Its not the marketing that should get fired its the planning department. Absolutely horrendous decision.idk how the marketing department doesn’t get fired for having two identical vehicles with different names. Blows my mind.
100%. Mazda really need to clean house. They got really hung up on having different widths for different markets and I think that led to a lot of poor decisions.Its not the marketing that should get fired its the planning department. Absolutely horrendous decision.
Yes, they hit 2.37% U.S. market share in 54 years! The issue is it could be so much better if they would quit cocking up the U.S. Market.You people complaining about Mazda are funny, as their sales are better than ever. Let the market decide if their strategy will work out.
Me, I will need to see what is different between the CX-70 and CX90 to see which is better for me (if either).
The first sentence of the reveal should have been "The not quite all new CX-70 is X inches/mm in length with a curb weight of Y lbs/Kg." Guess they knew giving real information would be too embarassing.We should wait for official specs. But.. after all the waiting in the lead up to the reveal, it seems a bit unfair to ask to wait longer for official specifications from Mazda regarding wheelbase, overall size, weight, cargo space, pricing, etc.
They had a record year last year and are profitable. Again, they are a company, offering a product. If you like the product and it fits your needs, buy it. If you don't like it and it does not fit your needs, don't. This is a free market and the market will decide.Yes, they hit 2.37% U.S. market share in 54 years! The issue is it could be so much better if they would quit cocking up the U.S. Market.
- CX-3 having to be replaced by CX-30 because it was way too small
- ND Miata planned to have 1.5L in NA and having to do the ND2 refresh
- MX-30 EV with 100 mile range.
- A Outdoorsy oriented CX-5 which is actually selling OK, but took way too many resources
- A 2nd fullsize when the they already have 2 compacts and no midsize since 2012.
I truly believe this was not their original plan and a lack of some resource of some kind prevented them from executing a midsize 2-row in time for release (even a year late).
Why are people so desperate to defend incompetence? Most manufacturers had a great year last year...sales in the U.S. were up 11% year over year.They had a record year last year and are profitable. Again, they are a company, offering a product. If you like the product and it fits your needs, buy it. If you don't like it and it does not fit your needs, don't. This is a free market and the market will decide.
Why are people so desperate to defend incompetence? Most manufacturers had a great year last year...sales in the U.S. were up 11% year over year.
Almost everyone here likes Mazda's products. We have 2 in my family (CX-5 and MX-5). I was actually intending to own a 3rd...CX-70...had it been what was originally promised and expected by customers and the entire automotive press. My wife still has a CX-50 in the running though she is leaning to the X5 because she was hoping at 54 to get something smaller than her minivan, but bigger than my daughter's CX-5 and a step up in quality. She already shot down the X7 and CX-90 for being Minivan sized.
View attachment 325580
People are [insert every adjective in the book] because they are dumbfounded. I'm angry because I waited for this and it wasn't as promised and I know the only real competitors to it are $25K more. Google Midsize SUVs not hampered by 4 cylinder motors and FWD. This just wasn't that hard of a decision to make on what size of a 2-row SUV the CX-70 should have been. Guess which model is BMW's best selling SUV? If there is a reason, they went with a CX-90 without a backseat, then it behooves them to tell everyone. But standing there lying that they just announced an all new MIDSIZE 2-row SUV model is a bad look.
View attachment 325581
Why are people so desperate to defend incompetence?
They never gave specifications. But they also gave lots of interviews which spawned lots of automotive press stories that universally indicated that the CX-70 would be 1) a midsize and 2) slotting between the CX-50 and CX-90. They were announced as North American versions of the CX-60 and CX-80 respectively. (wish I still had the original announcement video because I am sure that is what they actually said). Now, if your interview leaves people with the wrong impression, then from an ethical standpoint, it behooves you to correct that. Should the automotive press trust Mazda now? And from a PR perspective they have now created tremendous negative sentiment allowing a global consensus to gel for 3 years. Managing expectations and preventing product launches from impacting existing sales is always tough. But there was absolutely no excuse that Mazda had not corrected the global consensus by categorically stating the CX-70 would be positioned as a full size and not a midsize.I don't think Mazda ever promised anything with the CX-70. People just speculated on what it could be and where it could fit in Mazda's lineup, then developed their expectations and ran with it. IMO the speculations and expectations were well thought out and logical, which is why most people who saw the reveal yesterday felt so blindsided, myself included.
a Mazda U.S. spokesperson told me that Mazda considered naming it some variant of CX-90, but decided against it because CX-70 and CX-90 customers are differentiated enough and are not shopping in the same segment.