Do you think Toyota should abolish the brand Scion?

[chenshuo]

Originally Posted by Grishbok

just thought i would point out that toyotas profits grew drastically after the introduction of scion, and has and continues to be one of the most successful car brands in the US. From a marketing stand point, the move was incredibly risky, but overwhelmingly rewarding. It was the right move to make, it was the right decision to see the ft86 under the scion brand.

Those who hate scion, is this because you disagree with how they are marketing the brand, or do you just hate logo, or do you hate toyota?

I love Toyota, i think they make the toughest cars. One of my family's car is a 2005 Corolla we bought in 2004. Up until this day, it runs without a problem in the harsh Toronto winter. Tough as a friggin tank!

When the Scion brand first came out in North America i thought that was a cool brand, but then I see all the teenagers start driving Scion...

It's completely unnecessary to mark the FRS in the Scion line. Heck it's not even priced similar to rest of the Scion line.

[sol740]

I feel indifferent to the Scion brand. If the FRS was a Toyota, that'd be fine, as a Scion, yeah that's fine too. I don't have much brand loyalty though. Last three sports cars prior were a Nissan, a Mitsubishi, and a Chevy. I just want "the car".

[AsianStyle]

Originally Posted by SC David

Man, this is what I don't get. I'm happy it makes you happy, and in theory I understand the satisfaction of having the spiritual successor to your AE86 keep it company at night. But I just can't shake the feeling that all the marketing hype of the FR-S being a reincarnation of the AE86 is just bogus. Toyota handed the project off to another company who put a distinctly un-Toyota-ish engine in it. I at least half appreciate that they're trying to pay homage to their sportscars of yore, but this is not their sportscar!! It has the blood and bones of a Subaru with the nervous system and skin of a Toyota.

On the other hand, there's no harm in brand loyalty as long as the newer product you're buying is a good one.

I understand where you are coming from, but what do you think about the claims Toyota made about the vision of the twins?

I believe Toyota stated that Subaru did not believe in a non-turbo rwd car, until Toyota create a prototype that made Subaru interested. I agree the engineering was done by Subaru, but the vision of what the twins are now is more in line with Toyota and their sports car heritage.

[Joeprelude]

For all complaining about Toyota's decision for a boxer:
-FA20 is in the 4U family of engines (Subaru Built)
- the Toyota Sports 800
1961 used a 700cc Publica Engine (Publica Sport - precursor to the 800)
1965 used an 800cc (both engine were 2 cyl Boxers(2U Family)
This was 4 years prior to Subaru ever using a Boxer engine

Toyota used this engine setup in 60's because: Low CoG and cost (engine was already being used in Toyota Publica)

Want to talk about heritage:
Toyota Sports 800 (Yota-Hachi) Idea for use of Boxer (Low CoG)
Toyota 2000GT Idea for Styling
Toyota Corolla GT-S Idea for Inexpensive RWD fun
86/FR-S Combined all ideas from above

[idreamofdrifting]

Originally Posted by Joeprelude

For all complaining about Toyota's decision for a boxer:
-FA20 is in the 4U family of engines (Subaru Built)
- the Toyota Sports 800
1961 used a 700cc Publica Engine (Publica Sport - precursor to the 800)
1965 used an 800cc (both engine were 2 cyl Boxers(2U Family)
This was 4 years prior to Subaru ever using a Boxer engine

Toyota used this engine setup in 60's because: Low CoG and cost (engine was already being used in Toyota Publica)

Want to talk about heritage:
Toyota Sports 800 (Yota-Hachi) Idea for use of Boxer (Low CoG)
Toyota 2000GT Idea for Styling
Toyota Corolla GT-S Idea for Inexpensive RWD fun
86/FR-S Combined all ideas from above

+1

[rice_classic]

Why the Scion badge doesn't matter to me: (Philosophical/Economical rant regarding "Loyalty" in regards to business)

Preface: I want to differentiate between to two types of Business Loyalty. One type I refer to as "Consideration Loyalty" the other is "Blind Loyalty" or "Cultural Loyalty". Consideration Loyalty is doing business (product/service/compensation) well enough that after business is concluded, that business would be your first consideration when repeat business is needed. Cultural or Blind Loyalty is when a consumer purchase or continually purchase only because of the brand name with no consideration of competition or continue to contribute to a business after the business contract (aka employment) has concluded.

For sake of text below please disregard the Consideration Loyalty definition and only consider the Blind Loyalty definition.

Loyalty to anyone who wants your money, time or labor; once it passes beyond being loyal to a contract or commitment, is giving something of yourself freely to an entity that is not in need of it and will not recognize or reciprocate it, nor should they.

They need what you have and should instead continue to offer you a product, service or compensation package that is competitive enough that it continually earns your support as a customer or employee. If someone else delivers a better service, product, opportunity or compensation (aka: Better value) but you're "loyal" you have missed an opportunity to add value or advancement to your life, why would anyone do this in the name of loyalty, especially when that entity would not do the same for you?

(Disclaimer: I will admit that the "loyalty waters" get a bit muddy in an employee-employer relationship when considering the differences of Private vs Public employment and/or privately held vs. publicly traded employers.)

Be loyal to your children, family, friends and community. They need your loyalty. Toyota (Scion), Subaru, Honda, Apple, Microsoft, Verizon, DirecTV etc... they just need your money, time or labor and for that, they can earn it. Trust me, they don't want to give you anything for free.

[rice_classic]

I feel the same way about sports as well. When my team starts doing well I buy tickets and other branded items and I like to support them but when they're not doing well they don't get my money. Call me a fairweather fan if you want but last time I check professional sports was a business and a business is suppose to earn your money. I'll still watch them when they're doing poorly but they're not getting my money. Sports teams do that by winning. No winning = no money.

Free Agency already proves that the players have no loyalty to the fans or to the cities they play in and hell, even team owners have no loyalty to the cities they occupy. Anyone who's a Seattle Sonics fan can attest to that.


:END Loyalty RANT:

Thanks for enduring!

[Skyhound]

Idiotic poll is idiotic.

Toyota needs to do what they were planning to do and keep Scion, but make it their Sports exclusive brand. Toyota has a reputation as being a car maker that specializes in making economic family cars. Lexus has a reputation of making cars with the luxury and quality of a Mercedes, while still retaining that great Toyota reliability. With a car like the FR-S and hopefully the new MR-2/S; Scion can gain the reputation of providing a sporting experience at an affordable price.

Yes, a lot of younger people buy Scions. Why? Because sports cars are for the kids to have fun, or the middle-aged to feel like a kid again. You can try to deny it all you want, but how many people have had to sell their S2Ks/Zs/Miatas/FR-Ss because they have a kid on the way?

At the end of the day, it's just a badge. If it's such a big deal, people should be more outraged that their beloved Porsches are really dressed up VW Beetles.

[SC David]

Originally Posted by AsianStyle

I understand where you are coming from, but what do you think about the claims Toyota made about the vision of the twins?

I believe Toyota stated that Subaru did not believe in a non-turbo rwd car, until Toyota create a prototype that made Subaru interested. I agree the engineering was done by Subaru, but the vision of what the twins are now is more in line with Toyota and their sports car heritage.

I absolutely think that this car would not have been built the way it is without BOTH companies coming together to make it happen. Subaru on their own would have been very unlikely to produce an RWD sports car, and Toyota on their own would have been very very unlikely to put a boxer engine in a sports car, but both of those elements are absolutely critical to the execution of this car. The heritage argument is legitimate in theory, but in order to really capitalize on that line of reasoning, the product in question needs to be pure. And this car is a bastard.

Don't get me wrong, at this point I'm just arguing semantics. The car is damn good and I'm happy it's a bastard. The branding of the car just irks me slightly.

[AsianStyle]

Originally Posted by SC David

I absolutely think that this car would not have been built the way it is without BOTH companies coming together to make it happen. Subaru on their own would have been very unlikely to produce an RWD sports car, and Toyota on their own would have been very very unlikely to put a boxer engine in a sports car, but both of those elements are absolutely critical to the execution of this car. The heritage argument is legitimate in theory, but in order to really capitalize on that line of reasoning, the product in question needs to be pure. And this car is a bastard.

Don't get me wrong, at this point I'm just arguing semantics. The car is damn good and I'm happy it's a bastard. The branding of the car just irks me slightly.

Well said I agree with your points and I really couldn't care less about the branding. I could have bought either car, but circumstanced led me to get a FRS. Only thing that bothers me are people who seem to think one car is far superior to the other and act like the other car cannot be even considered due to their own biases.

[FirestormFRS]

Originally Posted by Skyhound

Lexus has a reputation of making cars with the luxury and quality of a Mercedes, while still retaining that great Toyota reliability.

Mercedes has crap quality in comparison to Lexus. MB is barely above the industry average.

Lexus rules the world on quality.

[cyde01]

hah! abolish brand is ahead now!

i used to hate scion, and hated that toyota of na made the ft86 a scion. but the brand started to grow on me, going from being the stupid hipster brand to the ft86 brand. but as time has progressed i've started to hate the brand again. why? no plan to release factory hids or fog lights in na! still no availability of trd japan parts in na! sure those are options and accessories and the frs is still a great car without them, but the lack of availability of options and accessories is an aspect that scion and toyota of na botched imo.

oh and as others have said, xd needs to die, xb should once more be based off the smaller jdm bB, iq needs to be more competitive in its class, mono spec is kind of lame, etc.

[ib]

Probably never going to happen, but it would be interesting if Toyota decided to turn Scion into the sports car brand. If the MR2 and Supra are both released as Scions, while the current lineup is phased out or rebadged as Toyotas, it would be a very different brand.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by cyde01

hah! abolish brand is ahead now!

i used to hate scion, and hated that toyota of na made the ft86 a scion. but the brand started to grow on me, going from being the stupid hipster brand to the ft86 brand. but as time has progressed i've started to hate the brand again. why? no plan to release factory hids or fog lights in na! still no availability of trd japan parts in na! sure those are options and accessories and the frs is still a great car without them, but the lack of availability of options and accessories is an aspect that scion and toyota of na botched imo.

oh and as others have said, xd needs to die, xb should once more be based off the smaller jdm bB, iq needs to be more competitive in its class, mono spec is kind of lame, etc.

if it was a toyota and they didnt have them, would you hate the toyota brand?