions around the world for what defines the term "luxury" when applied to a vehicle." - true, but your version is not very well sourced as well. What makes an Audi a luxury car? A Suzuki SX4 with standard Naviagation system, arguably high build quality... is that not a luxury car? Where is the cut-off? - the only reference that supports your version (the PDF version of the marketing report) answers this question by including only few select brands in its report. The revision reflected that consensus. - would it ever be a consensus, there would not be any rollbacks, right? I can see at least two of them in the history. Netrat (talk) 22:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- The old version was extremely POV. It was almost entirely unreferenced original research, it was heavily Americacentric and it read like a very long haphazard collection of contradictory opinion phrased as fact. Luxury Vehicle is a subjective term applicable to vehicles of all shapes, values and sizes and the previous article took it as an objective car classification which it desperately and unsuccessfully tried to define. The current version is also quite flawed but I would much rather build on this than go back to the old one and start trying to clear that up because it was pretty much beyond repair. Dino246 (talk) 16:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I just want to ask why the real definition of a luxury car is so important to 842U??? I understand and respect your right to challange what you think is false and misinformation but why downsize a perfectly made article? I feel the article is incomplete now as a result of this downsizing. Also, why put British and US classifications of a luxury vehicle on a page that is intended to contain information of luxury vehicles, shouldn't we just make a seperate Wikipedia article for the definitions/classifications of a luxury vehicle and put the old article back??? Just something to think about... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.162.63.62 (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Interwikis
Interwikis point to articles about the European F-segment (North America: luxury full-size car), not about the luxury concept in general as this article does. --NaBUru38 (talk) 00:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- The problem is not with interwiki, but with the contents of THIS article. It should include F-segment information, since the truth is in most markets outside USA, "luxury car" equals "F-segment". There are two editors who have their own concept of what luxury car is (marketing term that can be applied to any vehicle of any brand and any body style), and they are pushing it in this article. They succeeded in finding a single source that supports their concept, but:
- Only one source supports this concept
- The article ignores the meaning of the term as used by reliable motoring press
- There's absolutely NO consensus about the version that "marketing term that can be applied to any vehicle of any brand and any body style", as can be seen from numerous attempts to restore the old content. And Wikipedia:CONSENSUS is one of the most fundamental rules. Netrat (talk) 20:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm glad you agree that European F-segment equals North American luxury full-size car (in fact F-segment is more like simply "full-size car", however most mainstream American full-size cars are not large enough to be listed in the F-segment (for example, Dodge Intrepid was an E-segment car) while US-made luxury full size cars are larger than mainstream ones, thus "F-segment"="luxury full-size car" sounds closer to truth). If fact there WAS a major section of luxury full-size car in this article before those two came and kinda "downsized" the article. Netrat (talk) 20:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Classification
842U keeps removing car size classification template, as well as any mentions of F-Segment. Why that's wrong: 1. "Luxury car" may be a marketing term in American English, but in British English it refers to F-Segment cars. Sources: [26], [27], [28], [29]. What Car? and AutoExpress are premier UK auto magazines. Netrat (talk) 13:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I am not the only one who removed that information, so go easy. Not one of these references defines the term "Luxury Vehicle." They use the term without defining it. And it may well be their own idiosyncratic pereception of "luxury vehicle"... without a definition or some reference, there is no way to tell. I also don't see on your links, a clear connection between F segment and luxury vehicle. 842U (talk) 14:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm with 842U here. I'm normally quite quick to accuse an article of being Americacentric (as so many on Wikipedia are) but in this case I don't think it's the case. Luxury Vehicle is not an objective car classification in the UK either. Dino246 (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- "Not one of these references defines the term "Luxury Vehicle." They use the term without defining it." - still, note that they only include F-class sedans in the category. No Cayennes, no Gallardos, no Escalades (Capitain Obvious: I mean, no luxury SUVs, no luxury coupes, no luxury trucks - strictly sendans). No 3er or A4 as well (Capitain Obvious: I mean, no compacts or mid-sizers from luxury brands - strictly full-size cars). "without a definition or some reference, there is no way to tell" - well, I cannot see a strick definition in the source that supports your version as well. "I also don't see on your links, a clear connection between F segment and luxury vehicle" - true, I'm still looking for such sources. Just wait. Netrat (talk) 23:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- The reason the terms F-segment, D-segment etc are used is to deliberately avoid using subjective terms like luxury, family or executive. Dino246 (talk) 04:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- This does not anwser other arguments I've listed Netrat (talk) 13:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Not one of the sources you provided makes a direct equivalence between 'luxury car' and 'F-segment'. That various car magazines have a subjective annual award for the best 'luxury car' does not mean that there is an objective definition that defines what a 'luxury car' is and certainly doesn't suggest that there is an internationally accepted one. In some parts of the world even a lowly Fiesta is an extravagant luxury. Even without going to extremes, there are plenty places where the inclusion of such hedonistic accessories as electric windows and a CD player makes a car into the luxury model of the range, described perfectly legitimately as a 'luxury vehicle'. Dino246 (talk) 16:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Not one of the sources you provided makes a direct equivalence between 'luxury car' and 'F-segment. - please re-read my original message. My point was (and is) British motoring press uses "luxury car" only for largest sedans on the market. F-segment is completely different issue. Netrat (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- That various car magazines have a subjective annual award for the best 'luxury car' does not mean that there is an objective definition that defines what a 'luxury car' is - These magazines are reliable sources when it comes to car market. Can you explain why they include luxury SUVs/hatches/estates/coupes/roadsters in different catregories thus excluding them from "luxury car" category? Netrat (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- and certainly doesn't suggest that there is an internationally accepted one. - an object does not need to be international to be listed in Wikipedia. Netrat (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- You have not answered any of my arguments. I guess this is because you have no counter arguments, and it's no wonder as "Can you explain why they include luxury SUVs/hatches/estates/coupes/roadsters in different catregories thus excluding them from "luxury car" category" argument is pretty strong, but still - not answering the question is a violation of Wikipedia:ETIQUETTE rule. Netrat (talk) 20:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- This does not anwser other arguments I've listed Netrat (talk) 13:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- The reason the terms F-segment, D-segment etc are used is to deliberately avoid using subjective terms like luxury, family or executive. Dino246 (talk) 04:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
This isn't about you or your arguments or your conjecture. It's about verifiable, neutral, third party information.842U (talk) 20:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry if you thought I was ignoring you, Netrat, I didn't see that you'd added to this debate. I still stand by my argument that the categories chosen by a couple of car magazines for their annual awards can not in any way, shape, or form be considered an accepted definition of "Luxury Vehicle". If you want to add that "Auto Express considers a luxury vehicle to be xyz" then go ahead. Dino246 (talk) 07:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Magazines are insiders to the business, their survival depends on advertising income from manufacturers... they are not neutral in their point of view. 842U (talk) 13:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Weak argument. Like, chemists are insiders to the Chemical Industry, they are not neutral and we should not trust them when it comes to Chemistry. Netrat (talk) 08:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Actually, it would be beeter to have separate articles on luxury vehicle (term applied to any expensieve vehicle), luxury car (market segment: large sedans from premium brands) and F-segment (defined by size), but until we have such articles, all views on luxury cars should be kept in this article. Netrat (talk) 16:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)