Would you pay $45,000 for a Taurus?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael Bivens on July 15, 2009 at 1:00pm

$45k must be for the sporty SHO. You can't charge Audi prices for a base Taurus. I have to agree with Mr. Nolan's comment about domestic companies giving consumers reasons not to buy. I tried several times over the past 15 years and came up dry every time.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Linda J Ranger on July 15, 2009 at 2:32pm

I agree with Michael.....that price is for the SHO which is a very special high performance model. The average price is around 30K which is similar in price to many other cars in the same catorgory. See Edmonds for normal pricing. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2010/ford/taurus/101148207/prices.html
I like the new Taurus since the seats sit you higher than most sedans and the trunk space is good.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Michael R. on July 15, 2009 at 3:48pm

30K is still too much for a Taurus, IMO:)

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Linda J Ranger on July 15, 2009 at 4:10pm

Test drive the Ford Taurus against other similar size cars....the car reviews are quite good. Ford no longer builds a Crown Victoria model so the Taurus is now their full size luxury car and its pricing is similar to all of its competition.
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090622/CARREVIEWS/906229996

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Bill Bean on July 15, 2009 at 5:25pm

That's a serious upgrade for the Taurus brand. I doubt it will work. Ford brands don't carry that kind of weight anyway. The days of giant automakers that make many different kinds of vehicles are numbered, to say the least. This is the wrong direction for Ford.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Cissi Sherlock on July 15, 2009 at 6:00pm

If you want 45 grand for a Taurus, it will have to be the Cadillac of automobiles. if that's the case, change the name becasue people still equate the Taurus with the dependable cost effective car of earlier.

The specs and amenities would have to be totally different. And, if it does have those types of packages added to it, then it should not be called Taurus. Or it should be called Taurus "The Gold Edition" or El Diablo or something!

Yes, Cissi knows cars, too. Not only am I affectionado, I used to sell them on an actual car lot!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jeremy King on July 16, 2009 at 10:15am

Yes, yes, Cissi!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Brian Huff on July 15, 2009 at 8:14pm

I'd be interested to see how many of the amenities available for the new Taurus are standard and how many cost extra. I'd also like to know what kind of performance it offers. There will be some who will buy it no matter what the specs are and there will be some who absolutely refuse because it's a Taurus. Personally, I doubt it equals the overall value of a new Acura TL.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John R.(Dick) Troll on July 15, 2009 at 8:49pm

There is only one way for Ford ( and GM and Chrylser) to claw their way back into the minds of a large number of consumers. Honda did it. Toyota did it. And now Hyundai has done it. What's the secret?

Offer consumers more for less. More car for less money. Not almost as good. Not "made in America' good. But "wow that's a heck of a lof of car for the money" good.

So, to answer your question directly: will consumers pay 45K for a Taurus?
Sure some will. But not enough to change the game. Because there are too mamy other 45K cars that have established a place in the minds of folks looking to spend that kind of money.

Sell the SHO for 35K. Sell the regular Taurus for 25K. Make them bulletproof. Instill superb customer service,

Then perhaps Ford will have a chance.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul Poteet on July 16, 2009 at 9:50pm

We were at Tom Wood Ford just the other week. Great, genuine sales guy, and we'd love to buy from a non-bailed-out company right about now. The new Taurus does look/sound fantastic, but I think Ford would've been better off with a new brand.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Cannon on July 16, 2009 at 11:55pm

What Ford is NOT telling the public is that they are bankrupt, but chose not to take the bailout money because they A) didn't want to surrender controlling majority share of their company to the government like GM agreed to do and B) wanted to be able to use that statement in their commercials to boost consumer confidence in their longevity.

As reported by the Wall Street Journal:

"GM ranked as the top global automaker in terms of sales for 77 years before Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. snatched its crown in 2008. The company sold nearly 8.4 million cars and trucks around the world in 2008, falling short of Toyota's nearly 9 million.

Once the largest corporation in America, GM held the top spot in the Fortune 500 ranking for 20 years before being pushed out of the top spot in 1973 by Exxon Mobil Corp. It reclaimed No. 1 status in 1985 and held it for another 15 years."

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last