Ouch. According to The Motor Authority, the big cat didn't quite move 60,500 units last year. Yet its British sibling Land Rover sold 226,395 4x4s. Turns out that our nouveau riche Russian and Chinese comrades prefer rock-hopping to intercontinental cruising. Who knew? We're kidding by the way, as 99.9% of those Land Rovers will never leave socialist asphalt. Regardless, Jaguar is shagged. The Blue Oval Boyz blame for their sub-brand's sharp sales decline on the S-Type's death rattle. We're thinking several decades of inept management culminating in front wheel-drive diesel-powered Ford station wagons had something to do with it. But what about the new XF? Well, as car-mudgeon Jeremy Clarkson points out, Jaguar's new 5-Series competitor fails to realize the XF concept car's mission critical sex appeal. How'd Jezza put it? "Arguing that the two have the same proportions and stance is like saying I have the same proportions and stance as Brad Pitt. I do. But I'm never asked for his autograph." Jaguar dealers are claiming 10,000 pre-orders. As George Carlin would say, what the hell's a pre-order? An order before an order? Oh, and did you think Tata Motors wanted to buy Jag? No way. To acquire profitable Land Rover, the Indian motoring powerhouse had to adopt the underachieving, inbred, basket case money pit as well. They're still trying to get out of that one.
Find Reviews by Make:
Jag was down 24.2 percent in ’07 in the U.S.
Posts like these remind me how money can’t buy you originality.
If I was in the market for a luxury sedan, I wouldn’t even consider a BMW or Audi (OK maybe a TT). Jaguars always win hands down. They’re better built, look nicer and have a better brand cache than BMW or Audi.
I’ve said it before on TTAC, if you had the money for a BMW, why buy a BMW when a Jaguar is a far superior choice?
KatiePuckrik: and which nation to do you hail from? :)
Hurts me to say it, but nobody outside of the UK much cares for Jaguar. Its a regional brand, much like nobody outside of the Midwest thinks Lincoln and Cadillac are of the same caliber as a Lexus, Merc or Bimmer. The only place I see a lot of late model Caddies/Lincolns is Detroit, ditto the frequency of late model Jags prowling the streets of London.
And after checking out the XF at the NAIAS, Jaguar is right up there with Lincoln, Pontiac and Mercury in the list of dead brands walking.
Mr Mehta,
Are you sure? I was in LA a few weeks ago and when I was driving out there I saw LOADS of Jaguars out there. More than I was expecting….
There is no way you saw more Jaguars than BMWs in LA. I rarely ever see a new Jag, actually I have seen more new Masaratis then I have seen Jaguars. It’s sad the disgrace they did to Jag.
To be honest, I see a fair number of Jags in the “old money” parts of Houston. But the number of Jags to Japanese and German marques is heavily against the English. So yeah, I’m still sure.
I even know a lady with a late model XK, she likes it but everyone else in her family buys Japanese.
Like the sales trending shows, the fact is that old money is getting older, and new money could care less. Jaguar in the US faces the same problem Buick does, only at a higher price point.
Redbarchetta,
To be fair, I couldn’t work out what age the cars were (couldn’t dechiper the number plates) but there were LOADS of Jaguars roaming the streets (Especially Pasadena, where I stayed). I really was surprised, considering the many stories I hear of falling sales.
It’s no wonder. No one ever owns a Jag, they just arrange to have joint custody of one. I lost track of the number of times I had to haul friends back and forth to the service department for their “scheduled visitation”. Gawd help the poor soul who pilots a Land Rover, they are almost on the identical visitation schedule.
In Austin, Jags of any age are rare enough to notice and new Jags are all but invisible. Land Rovers are fairly common.
At the rare times I see a Jag, I always say to myself “Why?”.
KatiePuckrik I can understand not being able to tell the age with the copycat body styles. I look for the black smoke coming out of the tail pipe(they never sold oil burners here) and significant amounts of chrome. The interiors looked classier in the older models also.
If there are Jaguars roaming the streets of LA it’s because a Jaguar is a bargain basement image car used and wannabes have an image to maintain that they can’t otherwise afford.
Not to mention the jaw-dropping depreciation rates for 1-2 year old examples, especially the delicious “R” models.
Sajeev Mehta :
February 21st, 2008 at 10:42 am
Not to mention the jaw-dropping depreciation rates for 1-2 year old examples, especially the delicious “R” models.
Delicious at first, but try paying maintenance bills on one of those things. Our neighbor bought a lightly-used ’97 (I think) XJ12 about five years ago for what seemed like a bargain – 60,000 miles and around $18 grand. Last I heard, she’d put around 25,000 additional miles on it and has spent nearly as much on maintenance/repairs as she did on the purchase price.
Sad.
But seriously, who are they building cars for — and judging by their marketing, who is supposed to buy them? Stylists and fashionistas?
Sajeev Mehta :
February 21st, 2008 at 9:13 am
And after checking out the XF at the NAIAS, Jaguar is right up there with Lincoln, Pontiac and Mercury in the list of dead brands walking.
Thank you! I was beginning to wonder if it was just me, after reading the fawning reviews in the print magazines. Automobile’s words were something like, “…in person, it looks lower, meaner, more streamlined than in pictures.” I feel it’s the exact opposite. It looks decent in pictures – totally innocuous, but decent. In person in Detroit, it looked like a jacked-up Lexus GS, with none of the grace and all of the styling details translated verbatim. I went from not caring to actively disliking the XF.
Now, the XK and XJ – real Jags. Presence, power, and grace, even if not sales. I’d take one despite the associated costs simply for the rarity of them. But the XF? No, thanks. I have a feeling Jaguar faithfuls probably feel the same way, by and large, and I doubt Lexus-intenders often shop the unreliable, spotty British brand.
As said above, good used bargains considering their original MSRP, but you’d better be able to do your own work and get cheap parts.
As a man living in Los Angeles I can say that we have a lot of Jaguars.
Mostly XJs. Spanning all sorts of decades.
That said, we have more BMW 7s than we do Accords. I don’t think I’m kidding.
40 years ago, Jaguar was the low-priced member of the British premium car club. Like Rolls and Bentley, that meant wonderfully pungent Connolly hides and thick varnished walnut dash and door trim, with old-fashioned controls and instruments scattered all over the place. The first XJ was a milestone car by most any yardstick, save perhaps, reliability. Although, for British cars at the time, it was seen as above average in this respect. Ironic, that.
But now Mercedes, BMW and Lexus, to say nothing of Honda and Toyota, offer sedans with decent leather and either very processed wood trim or a reasonably convincing artificial substitute. The downfall for Jaguar was that, having lost it’s once Unique Selling Proposition, it failed to come up with any new ones, and continued the same XJ styling to the point of self-parody. The XF, while nice, is what the first S series should have been.
Still, the entire Jaguar experience under Ford has meant that Detroit-area FoMoCo execs had some much nicer company cars to drive than their counterparts at GM. After an XJ, a Town Car must be quite a comedown.
As a man living in Los Angeles I can say that we have a lot of Jaguars.
Mostly XJs. Spanning all sorts of decades.
That said, we have more BMW 7s than we do Accords. I don’t think I’m kidding.
I’ll second that. Recent Jags are routine in mainstream traffic throughout Los Angeles and its super-metro roadscape. Jaguar is also a respected car here, particularly among people who want some visual expression and grace in their automotive style as alternative to the searing lumpiness of the German brands these days, not to mention their bland ubiquity. There is no status to Mercedes, BMW and Audi ownership here anymore; merely cachet for conformity. Outside of their hardcore enthusiast constituencies, the German brands are funded primarily by the social acceptance market, which, given the role of store-bought status in our culture, means they are too numerous be noticed by people the buyers of these brands were hoping to be noticed by. But a Jaguar still gets a smile and a nod from one’s betters.
I’m sure Maserati is taking a bite out of Jaguar’s upper end sales here, as the coterie of folks who are expression driven and seeking sheer beauty in sheet metal satisfy that lust with inimitable Italian style. Still, if you roll in a Jag, you’re going to be greeted with “Beautiful car, sir!” at the valet drops.
But Los Angeles is its own distorted market. I see a half-dozen Ferraris *every* day. Three or four Lambos per week. The incidence of new and recent Cadillacs on the road here suggests a successful brand on a strong rebound. It would be easy to conclude that Prius outsells Accord. Scarcely a day goes by that I don’t see more than one first-generation rust-free Mustang in service as someone’s daily driver. It feels like we must have fully half of the country’s Chevy HHRs and nearly all the world’s Bentleys. I’ve seen a Veyron in traffic at least thrice in the last year. I don’t doubt that Jaguar’s strong street presence here fails to indicate the brand’s prevailing sales performance.
While the XF to my eyes is a serious misstep, on balance if more people were discerning about real beauty in the objects they own, Jaguar’s health as a business wouldn’t be in question. For the most part, the Germans (and later Lexus) have been proving for the past 30 years that beauty is scarcely present in the buying equation for luxury cars — Maserati’s success with it at low volumes notwithstanding.
Phil
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Ford demonstrated their recent extreme incompetence yet again when they declined BRITISH firm JCB Construction’s offer to buy JUST Jaguar at a REASONABLE sum. Not only would Jaguar have gone to an appropriate suitor who was a self-described car-nut, it would have gone back home where it belongs and in dedicated and capable hands as opposed to the inevitable stripping operation it’s headed for now. Say what you will about Jaguar, it is an institution with a heritage every bit as rich and storied as any of its higher end British siblings.
Not only that, Ford then could have KEPT Land Rover, which I might add is now PROFITABLE with a strong product line that caters to a clientele that is mostly unaffected by fuel prices. There was alot of potential for the Land Rover brand and it finally had come into its own under the careful guidance of Ford.
Instead, they decided to take an absolutely short-sighted firesale approach, not unlike a crack-addict needing a quick fix, and dump BOTH brands at FAR under their current value on a suitor whose intentions are now becoming more and more clear, and who certainly won’t do anything for the reliability perceptions these brands have had (mostly unreasonably so in Jaguar’s case since the end of the Dr. Lucas era). When you consider that LR was basically HANDED to Ford on a silver platter in 2000 with literally 99% of the Range Rover’s development COMPLETED and READY for sale, this makes even less sense.
My 2003 Range Rover, which is basically for all intents and purposes a BMW, is one of my favorite vehicles ever, and that’s saying ALOT. Despite all the negativity surrounding them, mine hasn’t even been so bad (knock on wood). I was fully ready to purchase another LR product in the future. Now? Not so much.