Is Ford Mispricing the Maverick on Purpose?

[Drew]

Maybe others will reread and realize you made what seems to be an evidenced based assessment of the current market and simply questioned Ford's insight/future plan. I'm a big proponent of Truth vs opinion and I don't see any disputing the fact/s you noted.

Thanks, I appreciate that.

Sponsored

 

[uh50]

1. Yes, labor is less expensive in Mexico. But I don't think that it can be fairly stated that Mexicans make less-durable cars.
2. Less expensive doesn't always mean cheap. While there are fewer expensive "soft touch" materials and the like, I'm hoping that they aren't using "cheap" materials. Many inexpensive cars that I've owned from Honda and Toyota have less-expensive materials, but they were still durable.
3. My truck actually has really nice fit and finish. In fact, I really haven't seen anything bad on that front that I find problematic.

Many manufacturers find ways to make inexpensive vehicles without making them cheap. In fact, the long-term reliability of inexpensive models is often superior. I suspect that less-fancy tech and older more-proven components often get used in inexpensive vehicles because people who are willing to pay more usually want the latest and greatest (and lots of extra stuff = more changes of failure)

It'll be interesting to see how the long-term durability of the Maverick compares to other Ford vehicles. I'm not expecting it to be much different--for better or worse. Fingers crossed (and extended warranty purchased.

Your points above are well made. I'm not sure what reciprocating_ravioli was talking about when he referenced crappy fit and finish. Seems like he doesn't own a Maverick. I've never felt the need to purchase foreign branded vehicles because the domestic brand's quality has been fine for me for the last 60 years. Others have different opinions and I understand that.

You make an excellent point about vehicles of today being superior. I grew up in a time when driving a vehicle 50,000 miles without fairly major repairs was unusual, although it could be done with meticulous maintenance. The vehicles of today are decidedly superior to those produced 30+ years ago.

I've had my XL since November 10, 2021 and haven't noticed any fit and finish flaws and I agree with your statement #3 above. In fact, I've found the opposite is true and since the XL is the bottom of the line and has a very nice fit and finish, bodes well for the more expensive trims, such as the new Tremor. It seems to have very nice interior materials at a reasonable cost. For someone that has purchased many vehicles, and a few luxury vehicles in the past the XL has exceeded any expectations for a truck costing me $25,635.

I don't know what expectations others have, but Ford has done a nice job producing an affordable light utility truck, and I'm taking advantage of it as well as enjoying it .

 

[gregsfc]

I don't get the quality versus price debate; at least if we're really referring to quality with respect to reliability and durability; not quality as in pretty interiors fit and finish and an overrated brand name. I got a brand new 2020 Mitsubishi Mirage built in Thailand (Japan's Mexico) for $11,820. Quality has been great. But quality to me doesn't mean that they don't use hard plastics in the interior or that it has minimal gaps in body panels.

 

[uh50]

This thread is a fascinating read - appreciate everyone's thoughts. I bought a new '86 Ranger XL 2.9L fuel injected V-6, 5-spd, 2WD in Nov. 85. Drove it 14.5 yrs. I bought a new '00 Ranger XLT Sport 4.0L fuel injected V-6, 5-spd, 2WD in May '00. Drove it ~20 yrs. When the '00 was no longer good for commuting (w/out very major work), I picked up a 2012 Civic EX-L (in Oct. '13 w/8K mis. on it). But we kept the Ranger around for hardware store runs, beach runs, etc. As I headed toward retirement (this year) I'd wanted a "truck" that would get terrific mpg. When Ford brought back Ranger in '19 I asked about a hybrid - nope. When Hyundai finally built Santa Cruz I asked about a hybrid - nope. So, I had to wait a lot longer than I wanted. I put in a reservation for a baseline, ZERO options Maverick hybrid in mid-July 2021. Picked it up 7/23/22. Paid $23,600 cash out-the-door w/tax/license. Basically, window sticker plus tax/lic. Now I see the comments about build quality, etc. Early in my career I spent 14 yrs working automotive parts/service. I don't necessarily find Ford to be a quality/durability leader, but this "truck" drives and rides so nicely and passengers have commented on that being the case, too. It is delivering over 38mpg, which to me is incredibly cool - several mpg better than my 2012 Civic. I have found no faults with fit/finish anywhere on the truck. Of course I realize it'll have to prove itself in the LONG haul - I hope it does. Thanks again for so many cool posts on this topic!

Very well said.

 

[LAClippers420]

If they really wanted they could have had the Hybrid Maverick be more expensive than the eco boost but it was smart of them to have the hybrid be the base option. No one else has a hybrid as the base, theyre usually the upgrades.

 

[Tailender]

Is Ford mispricing the Maverick? I don't know and I don't care. All I know is I got a hybrid for less than 23k out the door so it saves me money on gas, didn't cost an arm and a leg to purchase, and it comes with a warranty. Plus it's a truck! If it would have been much more in price, I wouldn't have gotten it. Thank you Ford! If they are mispricing it, I'm glad they did.

 

[jsus]

If they really wanted they could have had the Hybrid Maverick be more expensive than the eco boost but it was smart of them to have the hybrid be the base option. No one else has a hybrid as the base, theyre usually the upgrades.

Technically that's because the only non-hybrid engine available on a Maverick is the one that's a step above the hybrid in cost.

For example, Escape starts with a 1.5L EcoBoost standard. ~$1800 more to upgrade to a Hybrid, and more still to upgrade to the 2.0L EcoBoost.

They just didn't include the lower ICE option on Maverick because truck, and because they wanted the hybrid starting price at under $20k (before destination and other charges).

 

[Hoagus]

I know its not what you were talking about but those phones are useless and I would love my maverick to be $500 cheaper if it had zero connectivity what so ever, atleast outside of a radio.

Modern cell phones are incredibly useful. The Maverick hotspot isn’t all that useful though.

 

[Maverickman74]

Call it the Dragon Man(ual)?

 

[Guv]

I believe the Mav is underpriced by Ford as a strategy:

What price do other 4 Door Hybrids cost new?

What price do other 4 Door Turbo AWDs cost new?

…& they aren’t even trucks!

How is Ford doing it? Did Ford somehow discover a rift in spacetime that dropped their cost of materials & labor?
-No, in fact both are up!

So, the more important question is:

>Why did Ford price the Maverick so low?<

1. The advertised artificially low price gets huge attention, & brings people to Ford dealerships for possible upsells

2. Pulls buyers away from other vehicles & brands,

3. Incentivizes people to order & wait, & wait, & wait… locking them up, keeping them from purchasing other brands

4. While buying time for Ford to navigate it’s way through the supply chain nightmare & eventually get back up to speed…

5. Ford dealers are also given the opportunity to make some bucks on marking up cancellations & used Mavs, helping keep them afloat until Ford factories fully come back online.

Ingenious actually…

I think it might be a year from now before Ford is able to meet demand & deliver Mavs in a reasonable time frame, & I predict that by that time Ford will pivot to bring the Mav’s price more in line with other car companies’ offerings thereby reflecting the true cost of profitably manufacturing, marketing, & delivering the Mav in a timely manner to it’s customers… but for thousand$ more than the low price-leader, attention-grabbing, wait-placating price it is now.

Thoughts?

Edit: I don’t think Ford is intending to sell Mavs at a loss. My saying artificially underpriced means just that. The closest offerings from other manufacturers that are Hybrid or Turbos or AWD all cost substantially more. Our buying behavior, -your’s, mine, all the other thousands of buyers of Mavs behavior & the used market prices all demonstrate that Ford could charge much more for their Mavs. I’m exploring why they aren’t & why they choose to price them so low.

I don’t see a conspiracy, I see possibly an admirable business strategy that I myself am benefitting from. I’m not criticizing Ford. They’re not victimizing anyone. If I’m right I admire Ford management even more for making the best of the situation & getting a great little truck out of the factory every now & then. I am a very happy EB AWD XL owner & am waiting on 1 Hybrid XLT & 1 EB AWD 4K.

I ordered mine and paid window. To do all this, they must have had a crystal ball, new vehicle are conceived 2 years prior to release. A GM engineer told me this year’s ago. If you want to get a glimpse of the future auto market, look at what their suppliers are doing.

 

[Guv]

1. Yes, labor is less expensive in Mexico. But I don't think that it can be fairly stated that Mexicans make less-durable cars.
2. Less expensive doesn't always mean cheap. While there are fewer expensive "soft touch" materials and the like, I'm hoping that they aren't using "cheap" materials. Many inexpensive cars that I've owned from Honda and Toyota have less-expensive materials, but they were still durable.
3. My truck actually has really nice fit and finish. In fact, I really haven't seen anything bad on that front that I find problematic.

Many manufacturers find ways to make inexpensive vehicles without making them cheap. In fact, the long-term reliability of inexpensive models is often superior. I suspect that less-fancy tech and older more-proven components often get used in inexpensive vehicles because people who are willing to pay more usually want the latest and greatest (and lots of extra stuff = more changes of failure)

It'll be interesting to see how the long-term durability of the Maverick compares to other Ford vehicles. I'm not expecting it to be much different--for better or worse. Fingers crossed (and extended warranty purchased.

And to add, RAMS have been made in Mexico for a long time. Are they cheap to buy, is Chrysler setting the standard for automotive business practice?

 

[Drew]

Your points above are well made. I'm not sure what reciprocating_ravioli was talking about when he referenced crappy fit and finish. Seems like he doesn't own a Maverick. I've never felt the need to purchase foreign branded vehicles because the domestic brand's quality has been fine for me for the last 60 years. Others have different opinions and I understand that.

You make an excellent point about vehicles of today being superior. I grew up in a time when driving a vehicle 50,000 miles without fairly major repairs was unusual, although it could be done with meticulous maintenance. The vehicles of today are decidedly superior to those produced 30+ years ago.

I've had my XL since November 10, 2021 and haven't noticed any fit and finish flaws and I agree with your statement #3 above. In fact, I've found the opposite is true and since the XL is the bottom of the line and has a very nice fit and finish, bodes well for the more expensive trims, such as the new Tremor. It seems to have very nice interior materials at a reasonable cost. For someone that has purchased many vehicles, and a few luxury vehicles in the past the XL has exceeded any expectations for a truck costing me $25,635.

I don't know what expectations others have, but Ford has done a nice job producing an affordable light utility truck, and I'm taking advantage of it as well as enjoying it .

Hear hear! Right on target. Those cars from the 1970s & early 1980s seemed to be thrown together to last just 3 years or so. Some of the engines in the early 1970s were hard to start & needed tune-ups every 6 months but other than that were solid, but the gaps in the misaligned bodywork & interiors that fell apart after 3 years… The technology, reliability, designs, materials, safety, fit & finish… all of it vastly superior today.

Our increasingly open markets to overseas competition in the late 1970s made domestic manufacturers scramble to up their quality, technology, standard equipment, MPG. & value to compete for our car buying $. The big downside is we lost a lot of jobs & factories in the process. I’m happy about the advances, not happy about the factories & workers.

When I get frustrated or see my kids frustrated with todays products they get get an earful about how good we’ve got it now. From powerful battery powered power tools made for every possible purpose to motorcycles & cars that start 99% of the time… we’ve got it sooooo much better now.

Sponsored