GM Press Release: Chevrolet Lifts Lid on 2014 Corvette Stingray Convertible

[Evolution1980]

So you're saying that if the convertible was $5K cheaper than the coupe, they sell more convertibles than coupes but the total sales would be the same. Would make an interesting experiment.

Based on what I wrote, I don't fully understand where your question is coming from. :confused

"...but the total sales would be the same." Are you referring to total sales volume of "each type" or "total of the two", or are you referring to total sales revenue?

 

[73shark]

Based on what I wrote, I don't fully understand where your question is coming from. :confused

"...but the total sales would be the same." Are you referring to total sales volume of "each type" or "total of the two", or are you referring to total sales revenue?

I was just saying that based on the logic of your argument, if the coupe and convertible prices were switched, they'd sell more convertibles than coupes with total sales remaining the same. I don't know if that would happen or not which is why I said it would make an interesting experiment.

As far as the $60,000 extra for a ZR-1, I suspect that is based upon it being a very low volume car w/ a pretty hefty R&D outlay to recoup.

 

[Evolution1980]

I was just saying that based on the logic of your argument, if the coupe and convertible prices were switched, they'd sell more convertibles than coupes with total sales remaining the same. I don't know if that would happen or not which is why I said it would make an interesting experiment.

Maybe, maybe not. Considering the factor of "What will people pay" still comes into play. Just because the 'vert would be cheaper doesn't necessarily mean it would sell more. While a 'vert is nice in some areas, there are still benefits to having a fixed roof, thus it might be worth more to me to pay more for a fixed roof.
I will agree that it would make for an interesting study if they were the same price. I think there would be a slight bump in vert sales. However, when you get into the $50K+ range for a car, I'm not entirely sure that coughing up an additional $5K for a vert is all that difficult. If you really want it, then it's easy to justify. Just as it's easy to justify buying this new vette instead of last year's model or any other car for that matter.

As far as the $60,000 extra for a ZR-1, I suspect that is based upon it being a very low volume car w/ a pretty hefty R&D outlay to recoup.

"Low volume" is intentional. It artificially creates a higher price due to exclusitivity. Think about it... all the R&D is done. Tooling and supply chains are in place. If Chevy decided to only mass produce ZR-1's, it could. And it could likely do it for only slightly more than the cost of the base Corvette. Sure, there are inherently more expensive parts on the ZR-1, but if the entire production assembly line of Corvettes consisted only of ZR-1's, the volume produced would increase and the cost to GM would come down across the board. The end cost to buyers is intentionally and artifically so much higher because, among other reasons, Chevy chooses not to mass produce it.

I don't think I'm stating anything that's not pretty much already understood by most of us.

 

[73shark]

Maybe, maybe not. Considering the factor of "What will people pay" still comes into play. Just because the 'vert would be cheaper doesn't necessarily mean it would sell more. While a 'vert is nice in some areas, there are still benefits to having a fixed roof, thus it might be worth more to me to pay more for a fixed roof.
I will agree that it would make for an interesting study if they were the same price. I think there would be a slight bump in vert sales. However, when you get into the $50K+ range for a car, I'm not entirely sure that coughing up an additional $5K for a vert is all that difficult. If you really want it, then it's easy to justify. Just as it's easy to justify buying this new vette instead of last year's model or any other car for that matter.

"Low volume" is intentional. It artificially creates a higher price due to exclusivity. Think about it... all the R&D is done. Tooling and supply chains are in place. If Chevy decided to only mass produce ZR-1's, it could. And it could likely do it for only slightly more than the cost of the base Corvette. Sure, there are inherently more expensive parts on the ZR-1, but if the entire production assembly line of Corvettes consisted only of ZR-1's, the volume produced would increase and the cost to GM would come down across the board. The end cost to buyers is intentionally and artificially so much higher because, among other reasons, Chevy chooses not to mass produce it.

I don't think I'm stating anything that's not pretty much already understood by most of us.

That's why I said it would make an interesting experiment.

I agree that the ZR-1 R&D is done but they have to pay for it and they won't do it by selling them for less than they are right now.

So what you're saying is Chevy is choosing to "gouge" the customer rather than mass produce the ZR-1.

 

[Evolution1980]

I agree that the ZR-1 R&D is done but they have to pay for it and they won't do it by selling them for less than they are right now.

Certainly they could make that money back. It's a basic margin-vs-volume issue. They have chosen to make $60K by only selling 100, versus making only $30K per unit but selling 200 of 'em. Either way, all other things being equal, their net margin is the same.

So what you're saying is Chevy is choosing to "gouge" the customer rather than mass produce the ZR-1.

"Gouge" was never my word; it was Bob's. That aside...
They are simply employing the same sales model as most other car mfgs: the model they feel generates them the most net profit across the entire Corvette line. (Also keeping in mind that this isn't the only reason they aren't mass producing the ZR-1.)

 

[SnakeDr]

Managed to go to the NY Auto Show today. C7 Coupe and Convertible was very very nice. Lots of oohs and ahhs as well as analyzing the vehicle improvements.