dboz

iTrader: (1)

Whats it matter as long as MITSU gets the sale for one of them. If the RA price is too high you move on to the MS3, Cobalt SS, WRX. WHy would Mitsu care if RA ate up EVO sales. That would mean you really did not want an EVO anyway, or they did not make the EVO good enough to justify the cost.

Ramen_Noodle

iTrader: (3)

Eliminate the GTS? Why have so many different models of the same car? Keep the base model lancers with plenty of options to choose from, the Ralliart, and the EVO. It would atleast bridge the gap between the Ralliart and GTS pricing and leave more room for adjustment of the Ralliarts price. Without going into too much detail I would say that sounds about right to me but I am NO expert.

whodizking

Wow you guys are getting crazy here. It is alittle high but like one person said 27k soon enough with Recaro package. Plus you all sit here saying the WRX is that much cheaper but fully loaded its expensive too. And all this that "its cutting into Evo sales", please a sale is a sale for them at this point. The Evo doesnt sell to the Mass market anywayz so the Ralliart will help that. Plus, the ones that cant get the Evo fully loaded now get a Baby Evo.
Why would they ever cut out the lower end Lancers under the GTS, that makes no sense since the lower line brings in much of the profit and sales. I feel there will be a Manual in the next model year and pricing might go alittle lower (slightly) but 26k it will stay close around.
Also Evos being sold for 28k is rare and if it is in the range of 29-32k(with SSS pack.) and you are into the peformance and have the money then get the Evo. If you want more fully loaded with potential of more power and lower insurance (slightly since lancers are some how more then most) plus lower payments, then get a Ralliart.
Lastly if you are so mad at pricing please leave and buy a WRX (that is ugly in my opinion with more HP)

Bimmubishi

iTrader: (3)

...because a company's goal is to create a product line with enough differentiation such that a customer won't have difficulty in deciding what to buy and that the sale of one product will not take away from the sale of another in the same company's lineup.

The similarity is perhaps too close for the average customer and having extra Evos on the lot will eventually cause a price drop into the RA range. When the Evo leftovers are in the RA price range the RA isn't a good deal any more.

Thus, product cannibalism.

The only other explanation is that this was an attempt at a preemptive strike at Subaru, only too late. I say preemptive because they, by all accounts were trying to come up with a WRX competitor but it's tool late for preemption because the new shape WRX has been on the market for a year and is selling well to the mass market.

The only competitive advantage that the Ralliart has over the WRX are active diffs.

Alex

Bimmubishi

iTrader: (3)

I'm sort of talking to myself here but this really interests me. The RA is a great car. I've made no assertion otherwise. I just think that Mitsubishi is not on the ball, nor have they ever been in determining what the US needs for cars and trucks. We need a ford transit/honda Element type car from Mitsu.

We need a 2wd turbo hatch. For every GTI on the road there could be a Colt.
That's a lot of cars. about 11,000 GTI in 2005. For a 2 door niche market hatch isn't bad. Lancer Evolution Sales for 2005- (get ready...) 312

What about a hybrid? Everywhere I go I see Prius.

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

I don't think the situation is as bad as people make it out to be. The problem isn't intra-manufacturer competition but inter-manufacturer competition. No one who wants an evo and has the money for an evo will buy the Ralliart, it's not even in the same league performance wise. If Mitsubishi was smart they would drop the price of the Ralliart by 1000$, hold out for a year and then release a "revised" Ralliart that comes with a bit more HP (easy to get with a tune) and maybe stiffer springs and struts and then tack 1000$ onto the price.

dboz

iTrader: (1)

Still my same point. As long as you bought one of their cars, why would they care. If you are making products that similar, as I noted, you need to up the upper end product. If the market does not support it, it is not a good product. IE, demand dictates the market. If you can't sell it, it ain't good enough.

Also, I don;t think the average customer shops MITSU at all. That is their problem. And NO average customer goes in to look and comes out with an EVO as I doubt they even know what it is. They see the price and say WTF!!

While cannibalization may be bad for a company as far as production costs, they are still selling cars. If you leave for Subie, then you lost out. Amby has a good point. RA should be a little more competitive to make the decision easier. While the RA may be nice, I am skeptical on tunability as the MR does seem to have some shifting issues when mods are added.

Also, look at DODGE. The Charger and the Challenger. Basically the same car. 2 vs. 4 door. Similar prices. Consumers are not confused. Dodge could care less which one you choose. Just so that you buy one of the two, whichever fits your needs. Same with RA and EVO.

TruboPower

People need to stop *****ing about the pricing, 9/10 people complaining don't look at the bigger picture and realize its a better value. You know how many other cars I could take a lower trim of and add a few accessory's and pass the higher trim model in price? a lotttt



Remember guys, you always have Kia and Hyundai if you have that many pennies to count.

bye2u

wow the pricing is so close between models in the US..

in Aus the RA will be around 40k or so.. GSR is 60 and the MR is 70 ish..

Although the insurance for the evo x GSR is a killer for me so i think RA will be my choice..

eddie

iTrader: (1)

I agree with you on your original points but here are some possible reason as to why Mitsu. is where they are as far as their current avail. NA product.

1.Ralliart with TSST tranny: the unit cost them a bundle to design and manufacture (I've heard as much as $50,000,000.00) and they have to make their money back.
2. Evo 5spd. is expensive and won't fit in the Ralliart without a redesigned subframe.
3. Because of the rising cost of raw materials, Mitsu. (along with many manufacturers) are not making money (and in some cases) loosing money on there least expensive cars which they need to sell so as to not get taxed up the as# by the government for only selling higher end gas guzzlers. A balance between high-end and low-end models has to be maintained.
4. Redesigning the Colt or 'i' for the US market would cost Mitsu. a small fortune from money they don't have. Add that small problem to the one I just listed above and you can see their issue. Mitsu. isn't Honda and as such they do not have the financial capital to invest in a product that 1: may not sell in the #'s they need it to and 2: will lose money even if it did.

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

Why won't the evo 5-speed fit the Ralliart? If the TC-SST fits then logically so should the 5-speed.

eddie

iTrader: (1)

Well if the TSST tranny and 5spd. were exactly the same size/shape, you'd be correct but the design requires different cross-members and minor changes to the subframe.

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

Use the 5-speed from the older evo then, I don't see why it would be a difficult option.

ExcessLancer

There are so many simple things they could to to fix this situation.. but will they???

ExcessLancer

Those 2 brands are outselling mitsu now and building good reputations with consumers..... and that is sad... they simply sell well built cars with good prices for that get good reviews for cheaper than the competition.. mitsu's ego is too big to do that... they dont realize the golden years of the eclipse GS-t and GSX and 3000gt are over