Anyone concern with the Genesis Low Sales Figures

[bjjones]

The point about the gravy is that the Genesis was developed for the Korean Market (where Hyundai/Kia completely dominate the market) so there was not much extra cost in making the North American versions.

This is exactly the reason that Hyundai is not to concerned with truly marketing and promoting the Genesis or the Equus on a much larger scale here in the US simply because they stand to make money on both models even if sale volumes are low. Furthermore, Hyundai more than likely had fixed a marketing budget for the duration of Genesis's life cycle which may already been somewhat expended up to this point.

 

[SunnySD]

I believe Hyundai DOES care about unit sales for the Genesis. It's not a model they've given up on such as the Azera. This is their entry into the luxury class. What is their plan if the Genesis fails? With VW's Phaeton fiasco, when will they try again to have a VW branded luxury model?

My guess is Hyundai looks at the $35K price market and really, really care about their market share. If the Genesis does well, the cheap car and low quality reputation is going away.

If one really wants an exclusive car which neighbors don't drive, one can get an Azera, an Acura RL (or maybe any Acura with the way things are going), or VW Phaeton. An exclusive car which no one else drives in this price range of $35K means the car sucks and everyone knows it. I'd rather drive a car everyone buys. In this price range, these aren't cars which people desire to purchase. If they want it, it'll get bought. How many ES, C class and 3 series do we see everyday? If the Genesis is on a level playing field as GS, E class and 5 series, we should see the Genesis everywhere.

 

[GripperDon]

But we don't. I sold my VW Phaeton beacuse of factory not problems. It had CD based nav system etc. Nothing new ever happened. They gave up on a really great car except for Nav and not too good price. They made the same mistake hyundai is making NO ADVERTISING!!!!!

Their dealers were better too.

 

[RogerB]

The Genesis has no recognition with the public as a whole. Before they retreat to advertising in specialist magazines, they need to get out there in the mass media. Word of mouth will not do it. Middle class people who normally cannot afford to buy a luxury car need to know that Genesis exists. Hyundai needs the mass media for this. Hyundai failed to capitalize on the flurry of great reviews that greeted Genesis in 2009. If they keep up this mass media silence, Genesis will die a slow death.

 

[YEH]

When it comes to marketing luxury automobiles, Hyundai could certainly take a page or two from Toyota. Lexus shined in it's inception compared to the other Japanese luxury brands because Lexus marketed and created automobiles that conveyed a distinct message about the positive virtues of the product without perplexing or bewildering the consumer.

First off, marketing a new lux brand is a bit diff/ from marketing a luxury model under a mainstream brand.

2nd, Toyota at the time of the launch of Lexus was a much more mature company and had a significantly greater presence in the US market; Hyundai needs to get its mainstream brand up to the level of what Toyota was before it expends significant resources to a lux brand - which they likely will do in 5-6 yrs time.

The Genesis has no recognition with the public as a whole. Before they retreat to advertising in specialist magazines, they need to get out there in the mass media. Word of mouth will not do it. Middle class people who normally cannot afford to buy a luxury car need to know that Genesis exists. Hyundai needs the mass media for this. Hyundai failed to capitalize on the flurry of great reviews that greeted Genesis in 2009. If they keep up this mass media silence, Genesis will die a slow death.

Middle class people can't afford a Genesis.

People who don't care about brand names and actually care about how good the car is tend to be knowledgeable about autos than the general public, and are the one who tend to read auto publications.

A good chunk of the articles shown in the Hyundai Momentum website (which they advertised on TV) are about the Genesis (both sedan and coupe).

Frankly, it's just not cost effective to continue to do mass marketing (esp. national TV); the same reason why Lexus and Infiniti haven't done commercials for the GS and M.

Basically, look for Hyundai to make a marketing push w/ the refresh (tho, probably not national TV) and make a major push when the next-gen Genesis (and hopefully new lux brand) launches.

 

[akuma]

Middle class people can't afford a Genesis.

really!? maybe the V8 with tech is a bit out of reach, but saying that middle class people can't afford a Genesis is like saying that they can't afford a Maxima, Avalon, Taurus or Passat (CC included). middle class people sure didn't have a hard time affording all those ridiculous full size SUVs (at $40k+), although later they weren't able to afford the gas (11 mpg at $4.00 a gallon = over $10 a day easily for most drivers). i find it a bit hard to believe that a middle class family with two incomes can't come up with around $400 a month (average V6 lease).

 

[bjjones]

If one really wants an exclusive car which neighbors don't drive, one can get an Azera, an Acura RL (or maybe any Acura with the way things are going), or VW Phaeton.

Despite all the negative comments on Acura's new styling trend, Acura models are still selling very well so you can't always believe what you may view in various online or offline publications or periodicals.

January 2010 - Overall Luxury Brand Sales

1. Lexus - 15,517
2. Mercedes-Benz - 15,158
3. BMW - 13,163
4. Cadillac - 8,440
5. Acura - 7,132
6. Lincoln - 7,036
7. Infiniti - 6,711
8. Audi - 6,510
9. Volvo - 4,128
10. Land Rover - 1,958
11. Porsche - 1,786
12. Jaguar - 631
11. Saab - 511

 

[bjjones]

Middle class people can't afford a Genesis.

I don't know how you personally define middle class is but the target market or demographic segment for the Hyundai Genesis are middle class consumers (incomes of $25,000 to $99,999). Remember Hyundai's mantra for the Genesis sedan is "affordable luxury" and for the Genesis coupe "affordable performance".

Frankly, it's just not cost effective to continue to do mass marketing (esp. national TV); the same reason why Lexus and Infiniti haven't done commercials for the GS and M.

You can't compare the advertising campaigns of the Infiniti M series or the Lexus GS because currently they are both older Mid-Level Luxury sedans that were introduced in 2006 and will have or already have brand new models in the pipeline in 2010 (Infiniti M) or 2011 (Lexus GS) while the Hyundai Genesis is still technically a brand new model.

 

[Disaster]

Despite all the negative comments on Acura's new styling trend, Acura models are still selling very well so you can't always believe what you may view in various online or offline publications or periodicals.

January 2010 - Overall Luxury Brand Sales

1. Lexus - 15,517
2. Mercedes-Benz - 15,158
3. BMW - 13,163
4. Cadillac - 8,440
5. Acura - 7,132
6. Lincoln - 7,036
7. Infiniti - 6,711
8. Audi - 6,510
9. Volvo - 4,128
10. Land Rover - 1,958
11. Porsche - 1,786
12. Jaguar - 631
11. Saab - 511

Compared to January of 2009...which was down 32.4% from 2008, Acura sold 9% less vehicles.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/02/03/404262.html

It is a recession, but Mercedes sales are up almost 50%...after falling 43% in 2009.

http://www.emercedesbenz.com/Feb09/...SA_Sales_Drop_42_Percent_In_January_2009.html

BMW sales are ups 7.6%, after falling 15.5% in 2009.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/02/03/404499.html

Even Lexus sales are up 5.4%, in the midst of a recall.

http://lexusenthusiast.com/2009/02/03/lexus-usa-january-2009-sales-report/

Acura has definitely made some bad moves...particularly with their "beaky" front end styling.

Having said that, it isn't fair to compare Hyundai's Genesis sales to these companies when Hyundai has only higher end vehicles for sale...while companies like Lexus have over a dozen. Hyundai is satisfied with their captured market share, and particularly surprised at the amount of customers who have crossed over from European and Japanese luxury brands.

 

[YEH]

really!? maybe the V8 with tech is a bit out of reach, but saying that middle class people can't afford a Genesis is like saying that they can't afford a Maxima, Avalon, Taurus or Passat (CC included). middle class people sure didn't have a hard time affording all those ridiculous full size SUVs (at $40k+), although later they weren't able to afford the gas (11 mpg at $4.00 a gallon = over $10 a day easily for most drivers). i find it a bit hard to believe that a middle class family with two incomes can't come up with around $400 a month (average V6 lease).

Most "middle class" people cannot afford the Maxima, Avalon, $40K SUVs, etc.

The median household income in the US is about $44,400.

A little less than 35% of all households make $65k+.

Go up to $80K+, that figure drops to about 25% of all households.

At $100K+, it's only 15% of all households.

That $400 or $4800 yearly lease payments doesn't include the $3,500 due at signing and when one takes into account the after-tax value, it's like spending $6,200 pre-tax.

Also, keep in mind that a family usually has two car payments.

I don't know how you personally define middle class is but the target market or demographic segment for the Hyundai Genesis are middle class consumers (incomes of $25,000 to $99,999). Remember Hyundai's mantra for the Genesis sedan is "affordable luxury" and for the Genesis coupe "affordable performance".

Actually, the target is the upper middle-class or professional class.

People w/ household incomes less than $75k really can't afford a $30K+ vehicle (or if they do so, aren't being financially prudent).

And "affordable luxury" doesn't mean getting something for peanuts; the Genesis sedan, while in the E segment sells at a price of a D segment vehicle (C Class, 3 Series, IS, G37) - a pricepoint which is out of reach for most middle class households.

You can't compare the advertising campaigns of the Infiniti M series or the Lexus GS because currently they are both older Mid-Level Luxury sedans that were introduced in 2006 and will have or already have brand new models in the pipeline in 2010 (Infiniti M) or 2011 (Lexus GS) while the Hyundai Genesis is still technically a brand new model.

Uhh, the Genesis sedan is closing in on 2 years of sales in the US, hardly a "brand new" model.

As for the M and GS, when was the last time you saw national commercials dedicated those models?

Maybe 2007, but more likely 2006.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[bjjones]

Originally Posted by YEH

Most "middle class" people cannot afford the Maxima, Avalon, $40K SUVs, etc.

The median household income in the US is about $44,400.

A little less than 35% of all households make $65k+.

Go up to $80K+, that figure drops to about 25% of all households.

At $100K+, it's only 15% of all households.

That $400 or $4800 yearly lease payments doesn't include the $3,500 due at signing and when one takes into account the after-tax value, it's like spending $6,200 pre-tax.

Also, keep in mind that a family usually has two car payments.

Your numerous propositions above have many shortcomings. You are making assumptions on statistical data from middle class households that are leasing automobiles which is but a small demographic of the overall car buyer. The majority of cars driven by the average consumers in the U.S. are financed not leased and the financing terms are much longer in length than before (up to 9 years) which allows many people to purchase a nicer car for much less money monthly than they might be able to otherwise in the past. Furthermore unless you are leasing a automobile with a open ended lease, technically you are not buying the car but renting it for a short period of time with the option to buy at the end of lease term.

Finally, you fail to factor in that single people who make incomes within $25,000 - 50,000 with little or no expenses (individuals living at home, college students with scholarships, people that have roommates to subsidize their rent or utility payments) can easily afford entry to mid level luxury cars. Also you fail to understand that many people that purchase cars may have a another car to trade in or other discretionary income of some type available to offset the overall cost of the car.

Originally Posted by YEH
Actually, the target is the upper middle-class or professional class.

People w/ household incomes less than $75k really can't afford a $30K+ vehicle (or if they do so, aren't being financially prudent).

And "affordable luxury" doesn't mean getting something for peanuts; the Genesis sedan, while in the E segment sells at a price of a D segment vehicle (C Class, 3 Series, IS, G37) - a pricepoint which is out of reach for most middle class households.

Being able to afford a luxury automobile and being wise or judicious in ones financial affairs can be two totally separate aspects depending on the individuals or circumstances involved. You are using random data only to make conclusions which are devoid of logic. There are a number of other variables that you have obviously missed in your flawed hypothesis such as consumer buying behaviors and trends which also drive buyers decisions when making a purchases. Furthermore, the average price of a new car in 2009 was $27,958. In fact the $27,958 is a decrease in price from the all time high in December of 2003 which was $30,481. So your supposition that people with household incomes less than $75,000 are not capable of buying a car over $30,000+ is quite absurd and preposterous.

Originally Posted by YEH
Uhh, the Genesis sedan is closing in on 2 years of sales in the US, hardly a "brand new" model.

Even though the Hyundai Genesis sedan has been available for sale within the US starting in August 2008 (as a 2009 model) for 17 months the normal calendar schedule for new cars yearly in the USA is in September which is marked one year ahead of the actual current year to date. Therefore the Hyundai Genesis sedan in regards to it's actual lifespan in car years is only a one year old model 2009 - 2010 and therefore considered still brand new model. I thought maybe you would realize that with all your consulting work and connections inside the auto industry?

 

[Mark_888]

Furthermore, the average price of a new car in 2009 was $27,958. In fact the $27,958 is a decrease in price from the all time high in December of 2003 which was $30,481.

Are you talking about in the USA? Does that include sales taxes (usually at least 7% on average). I would like to see some documentation on that.

Perhaps those numbers are just the average price of all cars, not weighted for the number of people who actually purchase each car.

 

[Disaster]

The list is skewed by the fact the rankings include all-time sales since 1886 (no, that is not a typo), and not sales in a given year. However, most of these vehicles were outstanding in their price class during the years the racked up those sales (some of them many years ago), so yes it does prove they were very good vehicles for the money when they were sold.

Agreed. I loved my Fiat/Pininfarina 124 Spyder...except for the rust and every electrical system in the car. Put 170,000 miles on it and sold it for the same price I bought it for.

 

[Mark_888]

Despite all the negative comments on Acura's new styling trend, Acura models are still selling very well so you can't always believe what you may view in various online or offline publications or periodicals.

January 2010 - Overall Luxury Brand Sales

1. Lexus - 15,517
2. Mercedes-Benz - 15,158
3. BMW - 13,163
4. Cadillac - 8,440
5. Acura - 7,132
6. Lincoln - 7,036
7. Infiniti - 6,711
8. Audi - 6,510
9. Volvo - 4,128
10. Land Rover - 1,958
11. Porsche - 1,786
12. Jaguar - 631
11. Saab - 511

Some 2009 model year cars may have been sold in January 2010, so we will see how they do once all the 2009s are gone. Sales of the Acura TL are definitely hurting with their new "styling". In order to mitigate that problem, they have initiated some very expensive advertising campaigns were they talk about safety and other things, but avoid showing the front grills and Cadillac-like angular rear styling. There is reason why the new Maxima recently moved away from that kind of styling.

I personally was expecting to purchase a 2010 TL until I saw it. The TL also has poor driver viability, partly due to the rear styling.

I thought the styling of the TSX was acceptable (especially in Silver which matches the grill color), but just a little too small for me. The Acrua SUV's are OK, but get only marginal fuel mileage.

 

[bjjones]

Compared to January of 2009...which was down 32.4% from 2008, Acura sold 9% less vehicles.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/02/03/404262.html

It is a recession, but Mercedes sales are up almost 50%...after falling 43% in 2009.

http://www.emercedesbenz.com/Feb09/...SA_Sales_Drop_42_Percent_In_January_2009.html

BMW sales are ups 7.6%, after falling 15.5% in 2009.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/02/03/404499.html

Even Lexus sales are up 5.4%, in the midst of a recall.

http://lexusenthusiast.com/2009/02/03/lexus-usa-january-2009-sales-report/

Even though Acura sales numbers are still down somewhat from previous years, Acura is still one of the top luxury brands as far as overall/total yearly sales are concerned. What makes Acura's sales numbers so phenomenal especially when comparing them to the competition is that outside of Buick or Volvo, Acura has no rear wheel drive models in their lineup nor does Acura offer (or has ever offered) an eight cylinder engine.

2009 - Overall End of Year Luxury Brand Sales
Lexus 215,975
BMW 196,502
Mercedes-190,604
Cadillac-109,092
Acura-105,723
Buick-102,306
Lincoln-82,847
Audi-82,716
Infiniti-81,089
Volvo-61,435

 

[bjjones]

Are you talking about in the USA? Does that include sales taxes (usually at least 7% on average). I would like to see some documentation on that.

Perhaps those numbers are just the average price of all cars, not weighted for the number of people who actually purchase each car.

Below are a few of the links. Sales tax is not a factor when measuring average car prices. Sales tax percentages vary from state to state. Various states have regulations on how sales taxes are to be paid (upfront when purchasing the automobile or deferred for a number of months until the payment due date or in other cases financed within the terms of the contract, while in some states there is no sales taxes at all)

Certainly there will be other statistical data used to gather and compile the information but this is not really not rocket science here. Just if you were to take the 10 or 20 top selling cars and looked at the various model and assessed the base price to the highest price fully optioned it's not hard to make a reasonable deduction of what the mean price the consumer was paying might look like.


http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/10/car-buyers-pay-2-more-this-year-edmundscom-data-shows.html

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/18/study-average-car-costs-22-1-weeks-of-median-family-income-ave/

http://www.motortrend.com/auto_news/112_news030430_ave/index.html

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2005-11-16-car-prices-usat_x.htm

http://www.edmunds.com/help/about/press/101245/article.html

 

[YEH]

Your numerous propositions above have many shortcomings. You are making assumptions on statistical data from middle class households that are leasing automobiles which is but a small demographic of the overall car buyer.

I made no such assumptions - I merely countered a point someone made about monthly $400 lease payments.

Finally, you fail to factor in that single people who make incomes within $25,000 - 50,000 with little or no expenses (individuals living at home, college students with scholarships, people that have roommates to subsidize their rent or utility payments) can easily afford entry to mid level luxury cars. Also you fail to understand that many people that purchase cars may have a another car to trade in or other discretionary income of some type available to offset the overall cost of the car.

Oh, c'mon, those are total outliers.

And really, how many college kids did you know w/ a $30-35k car that wasn't bought by mommy and daddy?

Furthermore, the average price of a new car in 2009 was $27,958. In fact the $27,958 is a decrease in price from the all time high in December of 2003 which was $30,481. So your supposition that people with household incomes less than $75,000 are not capable of buying a car over $30,000+ is quite absurd and preposterous.

Most people know that using the average purchase price (instead of median purchase price) is not an accurate reflection - since the sale of expensive to super-expensive autos can inflate the no.

The average median purchase price is a bit lower at about $25,500.

Now, this doesn't take into account the fact that many people can't afford buying new or can't afford to buy a car at all.

Here's an analysis of what it takes to be an upper-middle class family in the Midwest.

Chicago, unsurprisingly, topped our list. The median income there was about $41,000 in 2003, according to the Census Bureau. We figure it would cost more than $275,000 in after-tax dollars to live an upper-middle-class American dream--less than in several other cities, including New York, Washington D.C. and even Atlanta. Minneapolis, Detroit and Milwaukee followed not far behind the Windy City.

Wichita, Kans., Sioux Falls; Fargo and Des Moines, Iowa were the least expensive places to live--cheaper than any of the Southern and Northeastern cities we examined. While the metros are relative bargains, they still aren't dirt-cheap. Our fictional family needs less than $200,000 to live affluently--but not much less, and again, that's net of taxes.

http://www.forbes.com/2005/07/01/realestate-livingwell-midwest-cx_sc_0701home.html

Take away the private school educations, fancy vacations, etc. that Forbes included and we're still talking about $120-140K net of taxes in places like Sioux Falls.

Even though the Hyundai Genesis sedan has been available for sale within the US starting in August 2008 (as a 2009 model) for 17 months the normal calendar schedule for new cars yearly in the USA is in September which is marked one year ahead of the actual current year to date. Therefore the Hyundai Genesis sedan in regards to it's actual lifespan in car years is only a one year old model 2009 - 2010 and therefore considered still brand new model. I thought maybe you would realize that with all your consulting work and connections inside the auto industry?

Advertising timeframe has less to do w/ what year a model is and more to do w/ the actual time passed.

Hyundai is spending a lot of $$ right now advertising the 2011 Sonata and Tucson - which will probably continue throughout a good part of the year.

The 2012 Sonata and Tucson probably won't arrive until the Fall of 2011 (more than 11/2 years from now), Hyundai certainly won't continue to advertise as heavily at that point.

Even w/ the 2012 models, Hyundai probably won't advertise much (w/ respect to model specific national commercials) until at least the refreshed models arrive some years later, and even so, it will be still be considerably less until the launch of the next-gen models.

 

[Mark_888]

Below are a few of the links. Sales tax is not a factor when measuring average car prices. Sales tax percentages vary from state to state. Various states have regulations on how sales taxes are to be paid (upfront when purchasing the automobile or deferred for a number of months until the payment due date or in other cases financed within the terms of the contract, while in some states there is no sales taxes at all)

Certainly there will be other statistical data used to gather and compile the information but this is not really not rocket science here. Just if you were to take the 10 or 20 top selling cars and looked at the various model and assessed the base price to the highest price fully optioned it's not hard to make a reasonable deduction of what the mean price the consumer was paying might look like.


http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/10/car-buyers-pay-2-more-this-year-edmundscom-data-shows.html

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/18/study-average-car-costs-22-1-weeks-of-median-family-income-ave/

http://www.motortrend.com/auto_news/112_news030430_ave/index.html

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2005-11-16-car-prices-usat_x.htm

http://www.edmunds.com/help/about/press/101245/article.html

Those numbers are BS. If you read the links carefully, the prices are the MSRP (list price) of the cars sold, not the actual transaction price. Many cars were sold at at least $5,000 less than MSRP in 2009 when you figure that most people paid close to invoice price, and they received thousands in manufacturer rebates or other incentives (especially GM, Chrysler, and Ford cars). Some of the links say the prices also include "financing charges" which can add thousands to the price over the life a loan. So the real average of transactions prices (not including financing charges) may be up to $7,000 less than they state.

I would also guess that the reason the average MSRP price increased in the past year is that lower income buyers have postponed new car purchases due the recession.

 

[Disaster]

Those numbers are BS. If you read the links carefully, the prices are the MSRP (list price) of the cars sold, not the actual transaction price. Many cars were sold at at least $5,000 less than MSRP in 2009 when you figure that most people paid close to invoice price, and they received thousands in manufacturer rebates or other incentives (especially GM, Chrysler, and Ford cars). Some of the links say the prices also include "financing charges" which can add thousands to the price over the life a loan. So the real average of transactions prices (not including financing charges) may be up to $7,000 less than they state.

I would also guess that the reason the average MSRP price increased in the past year is that lower income buyers have postponed new car purchases due the recession.

It isn't right to just summarily dismiss the numbers as BS. They are based in statistical facts...year to year...month to month, and are with respect to how much the car actually cost the person. Based on the 4.5% finance rate (very common last year) and a 60 month loan, the finance cost would be about $3000 dollars, on a $25,000 dollar car...putting it to the suggested $28,000.

I do agree that poorer people bought less cars last year, either because they chose not to, or because they couldn't get a loan in the tight financial conditions. This would skew the average car cost number higher.

The gov't rebate of $4,500, doesn't quite work out to that much savings because the cars that were turned in had some value. In fact, the worst cars (old or undriveable) weren't eligible for rebates. I suspect the average gov't rebate was good for about $2000 in value to customers....still an important factor when you consider they were talking about the average price of cars only moving up a few hundred dollars from the previous quarter.

One thing this shows is what a dismal failure the gov't's Cash for Clunkers program was. It mostly moved people to buy up and buy early, vs. got poorer people into dealerships to trade in their 20 year old gas guzzlers. The people with the worst and oldest cars, weren't eligible and couldn't get loans if they were.

 

[bjjones]

Those numbers are BS. If you read the links carefully, the prices are the MSRP (list price) of the cars sold, not the actual transaction price. Many cars were sold at at least $5,000 less than MSRP in 2009 when you figure that most people paid close to invoice price, and they received thousands in manufacturer rebates or other incentives (especially GM, Chrysler, and Ford cars). Some of the links say the prices also include "financing charges" which can add thousands to the price over the life a loan. So the real average of transactions prices (not including financing charges) may be up to $7,000 less than they state.

I would also guess that the reason the average MSRP price increased in the past year is that lower income buyers have postponed new car purchases due the recession.

None of this truly matters because the financing charges are still added to the total net price of the car. So unless you are paying cash for the automobile, unfortunately interest rate calculations are always factored in whether you lease or purchase. And many of the incentives offered off the MSRP offset or may eliminate the majority of the finance charges on the length of the loan. Again there are so many scenarios that you must account for when looking at the true actual cost of a car which could depend on many factors such as credit worthiness, actual APR, down payment amount (if any) and trade in values just to name a few.

Also some of the articles mention that the incentives or discounts allow the consumer to add additional options or to purchase higher trim levels as well. So just because there are discounts or promotions to lower the costs the buyer evidently can skew the costs up exponentially with optional equipment so incentives alone really have no real bearing on how the true average price of a new car is determined.

Plus, I clearly stated in my previous post that there may be different methods used to gather and extrapolate data from each research firm. However, if you really evaluated the information I supplied, except for the Motor Trend link which the title specifically states data is measured based upon MSRP pricing, all the other links are clearly not about the average MSRP pricing of cars sold but the average net price of the cars that are sold with incentives and extra cost options that are factored in.