2 Jaguar F type models are among the slowest selling cars in April 2014


10 Slowest-Selling Cars of April

 

With inventory languishing like that, I can't imagine this is going to be the profitable, game-changing car that Jaguar was hoping for. Then again, the other cars on this list aren't so terrible!!

[EDIT]Maybe I misinterpreted. There isn't 140 days of inventory, is there?

 

That is exactly what the information says. However, I would be willing to bet heavily the coupes will not be on the slow selling list. Actually, I suppose I am betting heavily--I have an F Type R coupe on order.

 

I had no idea the verts were sitting that long. :O In comparison my last car I bought averaged 6 days on the lot putting it in the top 10 fastest selling. No wonder there have been some really good deals.

I doubt the Coupe will be anywhere near that, but in a way I hope it does. That way when I am ready to purchase at the end of summer I have more room to negotiate.

 

I wonder how this might change the lease versus buy argument. I can't imagine resale values will be very good. But if you can get such a large discount when you buy it new, maybe it all evens out.

 

Not a surprise in the least. Everyone is waiting for the coupe... And most people want the V8 which also isn't a surprise.

 

That list is actually pretty insane. Half of the cars are 70K plus, a fair few over 100K and most aren't mainstream cars (F Type, M6, 6 Gran Coupe etc). Those cars don't exactly fly off the lot, and none are volume cars... Not many people are able to drop 70 to 120K on what may be a second or third car.

For what it's worth, my local dealer has only a few F Type convertibles in right now, and none appear to have been there all that long....

 

I think the idea that these aren't selling because they're convertibles and not coupes is crazy! I mean, is the F-Type roadster ugly or something? Is the coupe that much better priced? Does it drive that much better than the vert? I must be missing something!

Of course nobody expected the F-Type to be a volume model, but I didn't expect each one to take nearly 5 months to sell. And certainly not for under invoice price in its first model year...

The argument is often that most F-Types are ordered with custom options and colors, rather than purchased from dealer stock. Could this have a factor in the metric of days on market?

 

This is pretty interesting data, but the headline is sensationalist.
The f-type doesn't drive anywhere close to the volume of other brand/models, so basic inventory management theory would tell you that:
1. You need more on-lot inventory (inventory days) for small-volume cars; and
2. The law of small numbers tells us that sales volatility will be higher for small-volume cars like the F type.

It makes no sense to draw conclusions based on 1 months performance anyway... For small volume vehicles the sales rates will jump around a lot and it's like trying to predict the outcome of an NBA game based on looking at just 1 minute of team performance.

 

At my local dealership the V8 S sells quickly. The V6 and V6 S are moving slowly.

 

Custom orders actually bring the average down as they will result in an "on lot time" of just a few days.

It isn't sensationalist, it describes exactly what the metric represents. They aren't calling these cars bad.

1. That's not how this metric works. It is a pure supply/demand measurement. They already weed out the super low volume vehicles so all on this list had to sell a certain number before being included. All this shows is that there was more supply than demand for the bottom two F-type trims.

2. Again doesn't matter. The TT-RS was limited to 500, they actually brought in 740 and it's average was around 6 days. You can have a high in demand low volume vehicle that flies off the lot or you can high volume vehicle that suddenly drops in demand. Then you end up with a lot of unsold inventory. It is actually easier to gauge interest and keep supply matching demand on a lower volume vehicle.

It is actually really easy to draw conclusions from this list at this point in time. The data is cumulative. That means last month the average was probably between 127 and 157 days. Next month it could be between 157 and 187 days. Cars don't just suddenly appear on dealer's lots for 100+ days. You can't really say it was the winter months either since the closest comparison using the Stingray averaged just 14 days.

On the positive you can see that the most expensive V8S doesn't make the list, so it is selling the fastest and probably has the highest demand of the F-types. It will be interesting to see how the Coupe sells as it seems to have higher demand across all versions.

 

I should also point out that with the MY15 coming and heavy discounts on MY14, that a lot of those vehicles that are bringing the average up will probably sell quickly dropping the average back down to a 30-60 days.

 

For me, the convertible was absolutely unusable due to the very tiny trunk. The coupe makes the vehicle much more practical. The relative difference in attractiveness is certainly an individual preference. I have traded out of a BMW 650 convertible, and will certainly miss open air driving. For a daily driver, I could only consider the coupe for the extra space. I just hope the R coupe is as much fun to drive as the V8S is.

 

The f type is a stunning car. The v8 supercharged model both in convertible and coupe are highly desirable if a bit pricey at around 100 grand....

Surely worthy of competition yet still not inexpensive.

Love the f type both in convertible and coupe form.

 

Convertibles are generally not winter cars and the east coast has had a bit of cooold stuff happinin. Let's see what summer brings for conv. sales.

 

It shows that there was more supply than demand for the trims in the single month of April. Sales of small-volume cars like the F-Type are more volatile than those of high-volume cars like the Honda Accord. So that volatility will be reflected directly in the metric.
The same logic that causes cars.com to eliminate super low volume cars (e.g. Rolls Royce wraith) applies to small-volume cars. There is no magic about the arbitrary cutoff point....smaller volume => higher volatility.

That is not right. Inventory friction is much higher for small-volume vehicles because it's harder to move inventory within and across regions, secure shipping slots, predict volumes because of small sample size, etc. That is why you might have a yellow lambo sit in a dealer's lot for 6 months, whereas a green civic is really unlikely to sit for anywhere near that long. The proportional mean demand for the lambo (i.e. time-averaged ratio of supply / demand) might be the same as for the civic, but the volatility of lambo demand is much greater.....2 fewer lambos sold might swing volume by 2% or more for a given month. 2 fewer civics sold would swing volume by maybe 0.001% .

I agree that one can draw conclusions easily. But I don't think those conclusions would be meaningful. The denominator of the metric has a time-averaging component to it (and even then, it works really poorly for small-volume cars because a few long-sitting units can skew the entire measure), but even if we believe the denominator is semi-cumulative, the numerator is the measure of 1 month, which is not very meaningful.
Also, I don't think you can infer the average last month based on the average this month. The metric measures "the average number of days it takes to sell models from the day they arrive on the lot until the final paperwork is signed by a buyer". So to use a simple example:

• Dealer has 4 cars. 2 were delivered in 1975. 2 were delivered last month.
  This month, it sells the 2 most recent cars => Average sale time reported for May will be 1 month.
• Next month, it sells the 2 older cars => Average sale time reported for June will be 19 years.

Without more information it's impossible to logically conclude what last month's numbers were based on this month's. The higher the volume, the more reliably you can guesstimate based on past trends, but again....it goes back to having both volume and more than 1 month's data....

 

The problem is they didn't deliver just 2 F-Types in April? I could understand your argument if they were selling a handful of cars nationally in a given month. But in the last 7 months of 2013, Jaguar sold 2250 F-Types in the US. That works out to over 300 a month (even more if you count May as a partial month)! I don't think you will find this sort of hysteresis in the data from month to month...

Source:
Jaguar Land Rover Reports U.S. Sales For December 2013 -- MAHWAH, N.J., Jan. 3, 2014 /PRNewswire/ --

Then again, somebody in this thread predicted that in the spring the numbers will be 30 to 60 days!!! I will eat my hat if that happens!

 

@schraderade

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't agree with your logic or numbers in regards to this particular metric and it is pointless for us to keep posting theoretical numbers.

You are also over emphasizing how low of volume the F-type is. It is low, but not that low as amcdonal86 shows above. Jaguar did have one of their best years, the F-type sold well, they just overestimated demand and flooded showroom floors causing a large number to sit unsold over the winter months. That is all this whole article is saying.

 

You can use your own data.
Jaguar sold 2250 units from may to december 2013. That works out to an average of 281 per month.
In december, they sold 185 vehicles.
That is 45% off the average.

So yes. That is a lot of volatility.

 

Agreed. There's plenty of room for speculation. It's just hard to argue with math IMO, but your speculation may be totally accurate! It's just a question of certainty!