Creating an entirely new automotive brand must be like scaling Mt. Everest; extremely difficult and fraught with danger. Both endeavors also feature one distinct trend: extremely high mortality rates. The past decade has seen some brands wither and die and others newly born. Toyota’s 21st-century creation is an example of the latter. But is it successful?
Many of you will most likely respond by saying “no,” and I’d be inclined to agree with you. This year marks the tenth anniversary of the brand, but Toyota likely isn’t popping any champagne corks to commemorate the occasion. Only this week it was announced that dealers can walk away from the brand without penalty. So what happened?
Actually, it’s more of what didn’t happen. Millenials grew up to face a hostile job market to which their parents themselves could have also become victims. And what boomers were left unscathed likely scaled back their purchasing decisions. They also started buying the damn cars for themselves (right, Paul?). I’m sure there were many Toyota board meetings that ended in either screaming matches or head scratching, but that isn’t where Scion’s woes end.
To say the least, it’s tricky creating an entire product line based on such an ephemeral concept as youth. It’s one thing to launch an automotive luxury brand; in fact, I’d argue it’s simpler, since luxury doesn’t really change all that much. On the other hand, youth does no such thing. There are some similarities among generations, but the changing tastes of young people last about as long as a sun shower–and they’re currently focused on electronic gadgetry of the non-mobile sort.
So we have a poor economy and shifting cultural trends, coupled with a brand inexorably tied towards wooing a demographic that still has to worry about final exams, for the most part. All of this has impacted the Scion brand over the last ten years. So has their product.
I’m not going to discuss every single Scion here, largely because I think the merits of each individual model aren’t exactly subtle, nor are they meant to be. And that’s what the brand had going for it when it launched vehicles like the tC and xB. I’ve only been a passenger in a tC, but I came away impressed. It had a decent stereo, taut handling, and high-quality interior materials.
Of course, that was over five years ago. Since then, automakers like Ford have seriously stepped up their game in the small-car department and created vehicles featuring all the qualities listed above. Hell, even Honda stumbled a bit with their current-generation Civic while trying to figure out what their customers wanted. The point is that product-wise, Toyota needs to figure out this brand. How can they do it? Here is my advice:
1. Make a Suzuki Kizashi-size sedan to be positioned and priced between the Corolla and Camry.
2. ???
3. Profit.
Honestly, I’m really not sure what solutions for Scion would look like; after all, I’m not even certain this brand represents a failure for Toyota. Does it cost them much money to operate? I doubt it. They could at least advertise around The Walking Dead, which I’m pretty sure worked for Hyundai.
So what do you say, commentariat? Is the Scion brand a true failure for Toyota, or merely a dud? In any case, where do you think it should go from here?
Toyota’s arrogance doomed the Scion brand. There was really never any “must have car” in the Scion lineup after the killing off of the original XB. The XA and XD while competent cars were also competing with Toyota’s Yaris and you could get Fully equipped Yaris for cheaper then a loaded XA and XD. The tC was Toyota’s Chevy Beretta(all show and no go) and it was a too high an insurance premium and it was not even a sports car. The new FR-S is nice and a joy to drive but seriously how many of them are they going to sell to folks coming out of college or in their 20’s? If insurance was high for the pretend sports car(TC) then imagine how a real one is going to cost to insure.
The XB is larger(which I really like) BUT the engine is a true pig. On the highway i get 28mpg diving it nice. By contrast I got 26mpg in my old 2005 Lesabre(which is bigger and heavier and more powerful)
Oh and hatchbacks don’t sell in the USA(unless it is a SUV or a Hyundai/KIA Accent/Rio(and Hyundai/KIA offers a sedan version also) ) and offering no 4 door sedan is stupid. Toyota just needs to take a look at the Matrix and see it not selling and realize they are in the USA and not Europe and hatches don’t really sell
Scion is so over priced. it costs just under $20,000 for a well equipped 2013 XB with an auto trans. A 2013 Corolla with auto trans and power windows/locks etc with rebates costs about $16,000-$17,000 and has a trunk. Corolla has been a best seller for decades and is cheap to own and run
In short Toyota’s holy then thou attitude keeps them from seeing that nobody wants those damned cars. Most kids fresh out of school that are getting a new car is ether going to Hyundai/ Kia for an Accent, Rio, Elantra or Forte or getting a Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla.
In fact most young folks I see driving around in a new car are in a Corolla or Civic.
In short Scion is competing for the most part with Toyota and the Corolla. If they want to ever sell Scions then they need to lower the price or price the Corolla over the Scion products
I will disagree on the hatchback not selling as that depends on where you are, and if you aren’t a hatchback kinda guy, then you may be likely to say that.
Out where I live, hatchbacks seem to sell in very decent numbers, even now. I would say at least half of the current Focus and the current Fiesta are hatches. I see plenty of the Hyundai hatchbacks, of various vintages, most from 2000 to the present, heck even the Kia Rio5, and the Rhonda5 both sold plenty of hatchbacks.
The Mazda Protege5 was a hot seller, and the current Mazda 3 is also selling plenty of the hatchbacks – mind you, most are now only coming as a 5 door these days, and are plenty premium then they once were.
Also, much of the Yari and Versi are hatchbacks too, rather than their sedan stablemate as well, as most of these also come in sedan form as an option. Also, the little Fiat 500 is selling quite briskly, despite being 1, a 3 door hatchback, and two, it’s tiny. Even the larger 500L seems to be selling briskly for a model that was just introduced, and both are hatchbacks, though the L is a 5 door.
So to make a blanket statement that hatchbacks don’t sell, not so much, as it all depends on where you live.
For the record, I drive a 5 door Mazda Protege5 and would not have it any other way as I’m a hatchback/small wagon kinda guy.
I guess my past post was not so clear. I did not mean to imply that nobody in the USA is buying hatchback cars only that they really are not popular to the majority of folks. I live in MD/VA/DC area(aka RT495) which is a hotbed of cars of every shape or form. The only hatchback cars I ever see loads of are the following
1. Mini
2. Hyundai Accent
3. Kia Rio
4. Yaris(when gas hits a high price)
5. Toyota Prius
6. Honda Fit
I have never seen a protage5 or a Spectra5(and the area is a hotbed of Mazda and Kia vehicles) I have seen a couple of those turbo Mazdaspeed Protege sedans in the past few weeks.
With the exception of the Fit, Mini, Prius, Yaris, Matrix, the Scion etc and niche cars (like the Fiat 500) car companies are not making stand alone hatchback cars. They are part of a family of cars(aka Focus wagon and sedan) and the sedans outsell their hatch counterparts.
I am not talking about the wagons only hatchbacks
You mention the Fiat 500, it does not sell and Chrysler still seems perplexed about why. The Focus offered a hatch and wagon along with a sedan but dropped the hatch from 08-11 because it did not sell. Even now there is more sedan Foci out there then hatch versions.
I like a good hatch also and have owned and loved them but i can see them going the way of manual trans(a niche market item)
Leon,
That may well be your area. The Protege5 was only sold in 2002-2003, and was replaced by the Mazda 3. They are offered in sedan and hatchback, as was the protege, though up through 2001, we in NA only got the sedan. The 323 hatchback was dropped by 1993 when the 323 nameplate was dropped.
Despite it all, I see plenty of the P5’s all over Seattle/Bellevue, pretty much every day of the week, as I see plenty of the regular Protege sedans (and they don’t rust out here either so that may be why you don’t see them much as Mazdas of this vintage did rust more than most at the time.
That said, I think it largely depends on where you are and the hatchback will remain, now that they aren’t thought of as the base car anymore. If anything, the sedans cost LESS, and are somewhat less equipped (read, less premium) than the hatchback, at least in some models in any event.
So who knows, the hatchback may die out, but it may not, as long as small cars up through the compact class remain reasonably popular, whereby the hatchback, or small wagon prove more advantageous than most sedans of the same size.
Also, I find that most modern hatchbacks today may not be any more noisier than their sedan counterparts as most cars today are quite quiet.
So, to each his own.
I find that as a premium option, hatchbacks sell in cities (including small ones) and inner-ring suburbs where single people or couples/families own one car or their other one’s a paid-for older small car which would usually be a sedan from the era where that was all that was available, especially used (as an aside, clean ’96-00 Civic hatchbacks are gold dust, and have been for some time). The hatch is the household’s prime mover.
In outer ‘burbs, exurbs and rural areas where people own pickups and big SUVs and the new compact is mainly a commuter car, spending the extra grand on a hatch isn’t as rational a financial decision.
Toyota builds two distinct nonhybrid C-segment hatchbacks, the Matrix and xB, both of which have dated, controversial styling and are nearing the end of their design cycle. The wise move would indeed be to replace both with the global Corolla 5-door hatch that would share sheetmetal from the rear doors forward with the sedan.
Nlpnt,
All very good points, and well taken, still in all, it’s a blanket statement that Leon was making was my point – and I would agree that hatchbacks will be more prevalent in areas like cities and the exburbs.
I would also say that the split tailgage Civics are also well popular too, at least out here where rust isn’t an issue.
Hatches DO sell decently (see: Ford Focus), just not overpriced mediocre garbage like the current Matrix. It’s seriously flawed thinking to offer overpriced and underwhelming hatchbacks like Toyota does and then throw your hands up in the air when they don’t sell and say “Americans just don’t like hatchbacks!”.
The original Matrix sold well, the 2009 restyle killed it. Americans don’t buy cars that resemble toads.
21k toads at that. That kinda money gets you a Focus hatch, a Golf, a Mazda3, all of which are light years better.
Scion’s the reason Toyota seems so bland. All the products with any edge, that would be todays Supras and Celicas, are now Scions. I wonder how much it cost them giving up on those well-known names?
You might say Scion is Toyota’s Mercury. Mercury was a slow starter from 1938, with a hazy definition, then the disruption of WW II and postwar. It took the 1949 Merc to get people’s attention and kick the brand off right.
What would that hit car be for Scion?
Just double checked US sales figures (wiki link here). Mercury jumped from 16th, just ahead of Frazer, in 1948 to sixth in ’49, ahead of Olds and Dodge, a factor of six in sales. Then Mercury stayed in the top ten for decades.
Speaking as a member of the Scion’s age demographic, I couldn’t see buying one except for the FR-S. They don’t appeal to me because they are simply rebadged mainstream Toyota’s. I’m not in a position to afford a new car, and I’d much rather buy older European cars as I find them more satisfying to drive and own. My wallet usually disagrees with those statements. But having a interesting car is more important to me, than tech toys and the other things popular with my generation.
Scion is a bit like Saturn, just without a dedicated dealer network and the sharp divisional lines that early Saturn manufacturing was done under. But, the hoped for demographic is similar.
Like GM, Toyota doesn’t really need another brand. Toyota lead the way with putting the Sloan ladder under one brand, except for the very top tier, and Ford and GM have gone that way. Toyota was worried that the Toyota brand was becoming too staid for the youth market, and Scion became the solution. Some sportier small Toyota’s would have been a smarter solution.
And, the youth market is overrated. New successful smaller cars with a youthful image always end up in the hands of people with real paychecks, a bit of grey hair, and maybe some paunch. Falcon was my parents first new car – married people with jobs. I saw my first 1965 Mustang as a second car in my neighbor’s driveway, parked next to a 1966 Impala wagon and house full of kids.
I knew a few 20 somethings that literally got out of Cavaliers and such for a few early Saturns. We all know how well model proliferation and sales disintermediation worked for GM.
So, like the Chrysler Imperial, the Toyota Scion (that’s what everybody seems to call them, if they even mention them), represents too many models in the Toyota stable that don’t sell very well.
Car companies market to young men, not because young men buy a lot of new cars but because it’s axiomatic among car salesmen that selling a youthful car to a mature customer is easier than selling a fogeyish car to a kid; and it’s likewise easier to sell a macho car to a woman than a chick car to a guy.
Basically, Toyota is trying to do with GM did with Pontiac back in the mid/late-50’s: Give the car a youthful image, hope the youth buy them, and work with a reasonable assurance that older people with youthful thinking will buy them.
A combination of the economy and changing tastes ensures that it’s not that simple anymore.
FRS debuting with 50 more HP (for the same price) would have helped things, if they hadn’t screwed the pooch on the replacement of the xB, and although I kind like the tC (I’ve gotten to ride in one) the pricing has never really said “youth” to me. Actually the tC I rode in was owned by a 50 something man, I thought the back seat room was pretty good for a coupe.
It is a brand that just doesn’t fulfill its mission. Cheapest xD within 500 miles of me $16,184 only about $500 off MSRP, cheapest xB at $17,739 which is MSRP, tC at $19,480 which was $1000 off MSRP (hey someone wants to deal finally), iQ at $16,340 which is MSRP (starting to see a pattern?), and the FR-S $24,714 which is MSRP.
If you were young and had money the problem for Scion is that I can likely get a turbo Cruze for the price the xD/xB/tC depending on option packages and the iQ is spanked by the Chevy Sonic whose real world price undercuts it by thousands of dollars. Heck you could get a Mustang or Camaro or Miata for FR-S money. I just don’t see the brand giving any young person a compelling reason to choose them.
Scion’s next stop? Oblivion…
As a first generation xB owner: The FRS doesn’t thrill me having been spoiled by a Porsche 924S. I’d rather pick up another really clean front-engined Porsche. And ditto Dan’s Mustang comment. This is my first and last xB, because I specifically bought the car because it was small and hit the back roads like a go-cart. The new one (I’ve driven it) is bloated. The tC hits me as a pale imitation of a Celica, it just doesn’t turn me on at all. And the xD is there. If there’s anything in the line that might interest me, that’s it, strikes me as an xB with messed-up styling.
And, for my next car, I’m seriously thinking hybrid. Or plug in. Don’t see one of either in Scion’s lineup.
For any other company I would say you don’t need a “youth” brand. Make the right car and they will come, doesn’t matter what’s on the hood. Cars make the brand not the other way around.
But T has become such a staid nameplate that I think it would be a negative, even on the perfect car.
So keep it. But, seeing as how younger folks are less interested in cars, do much more than you have to attract them. The tC and xB second gens being worse than the first is really lame, so no more of that stuff or what’s the point of the brand.
Since there are no emotionally satisfying hyper-effiecent cars out there (except Model S) I would do one for Scion, even if it’s a bit pricey.
Take that BRZ platform, make it a 4-seat coupe or 4-door along the lines of the Chevy Code 130R concept. No minivan windshield like the Prius, make it stiff. Have lots of engine choice to sell a lot and make it worth the investment. Gas boxer for the affordability buyer. Boxer diesel to have a fun green car (with a heartbeat) that the kids will want. The RWD platform should allow for beefier transmissions that can handle the full through put of torque from a modern diesel. Subaru makes a boxer diesel.
Do an HEV version of the diesel to compete with the Tesla post-S model, at a much lower price. Once a month fill-ups, versus every night plug ins. Lower CO2 emissions than an EV, considering the way we generate electricity in the US. A car like this will appeal to everyone.
A bit of a gamble but that’s what brands like this should be for.
Cultural trends, schmultural trends. I’ve shopped Scions. The original xB was ahead of its time, but the rest of them are yawners. I found nothing defining or head-turning about the current lineup that would sway me away from the competition. For example, the xD, compared to the Fit (which I bought), was smaller and cramped inside, and just plain numb to drive. Basically, it was a Toyota. At least it doesn’t have that dumb center-mounted instrument cluster.
When Saturn was introduced, it did an absolutely amazing job marketing itself, playing up the made-in-America, the no-haggle pricing, and the plastic no-dent doors. It had a brand identity and relatively solid cars that got decent reviews compared to the competition. Scion has neither.
And i would not trade my ’96 SL2, which only has 190K on the clock for any Scion.
My Planet is not perfect after all these years, not refined, but it works. And works. And works. Car owes me NOTHING
Like some others, I would argue that the Scion brand has hurt more than helped. Its not the brand, its the cars. They are going to sell or not, depending on their pricing and appeal. Same dealers, same service, just call them a Toyota.
As someone said above, Scion has sucked any fun/youth-oriented cars out of the Toyota line, and artificially aged Toyota, yet Scion has not really grabbed youth as it was supposed to, either.
Chrysler, as a brand, was supposedly dead as far as anyone under 60 was concerned, in the mid 90s. Not now – but it was not marketing, it was the cars.
FRS should have been a Toyota Supra.
The real question here is, can a world-class automaker succeed today with more than two makes? Ford-Lincoln, Dodge-Chrysler, Honda-Acura, Nissan-Infiniti, VW-Audi. GM’s OK with Chevy-Buick-Cadillac since everyone knows what a Buick is (especially in China).
Toyota-Scion-Lexus or just Toyota-Lexus?
With the power(or lack there of) the FR-S produces I’d think calling it a Supra would ruffle the feathers of the fans of the nameplate, hopelessly pining for a continuation of their twin turbo straight 6es. Celica would be more appropriate, although it’s last generation did end with a bit of chick car stigma, the FR-S would have been the perfect redemption for the Celica name IMO
And I don’t think so. There’s too many actual companies with full model lineups today for a multidivisional Sloan hierarchy to work. Two seems to be the max these days, and even that might be excessive(I’m looking at you Lincoln). Scion never made sense to me.
Well in all fairness, VW-Audi also includes all sorts of other makes too, like Bentley, Bugatti, Seat.
GM also has all sorts of other makes in other places besides Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac AND GMC.
The tc should have been called a Toyota Celica
There are plans to build a new Supra. Toyoda wants to have a troika of rear-drive sporty cars: the Supra at the top, 86/ FR-S in the middle, and a third car at the lower end.
Toyota really screwed the pooch when they stopped making the Celica. A sport(y) car with an ironclad rep for reliability will never stop selling. Look at the Miata and Nissan’s 370z. I see new ones on the road all the time. The 1st gen TC was interesting, but the 2nd gen restyle is fugly.
Ten years, has it been that long? Well, not in Canada. Scion didn’t come to Canada until 2010. Seems odd that they waited so long, considering that Canadians like small cars, which is what Scion predominantly offers.
Seems to me that targeting “the youth market” is a losing proposition. I read that they were initially looking at the 18-to-24 market. I only know one person whose first car was purchased brand new. In that segment they are very much competing against used cars. I have seen a couple Scions driven by younger coworkers, I presume recently graduated. This would put them the top edge of Scion’s 18-to-24 target, but really a different market of people now gainfully employed with a better income and credit rating than when they were students.
However, as Bunkie Knudsen famously said, “You can sell a young car to old people, but you can’t sell an old car to young people.” If they’re secretly using psychology to target older people by claiming that Scion is a “youth” brand, then I’d have to give Toyota credit for running such a grand experiment.
To me what Scion (like most Toyotas) lacks is any sense of style or excitement. You can admire (worship?) their practicality and durability or even quirkiness, but I can’t remember experiencing anything like a ‘frisson of desire’ within sight of a Toyota product.
Maybe Toyota should have taken a harder look at the Mini in framing the direction for their ‘new’ youth-oriented brand. That’s a car with style and desirability written all over it, clearly focussed on a younger demographic, and yet engineered and constructed in a way that makes it a respectable choice for a wide range of buyers.
Ten years, Holy crap! Well that puts me right back in 2003 at age 15, learners permit in hand. My recollection of Scion at the time harkens back to Fast and the Furious inspired ad campaigns, promotions and giveaways with EXTREME things like Mountain Dew and Playstations, and lots and lots of emphasis on “customization”. Stereo laden abominations like that yellow/orange XB even showed up in their commercials.
Did any of this appeal to me? God no. But I was always a bit out of touch. In 2003 I was listening to Black Sabbath and sifting through piles of Old-Car-Trader trying to find a big V8 RWD coupe I could afford. My first and only direct exposure to Scion was right before I graduated high school as my friend wanted to buy a new car. He originally wanted a TC but instead opted for a final Acura RSX-S. Since then it seemed like Scion’s just been trying to capture the same market that was there in 2003, when fart cans and bolt on spoilers were the keys to “cool”, but that fad was on decline even then, now it’s the joke the few of us always knew it was. And here lies Scion today, the metaphorical fart can attached to the back of an aging Toyota.
“And here lies Scion today, the metaphorical fart can attached to the back of an aging Toyota.”
HAH
In discussing Scion, comparisons to other brands is not all that valid, since Scion is an in-house “sub brand”, like the growing Prius sub-brand. That’s quite different than comparing it to the other brands that require massive commitments and separate dealers.
That’s not arguing pro or con for Scion (I think they should just pull the plug and call them all Toyotas), but it is an important distinction. Carry on….
That’s an interesting distinction, and that so many here may see it as a full fledged brand says something about Toyota’s muddy and rarely anymore marketed identity for it.
Prius wears a big “T” logo on it’s nose. Scion has its own logo. They can call Prius a sub brand, but I’m not sure any Prius fans really care one way or the other. Toyota says quality and trust my new technology. I’m not sure why Toyota would want to change that.
I’m guessing the cars get registered as Toyota Prius, and Scion XB, etc., that probably cements brand image as much as anything.
Scion almost seems a “companion brand” in the ancient GM definition of the term.
Scions are legally registered as Toyotas; at least mine is.
Agreed about the “companion brand”.
I thought Scion had its own dealers, like Lexus does. You’d sure think so from the ads. And I don’t remember seeing them at my downtown Portland Toyota dealer. I’m surprised enough that I double-checked.
That is totally messed up. No wonder Scion is failing.
It was never intended to be a separate “brand”, but just a couple of funkier Toyotas sold under a different name, because at the time it was felt that kids that grew up with parents driving Toyotas wouldn’t want to be caught dead in a car with the same name on the hood.
Legally, Scions are Toyotas, and included in Toyota’s sales stats, etc…
Actually the best comparison to Scion was the late Geo. Both were sub brands, and neither marque showed up on your title when you bought one. Own a Scion, the title says Toyota. Own a Geo, the title says Chevrolet.
I’ve had one of each, so this comes from experience – split between two states, PA and VA.
Maybe that’s the future of Scion: The Toyota tC or Toyota FRS (which is almost what they call it in Japan?).
Here’s how to shortcut the development of the new halo product for Scion and be 100% certain you got it right.
Call a brainstorming session. Invite your best engineers, designers and sales & marketing people. Order lunch. At the end of lunch drive a Prius into the room and instruct the team to do the opposite. Guaranteed home run.
Are you sure?
This reminds me a bit of GM’s decision to essentially “drop” the Oldsmobile name, on their new flagship for that division, when they launched the Aurora. Due to that direction, Oldsmobile itself got minimal lift from a pretty interesting product. In fact, it cemented the notion that Oldsmobiles were frumpy and dumpy, as no stylish new car would be saddled with that moniker. Way to kill a brand! In Toyota’s case, Scion did nothing to burnish the youthful credibility of the parent brand, and now seems irrelevant. If done right, it could have injected the Toyota brand with some much needed product and “customization” spice (a strength of the early cars at least was how uniquely they could be outfitted). As it was, Scion was merely a flash in the pan. Stick a fork in it–take the best of the products, make them Toyotas (Celica anyone?), and continue to attract whatever Scion audience remains. It’s not as if Scion customers and intenders didn’t know it was a Toyota anyway…
“This reminds me a bit of GM’s decision to essentially “drop” the Oldsmobile name, on their new flagship for that division, when they launched the Aurora. Due to that direction, Oldsmobile itself got minimal lift from a pretty interesting product. In fact, it cemented the notion that Oldsmobiles were frumpy and dumpy, as no stylish new car would be saddled with that moniker.”
+1
Aurora was sort of a sub-brand for Oldsmobile when it first launched too, not ever Oldsmobile dealer sold Auroras at first, it was only awarded to dealerships that met certain requirements, they had to have a space set aside in the showroom for the Aurora and Aurora merchandising materials. Aurora window stickers even read Aurora in big letters at the top instead of Oldsmobile, there was a little “by Oldsmobile” underneath.
Kinda ironic about the Aurora having that “by Oldsmobile” on the sticker as if to shield the car from the brand especially since it was used in total opposite meaning with GM billing the Cimarron as Cimarron by Cadillac to shield Cadillac from a rebadged J Car
True, though GM used to love to do that “authored” nameplate jive for a long time, Riviera by Buick, Toronado by Oldsmobile, etc.
Death by A Thousand Cuts.
I would like to see some of the appealing European Toyotas sold here as Scions, like the Auris and Avensis, but I don’t know if they would sell well.
auris=corolla
My biggest take on Scion is that it’s just Toyota in disguise. They didn’t even try to change the basic feel/handling of the Yaris when it became the xA/xD, though I did like its styling the best of the entire lineup, though the xD is certainly better looking than it’s xA predecessor.
That said, if they had just livened up the handling/steering/road manners of the Yaris along with a new body and interior, I think the xA/xD for starters would have done much better, but at the end of the day, it WAS just a boring Yaris in drag.
The same goes for the xB, both iterations so in essence, outside of bodies and interiors, and some interiors I don’t think were even as well thought out as in their Yota stablemates, just Yotas in drag and nothing else.
That and their pricing wasn’t enough to have young buyers in to buy them, so in the end, it was older buyers with perhaps a youthful attitude, but with money that bought them.
Anyway, that was my feeling pretty much from the beginning.
how about a CC on another Toyota’s child DAIHATSU?please.
Daihatsu is a separate company, Japan’s oldest automaker (1907). Toyota bought a controlling interest in 1999, and Toyota did distribute Daihatsu in the US. (Wiki link)
“Is the Scion brand a true failure for Toyota, or merely a dud?”
If forced to choose, I would say “dud”. But I would choose neither.
Scion isn’t a brand in the traditional sense — there are no separate Scion dealerships, and the affiliation with the parent brand is clear to the consumer. Rather, it was an experiment with youth marketing and no-haggle pricing. It was also a test to see whether some elements of Japanese marketing could be used in the US.
In terms of age demographics, Scion did well. It has the lowest average age of any brand in the industry, with the tC having the lowest average age of any nameplate.
But in terms of volume, it was lousy, as you know.
The no-haggle pricing doesn’t seem to have achieved much. Consumers tell survey companies that they like this sort of thing, but then feel ripped off if they can’t secure price reductions from the dealer.
The aftermarket customization aspect also doesn’t seem to have worked out. Scion wanted to capture the ricer market, but that trend seems to have fallen out of favor.
The real test of success is whether Scion buyers can be converted into Toyota buyers as they get older. I don’t have that data, and I doubt that Toyota would ever publish it.
On the whole, Scion has been a non-event. I would suggest that it was a bad idea — if the goal was to bring youth into the Toyota family, then it would have been preferable to have done that within the Toyota brand. Focus on youthful nameplates within the brand, rather than on youthful branding, so that the brand equity created with the first sale isn’t wasted with the second sale.
weird thing is I consider a Lexus a Lexus but Scion a Toyota. I’ve only ever looked at an XB and thought about owning one. The TC was a tercel with a premium audio system. Point. blank. period. Moreover, it got kind of pricey for something without a turbo. Better to pick up a five or six-year-old used one on the cheap. And like the tercel, it wasn’t really cool to look at. Kinda thought Scion was going to be Toyota’s Saturn brand. But it is still around and I was wrong. Not the right place to write this but I am going to miss the Matrix.
Scion has stupid, dumb, forgettable, meaningless names for their cars.
Who would willingly announce or want to chat about driving something called an XB, TC, or whatever they are called? Give them great names and perhaps it will help. They aren’t bad looking cars..
Nobody bitched about TC when MG used it. Of course, they capitalized both letters. And that was 65 years ago. But it’s still a legend.
When I first heard XB I immediately thought Falcon
yes though in NZ its a Toyota BB.
When was the last time you saw an ad for the xD or xB? How many do they sell anymore, and what portion go to fleets? What compelling reason is there to buy one anymore?
The iQ seems to be popular…with about one person in my area. Other than that, I’ve never seen another on the road. Okay, maybe once.
The FR-S is an excellent effort, and I’ve seen them around, but the market for this kind of sports car is inherently limited.
The tC is nice in its own right, but sadly it’s just another compact, lost in the sea of more aggressively advertised and incentivized competition. It needs a five-door version.
I love my ’05 xB, purchased used in ’09 (with 22k!). But the replacement for the Gen1 xB isn’t the Gen2 xB, it’s the Kia Soul. The new xB is an ugly pig.
Behold the ultimate Scion iQ (also the ultimate chutzpah and the ultimate example of badge engineering), the Aston Martin Cygnet.
Wasn’t the intention that you had to have one of the big Aston-Martin’s before they’d be willing to sell one of these to you? I believe the car was done so A-M owners could drive into London without paying the incredible congestion charges. At no time have I read that some status-seeking punter with little bank account could go into an Aston-Martin dealership and buy one of these.
If I recall correctly the main reason for this Toyota~Scion~Aston Martin is to lower the CO2 emissions for the Aston Martin brand as a whole.
Automakers have to deal with current and future CO2 regulations. (So I’ve read)
The Cygnet is a compliance car. Europe has its own version of CAFE, and the Cygnet should reduce the company’s fleet-wide emissions
i seriously doubt that avoidance of a £10 toll would have motivated many Aston Martin buyers to buy one. But in any case, the Cygnet doesn’t qualify for a congestion charge exemption. EVs and plug-in hybrids such as the Volt are exempt from paying it.
I am of the opinion that the Scion brand has been a colossal waste of money. Toyota could have sold their models all the same under their parent brand.
I say this as a former first gen xB owner, which in of itself is dangerously too slow for american roads. the engine itself is amazingly reliable, but it has no business pushing a square box.
I also say this as a current owner of a 2012 scion xb, which i am very happy with, it has a proper powertrain.