We recently lamented Mazda's decision not to bring their new MPV minivan to the States. Mazda helped explain the decision by saying that minivan marketing practices put too much downward pressure on prices and therefore limit profits for automakers. We think Mazda could reverse that trend by doing what we called for years ago: adding some "Zoom-Zoom" to the segment with a better handling, lighter-on-its-feet shuttle like the new MPV. Mazda has instead decided to focus on crossovers, much like every other manufacturer with the exception of Chrysler. Apparently SUV/CUV buyers will still accept the premium pricing that nets higher profitability for the automakers. There may be a fly in that ointment, however.
Story continues after the jump.
[Source: Automotive News, sub req]
Mazda dealers are already complaining because their newest CUV, the CX-9, is being debuted with a huge national ad campaign to coincide with a regional program (a first for Mazda). The rollout will see a special lease deal of $349 a month for 39 months with $2,000 down. While it will probably help Mazda make a name for itself with this attractive Ford Edge derivative, dealers are questioning the decision.
Some think Mazda's just fine playing the niche role and maximizing profit on a smaller number of vehicles sold. Slow and steady wins the race, as the story goes. They think Mazda should follow the lead of Honda, Toyota and Nissan and establish their perceived value levels early on. They don't want to be seen as "the cheap-deal brand anymore." A group of California dealers, in particular, is trying to keep the regional outlets from over-promoting the offer and cheapening the brand. They don't think there's a need to "Zoom-Zoom" to a high sales figure right off the bat.
While getting into one of these nifty new three-row CUVs at a lower monthly payment sounds great to us, we understand the thinking and agree that it can probably sell quite well without the incentives. We'll keep you posted on how it shakes out.
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
Volkswagen unveiling two-door Elise fighter in LA, new sports car
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
In The Autoblog Garage: 2008 Mercedes SLK55 AMG
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Dave T. @ Feb 6th 2007 3:49PM
First, for the love of all things Mazda stop saying this is based on the Edge. Haven't we all gone over which is based on the 6 sedan, which isn't and that the CX-7 and CX-9 are different platforms from each other and the Edge?
OK now that that's out of my system...I think the dealers should be complaining if Mazda is going to spend money on any ad or marketing campaign with the word zoom zoom in it. It's old. People remember it sure, but they don't associate zoom zoom with anything good. Even with these lease deals I don't think the Mazda brand will get anywhere near close enough to Honda numbers. Only california dealers probably would complain since they sell more mazdas than anyone else.
As for the deal I think getting as many of these on the road asap will help with sales later on down the road especially for a brand that doesn't have a name recognition like Honda.
Steve @ Feb 6th 2007 4:07PM
Mazda is right in bringing teh CX-9 over instead of the MPV. There is no market for a sporty oriented mini-van. Honda and Toyota have it right with their offerings, roominess, reliability, safety, comfort. This is what minivan buyers want. If you want to haul the kids in something fast you get a sport sedan.
Fabulo @ Feb 6th 2007 5:06PM
I'll be happy to not care about what the dealer thinks. If only I could test drive cars without the dealer monkey and then buy off the internet.
Typesbad @ Feb 6th 2007 5:17PM
#1 I couldn't tell if you had it right or not. The CX-9 is based on a stretched MAZDA6 platform. The Edge is also MAZDA6 based. It may be splitting hairs but it doesn't seem fair to call the CX-9 an "Edge derivative" when their common platform is based on a Mazda sedan. And yes, the CX-7 is on a very different platform, one that has more in common with the MAZDA3 and MAZDA5. Speaking of which, as much as I like the CX-9, (a whole lot) I'd rather see if my family could get by in the MAZDA5. If the third seat configuration is the exception rather than the rule it is cheaper, cheaper to run and still handles very nicely.
Gardiner Westbound @ Feb 6th 2007 5:20PM
My interest in a CX-9 went to zero when I learned its engine and transmission are Ford units.
PJ @ Feb 6th 2007 5:26PM
Tough spot for Mazda. On one hand, they're introducing an softly-styled vehicle with few outstanding qualities and no name recognition (CX-9 sounds like an antiseptic) in a crowded segment that's already full of excellent, well-known choices.
On the other hand, announcing incentives right off the bat doesn't help Mazda's resale value, which already trails Honda's and Toyota's badly.
Of course, we are talking about a *very* mild incentive. Nothing like a new-model rebate.
Anthony Gentavoe @ Feb 6th 2007 5:37PM
Sounds like some sour grapes from the dealers, thinking they won't be able to squeeze as much profit out of the early adopters.
We recently shopped the new GMC Acadia. We can buy on GM Supplier Pricing, so if we liked it we were going to pull the trigger on it. The sales manager started to play games with us, insisting that it would be at least a year-and-a-half until they would honor SP (their prerogative) as the Acadia was selling like crazy. We called another dealer and they honored the SP.
A few days back, GM announced a $500 rebate on the Acadia, which is already being sold at local dealers for under MSRP.
While it did show improved sales in January, Mazda is not exactly tearing it up. Ford is doing what they think it necessary to capitalize on the recent positive press. As someone noted, there is a decent amount of competition in this segment now.
Doug @ Feb 6th 2007 5:57PM
Hey Gardiner Westbound, News Flash: Ford owns Mazda. In fact they have for quite some time now. Mazda's been using all kinds of parts from Ford for a long time. In fact, the reason Mazda is once again a profitable company with good a quality record is because of Ford. time to wake up and realize that Ford's quality ratings are as good if not better than Honda's. Don't believe me, go check out JD Power's website.
Chris @ Feb 6th 2007 6:36PM
This isn't even an incentive. I don't see how a lease offer at full MSRP can be considered an incentive. All it is is an attractive, low payment on a gorgeous new crossover. Just like when the premium brands (Mercedes, Audi, BMW, etc.) show low lease payments with several thousand dollars down. Also, the vehicle is based on the Edge platform, stretched out to accomodate the 3rd row. It (the platform) was co-developed.
PJ @ Feb 6th 2007 8:04PM
Doug -
Ford owns only 33.4% of Mazda, which is just .1% more than the minimum required for a controlling stake under Japanese law.
Additionally, Ford has benefited from Mazda's expertise just as much--and some may argue more--than the other way around. Mazda's hot sellers and image leaders--the 5, 6, MX-5, RX-8, and CX-7--are pure Mazda designs. The 3 uses a platform developed by Volvo, not Ford USA. Mazda's Ford-sourced vehicles (the Tribute and B-Series) have been the weak spots of its lineup, intended to fill gaps in the product range.
Ford USA, on the other hand, is relying on Mazda's 6 architecture to underpin some of its high-stakes, save-the-company Hail Marys: the Fusion/Milan/MKZ and Edge/MKX.
I personally like some of Ford's other current vehicles, but get frustrated with the common misconception that "all Mazdas are Fords."
JarryHames @ Feb 6th 2007 8:05PM
#8 - Newsflash for you. Ford does not own Mazda! They own 33.4% of Mazda. The majority of their products have been based on shared platforms like the Mazda6 - Edge, Fusion, CX9 and probably all of the future products. Also, Mazda developed the Tribute product and Ford's much more successful Escape (and others) used it as well. Are you stating the facts about Ford's qaulity ratings or just bashing Honda? I own a Honda and have several friends who own Fords. Honda kicks Ford's ass in quality, ride, reliability, and resale value. So get your facts straight or refrain from correcting others.
NoNameDenton @ Feb 6th 2007 8:20PM
Someone said their interest went to zero because of the Ford units in it. Well, the engine is proving to be a huge success, and the 6 speed automatic is proving popular as well in GM products. This makes this a viable product with the two combined, not to mention Lincoln showed what you can do with a turbo or two combined with the 3.5 liter engine.
DB97 @ Feb 6th 2007 10:12PM
The CX-9's transmission is sourced from Aisin (same supplier of the 8 speed transmission used in the 2007 LS460) and not the GM/Ford unit used in the Edge.
Whuffo @ Feb 6th 2007 10:34PM
No Chrysler crossovers? I thought it was the Chrysler Pacifica that defined this segment...
NoNameDenton @ Feb 6th 2007 11:26PM
Last I heard the Pacifica was going to be dropped and the rear wheel drive replacement was also going to be dropped as too expensive
Bryan @ Feb 7th 2007 1:47PM
I will clear everything up for everyone. First lets start with the Mazda 6 which Ford and Mazda co-devolped. From there, Ford took the basic architecture, stretched it and made the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr(MKZ). Meanwhile, Mazda just made the CX-7 off the original 6 platform. After that, Ford made the Edge/MKX from its stretched Fusion platform. Then Mazda further stretched the platform and created the CX-9. This is a very flexible architecture that Ford and Mazda both deserve props for. I recently saw the CX-9 at the Houston auto show. Very nice. The front doors have bigger door panels than my F150! The gauge lighting is awesome, it uses two different colors. All in all all of these vehicles seem to be doing pretty and I do not feel the CX-9 needs any special deals right out of the gate the vehicle will sell itself just as the Edge and MKX are.
Bryan @ Feb 7th 2007 1:47PM
Oh and to PJ..the mazda 3/euro Focus/S40 platform was a 3 way joint venture. Volvo did not create it on its own.
PJ @ Feb 7th 2007 2:37PM
Indeed it was. But Volvo was responsible for developing the structure (hence the unusual solidity and high crash-test scores), Ford developed the suspension design. and Mazda tuned it for the 3.
Carl Mannheimer III @ Apr 1st 2007 3:10AM
Interesting comentary from all!
Bite the bullet and someone just drive the CX9. And not the basic, try the Touring/Grand Touring. If opened minded you will find a quick, not fast smooth running great handling CUV. Ergonomics, fit, form and quality of this Mazda is better than any CUV out there, in my self centered opion as we all have. Nissan, Acura, Hyundai and I looked at the Toyota's, Honda and the Americans. Hoping truly that the USA would showed better than the CX9, but it didn't. Toyota is behind the 8 ball with their CUV design push to market. Acura made a very nice but over price CRV called the RDX. Nice ride but to small of back seat for a 6 footer. Turbo/4 is fast but too jumpy for this ride. "Turbo Lag". Great sound system and GPS. Goofy toy the voice activated temp, radio station change. Pardon me Bob, "XM chanel 74"and 72 degrees temp."yes go ahead.. you were saying" Aaaa...use-less!!!
Joint ventures. Who owns who. BFD! Shared platforms, this is nothing new. Costs of tooling design and manufacturing dictate this format of future development of a new model. These aren't race cars, there for us "the general public". This all to deliver a cost effective product that compete for our dollar. Want quality, style value...Go to Barret/Jackson and buy a '66 Mustang.
Remember this CUV gig was all started by Nissan with their Murano. Starting in '03 and little changes here in the '07 model. All other manufactures are in the catch-up mode.
My point, well no point at all.. test drive and by what you want, you'll sell it in 3 years anyway!
matt mosinski @ Feb 15th 2008 6:24PM
I just bought one and found the "cargo cover" is a $200 optional extra. No other hatch I've owned has it as an optional extra. Next they'll tell you the spare tire or the jack is an extra. I'm so pissed off i'm trying to rescind the contract or get 'free cargo cover's for all' issued as standard on all CX-9s. We are going to take legal action if they don't comply