Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
GXT

If the Aura is so much better, why is GM playing games?

53 posts in this topic

I thought I'd take a look at the Aura web page and see how GM is selling this comparison with the Accord and Camry.

http://www.saturn.com/saturn/sidebyside/index.jsp

The first tactic is to compare the V6 Aura to the 4Cyl Camry and Accord. Of course they never mention fuel economy. Generally they omit all the categories where the aura is not competitive (e.g. Residual value, interior dimensions (accord has more front and back headroom/shoulder room/hip room, and front legroom (not back)), residual value, suspension, fuel economy, etc.). That is smart, and I understand to sell you want to focus on your strengths, but an item such as fuel economy is too important to omit. This is especially true when you are claiming that your product is so much better.

The second tactic is more misleading. If you click on the link that says "Take a Closer Look: Click for complete specs comparison, including interior, exterior and safety features" at the bottom of the page you see a comparison with what I believe is the Accord LX, and not the SE that was implied on the first page. At least, by the price I assume it is the LE... it is never actually stated anywhere that I can see. This page generally doesn't work very well, but it does do some humorous things like listing the sunroof that wasn’t include on the Aura in the front page as a “Saturn Advantage” as it is optional, while showing the sunroof that was included in the price of the Accord SE on the front page as “Not Available”. In general this is all very misleading. Perhaps GM is just incompetent, but one might assume they were being complacent.

The third and most misleading tactic is how they pretend to be comparing equivalently configured models for a given price.

For example, in the "Aura Pocket Guide" at http://www.saturn.com/saturn/sidebyside/pd...PocketGuide.pdf they list pricing under the heading “Starting MSRP” with a footnote that says, “Based on comparably equipped vehicles. Level of equipment varies.”!! Can anyone explain that to me? Are they trying to imply that the vehicles are comparably equipped? To get the Aura XR from the shown base price of 24,995 to match the level of the Accord EX-L, they would have to add: - A moonroof for $800 , the “Enhanced Convenience Package” for the power passenger seat for $425, the “Premium Trim Package” for the leather seats, steering wheel and heated seats for $800, and $200 for XM radio. That eliminates the supposed $2,000 price advantage of the Aura. If they were trying to match price and not features, they could have included the Accord SE V6 for $24K instead of the $28K EX-L. The only thing that would have changed in their comparison is that the Accord wheels would be 16" instead of 17". But then the Accord would have been less expensive than the Aura. Much of the same tacticts are used on the Aura XE comparison.

While we are on this page, it is incorrect that the Camry XLE V6 comes with 16" Steel wheels. It comes with Alloy wheels. I'm not sure why GM would lie about this one... the Aura still has it beat. Perhaps it was just a mistake. However when you are being dishonest in multiple places and linking to incorrect 3rd party data you have to be careful about when you are blatantly wrong.

Back to the main comparison page, http://www.saturn.com/saturn/sidebyside/index.jsp, note that the footnote by MSRP has changed. The, "Based on comparably equipped vehicles. Level of equipment varies.” Wording is gone. I guess this gave them the freedom to add a couple of packages to the Aura to improve some of the listed specs (e.g. Alloy wheels instead of steel) while at the same time omitting ones that they should have added… like the $800 sunroof or the advanced audio package for $725 to get the 6 disc changer to make the Aura as well equipped as the Accord. However if they had done that then they could have included the Accord V6 SE in their comparison as it would have been almost the exact same price. But then the Accord would have had more HP, traction control, etc. and the Aura wouldn't have looked so good.

I’m sorry I can’t comment more on the Camry comparison as I don’t know much about the Camry. But I am assuming that GM is being just as dishonest with Toyota. Anyways, I think the moral here is clear. When you really have a product that is superior you don't need to play games. I almost feel sorry for the hardcore GMers who are about to be rooked again. But I guess if you don’t do your research then you get what you deserve.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah its not a game just another way of looking at things. FYI the Camry is not as good of a car as the Aura or Accord.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy... we have someone here who can't do research themselves on one site and ridicules others for not doing research...

Fuel economy is listed, interior dimensions are listed...

I don't see why your so concerned about the web-site comparison. No one (except perhaps Toyota and Honda humpers) looks at specs online, sees that one car is better than the other on paper, and then goes and buys that car without driving the others it was compared to. If your beloved Accord is better then the people will go and drive them all, see that the Accord is better, and buy it.

:rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. :withstupid: **This is the second time in a half hour I have used this!**

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People generally consider getting a V6 more expensive than getting a 4-cylinder. The Aura offers V6 at the same price as the 4-cylinders in the competition. This is an advantage for those wanting a V6.

But wait there's more. If fuel mileage is more important to you than engine power, there is the Saturn Greenline hybrid that bases at 22k... still well inside 4-cylinder Accord territory.

If absolute cheapest price is your thing... you're at the wrong dealer. Head on over to your local Chevy dealer and test drive a Malibu. Saturn is more premium now days dontcha know.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I almost feel sorry for the hardcore GMers who are about to be rooked again.

I feel sorry for you wasting a good half hour if not more of your life by doing exactly what GM wanted you to do by visiting Saturn's website, then opening page after page and a .PDF file, scanning over every piece of minutia while running back and forth through Honda and Toyota's beleagured sites to run their lousy Build n' Price apps to determine that GM engaged in an act of travesty worse than Watergate by incorrectly stating the Camry has steel wheels, all the while ignoring that the non-GM third-party AIC Comparator - an application multitudes of manufacturers utilitze - disclaims that it does not guarantee the accuracy of its information.

And since we're all atoning for our sins, why don't we take a closer look at the disingenuous advertising done by Toyota and Honda. Remember the 280hp Avalon? Remember the 270hp Avalon? Oh, how about the 268hp Avalon? The first lie can be blamed on inaccurately-converted horsepower estimates knowing used by a number of Japanese manufacturers for years and years. The second lie, however, is just that...a lie. But I guess its not quite a lie if its +/-2hp; its just an estimate.

I like seeing the $199/mo Accord Value Edition lease special ads on TV, radio, the 'net, and in papers. But what I'd really enjoy is seeing an Accord Value Edition...anywhere. Have you seen one, you know, the 4-cyl 5spd stripper Accord with manual mirrors and locks and two speakers? I haven't. Its because a handful of these cars actually exist and they're so poorly-equipped that no one would buy one if they could even find one. But, for only $3000 more, we'll be glad to move you up into an LX.

Guess the dishonesty goes all around, doesn't it?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have tri-fold hand outs that GM supplies us, comparing the Malibu to the Accord and Camry, exposing all the places where the competition "wins." Neither the newer Aura or the older Malibu truly match up to the Accord/Camry in terms of size. The Accord/Camry are slightly larger than the Malibu/Aura; whereas, the Impala is larger than any of them.

Size does not always matter, nor does HP, or fuel economy numbers. However, the sum of all numbers (particularly PAYMENT :deadhorse: ) is what may sway one discerning consumer one way or the other.

That is, assuming we have "discerning" consumers, and not just sheeple that gobble up and then regurgitate numbers. As Fly points out, the Japanese lie and lie very well. Hyundai got sued a few years ago for doing a lot less than what both Toyota and Honda blatantly got away with last year.

And for GAWD's sake, can we axe the BS about "residual:" a totally fictional number that is obsolete the day someone dreams it up!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted Image
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel sorry for you wasting a good half hour if not more of your life by doing exactly what GM wanted you to do by visiting Saturn's website, then opening page after page and a .PDF file, scanning over every piece of minutia while running back and forth through Honda and Toyota's beleagured sites to run their lousy Build n' Price apps to determine that GM engaged in an act of travesty worse than Watergate by incorrectly stating the Camry has steel wheels, all the while ignoring that the non-GM third-party AIC Comparator - an application multitudes of manufacturers utilitze - disclaims that it does not guarantee the accuracy of its information.

And since we're all atoning for our sins, why don't we take a closer look at the disingenuous advertising done by Toyota and Honda. Remember the 280hp Avalon? Remember the 270hp Avalon? Oh, how about the 268hp Avalon? The first lie can be blamed on inaccurately-converted horsepower estimates knowing used by a number of Japanese manufacturers for years and years. The second lie, however, is just that...a lie. But I guess its not quite a lie if its +/-2hp; its just an estimate.

I like seeing the $199/mo Accord Value Edition lease special ads on TV, radio, the 'net, and in papers. But what I'd really enjoy is seeing an Accord Value Edition...anywhere. Have you seen one, you know, the 4-cyl 5spd stripper Accord with manual mirrors and locks and two speakers? I haven't. Its because a handful of these cars actually exist and they're so poorly-equipped that no one would buy one if they could even find one. But, for only $3000 more, we'll be glad to move you up into an LX.

Guess the dishonesty goes all around, doesn't it?

As usual, Fly demonstrates why he pwns this site.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WAKE UP!

Japan Inc. has been using misleading and deceitful marketing methods for YEARS. What's fair is fair and IMO GM should, eventhough it HASN'T, fabricate all it can to degrade and deflate the artificial value of Japan Inc and it's products.

P.S. I didn't even read your rant because I know it's just another blindly loyal import fan trying to "put GM fans in their places" Just accept that the Aura is a better product and that Toyota and Honda need to try harder next time.

Edited by FUTURE_OF_GM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy... we have someone here who can't do research themselves on one site and ridicules others for not doing research...

Fuel economy is listed, interior dimensions are listed...

Do you have a link?

It isn't on the main page or the pocket sheet. The only place I could find it was on the third party comparison which doesn't really work well and shows the wrong cars.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel sorry for you wasting a good half hour if not more of your life by doing exactly what GM wanted you to do by visiting Saturn's website, then opening page after page and a .PDF file, scanning over every piece of minutia while running back and forth through Honda and Toyota's beleagured sites to run their lousy Build n' Price apps to determine that GM engaged in an act of travesty worse than Watergate by incorrectly stating the Camry has steel wheels, all the while ignoring that the non-GM third-party AIC Comparator - an application multitudes of manufacturers utilitze - disclaims that it does not guarantee the accuracy of its information.

Yes, generally it was a waste of time. It certainly didn't help that I posted it here to be viewed by GM's Biggest Fans.

I don't think I did what Saturn wanted... I'm certainly not going to by an Aura, and I confirmed that their claim of superiority is so weak that it requires games and half-truths to even attempt to substantiate.

As for the lies/inaccuracies on the pocket sheet and the AIC comp that shows the wrong cars and plays games. Sure GM can pretend that they are showing you something, and if you are smart enough to think for yourself they can point to the disclaimer. But it sure shows the Aura's true competitiveness and GM's confidence in it, as well as what they think of their consumers.

And since we're all atoning for our sins, why don't we take a closer look at the disingenuous advertising done by Toyota and Honda. Remember the 280hp Avalon? Remember the 270hp Avalon? Oh, how about the 268hp Avalon? The first lie can be blamed on inaccurately-converted horsepower estimates knowing used by a number of Japanese manufacturers for years and years. The second lie, however, is just that...a lie. But I guess its not quite a lie if its +/-2hp; its just an estimate.

I'm not here to defend Toyota. I could care less about them. If you want to defend GM's purposely misleading campaign to show the benefits of the Aura by saying that Toyota has played games in the past, that is fine. Just realize that what is being conceded is that the Aura isn't actually better.

I like seeing the $199/mo Accord Value Edition lease special ads on TV, radio, the 'net, and in papers. But what I'd really enjoy is seeing an Accord Value Edition...anywhere. Have you seen one, you know, the 4-cyl 5spd stripper Accord with manual mirrors and locks and two speakers? I haven't. Its because a handful of these cars actually exist and they're so poorly-equipped that no one would buy one if they could even find one. But, for only $3000 more, we'll be glad to move you up into an LX.

I don't know, I've never tried to buy or find one. I'm glad to see that you are actively scouring the lots for them and checking the sales sheets to know the relative percentage going out the door. BTW, the LX is 1,500 more, not $3,000. I can see why you were confused about that. $3,000 is about the amount that you would have to add to the Aura in GM's pocket comparison to make it comparably equipped to the Accord (as they imply).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for GAWD's sake, can we axe the BS about "residual:" a totally fictional number that is obsolete the day someone dreams it up!

Ignorance again.....rearing it's ugly head.....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is in the link that compares different cars than what is implied on the main page (with no indication that it is switching models on you... or even any indication of what model is being shown)... the page that doesn't work right with the current version of IE.

But it isn't in the main comparison or the pocket sheet. Perhaps it is me, but if you are really trying to show that your car really is better, then you show the important categories, not just the ones that you are best at.

As I said, I don't blame them. In the end it is marketing (not product).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WAKE UP!

Japan Inc. has been using misleading and deceitful marketing methods for YEARS. What's fair is fair and IMO GM should, eventhough it HASN'T, fabricate all it can to degrade and deflate the artificial value of Japan Inc and it's products.

P.S. I didn't even read your rant because I know it's just another blindly loyal import fan trying to "put GM fans in their places" Just accept that the Aura is a better product and that Toyota and Honda need to try harder next time.

I know you don't actually read my posts, but you should try it sometime.

Or, if you don't like reading my posts, try reading some GM literature:

“Based on comparably equipped vehicles. Level of equipment varies.”

I'd love to know what it actually means.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you don't actually read my posts, but you should try it sometime.

Or, if you don't like reading my posts, try reading some GM literature:

“Based on comparably equipped vehicles. Level of equipment varies.”

I'd love to know what it actually means.

meaning that on some vehicles certain features may not even be available, but they get as close as possible.

Neither the Accord or Camry have an Onstar like system available.... but that doesn't make the comparison invalid. Neither the Accord or Camry have traction control available... but that doesn't make the comparison invalid.

Not that I've don't the research, but I'm sure there are features that are only available in certain packages in all 3 cars it's highly likely that those packages don't line up features exactly. NO ONE except Bentley, Rolls Royce and Maybach, have completely ala' carte ordering schemes.

What is so hard to understand about that?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have tri-fold hand outs that GM supplies us, comparing the Malibu to the Accord and Camry, exposing all the places where the competition "wins." Neither the newer Aura or the older Malibu truly match up to the Accord/Camry in terms of size. The Accord/Camry are slightly larger than the Malibu/Aura; whereas, the Impala is larger than any of them.

Size does not always matter, nor does HP, or fuel economy numbers. However, the sum of all numbers (particularly PAYMENT :deadhorse: ) is what may sway one discerning consumer one way or the other.

Totally agree. But in the Aura comparison GM choose to show HP and wheel size instead of HP and MPG. How does a consumer come up with an accurate sum of all numbers from that?

That is, assuming we have "discerning" consumers, and not just sheeple that gobble up and then regurgitate numbers.

It seems to me GM is banking on NOT having "discerning" consumers in this comparison. I don't think MPG is the meaningless number that you are implying.

And for GAWD's sake, can we axe the BS about "residual:" a totally fictional number that is obsolete the day someone dreams it up!

Really? Because the lease on my wife's Accord as compared to the Malibu that we looked at certainly seemed to be affected by something. I thought for sure the car's value at the end of the lease had some effect on it.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should ask Saturn why they made their comparison how they did, and not us. This thread is pointless.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meaning that on some vehicles certain features may not even be available, but they get as close as possible.

Neither the Accord or Camry have an Onstar like system available.... but that doesn't make the comparison invalid. Neither the Accord or Camry have traction control available... but that doesn't make the comparison invalid.

Not that I've don't the research, but I'm sure there are features that are only available in certain packages in all 3 cars it's highly likely that those packages don't line up features exactly. NO ONE except Bentley, Rolls Royce and Maybach, have completely ala' carte ordering schemes.

What is so hard to understand about that?

So, given that, would you say that if the Accord and Camry being compared both had a moonroof standard, and that was available as an option on the Aura, then should it have been included in the Aura's price?

Edited by GXT
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0