http://www.autoblog.com/2008/10/27/volvo-t...s-up-yet-again/

Makes perfect sense to me. Ford is unloading its European brands (I think Volvo's the last they have), and probably will unload Volvo to get some more capital. Volvo, unlike, say, the Chrysler group, is actually worth something, so a sale would help Ford.

I think a BMW-owned Volvo would be good for both brands. I'm assuming that BMW would push Volvo slightly downmarket (competing with higher-end Hondas, Toyotas, and Volkswagens instead of taking pot-shots at Bimmers and Lexii), and would emphasize environmental friendliness (FWD, turbos, and a host of diesels models already available in Europe) as well as safety. What I don't see happening is a lineup of RWD, BMW-platformed Volvos, because that would basically be an old-school-GM-esque style of unproductive rebadging.

Volvo would benefit from this by getting some new engines to drop into its already-existing FWD platforms (I'm thinking the Mini Cooper's turbo and diesel engines in the C30/S40/V50, leaving a 250-275 hp T5 as an optional upgrade. And the new V70/XC70/S80 can fit an inline-six transversely, which makes the _28i and _35i engines no-brainers). They'd also benefit from increased prestige and respectability (a lot of European car lovers have shunned a Ford-owned Volvo, and Ford's memo telling Volvo to quit emphasizing roof strength didn't help affairs). Finally, BMW already has a torque-vectoring AWD system (in the X6); I'm thinking that torque-vectoring AWD could be the centerpoint of a reinvigorated "-R" line of Volvos.

BMW could benefit by getting a bite at more of a mass-market audience without compromising the image of either BMW as a luxury brand or Mini as a niche vehicle. Selling a load of 1.6T S40s and V50s should also help the BMW group's overall CAFE numbers. Finally, BMW isn't quite up to Audi or Merc levels on the safety front (the 5-Series got an embarrassing "marginal" side crash test result from the IIHS), and that does matter to some luxury buyers. Volvo's safety testing facilities and experts should help address that issue.

I see no downsides to BMW buying Volvo. Does anyone else?

I voted yes.

I voted yes as well.

I don't think so.

Moving Volvo down market sounds kinda cool, but I think you could potentially loose a lot of clients, Volvo is a prestige brand. Then again, I can see an argument for a VW like Volvo...maybe...but I have the following concerns:

1) Adding Volvo to BMWs lineup could create Aston Martin/Jaguar like infighting, where nobody wins, feelings are hurt, and customers suffer.

2) It could also have the effect of pushing BMW up market, which isn't a very good idea IMO, considering the credit crunch going on now.

Is Volvo really a prestige brand? I know they want to be, but I don't see them as actually being that. A five-year-old Cross-Country is no more prestigious IMO than a five-year-old Passat. As for new cars, I see the S40 as barely more prestigious than a Jetta, and I don't see an S60 or V70 as any more prestigious than a Passat. I see the XC90 and Tuareg as roughly equivalent in prestige as well. Frankly, I see Volvo currently being equivalent to VW in both luxury and badge prestige, but priced significantly higher. The S80 is the only Volvo I see as more prestigious than any VW.

I think Volvo should admit that they're no more luxurious or prestigious than VW, and price accordingly. I'm hoping that BMW would do so, whereas Ford tried to push them too far upmarket.



Here I'd just point to VW and Audi. Is there a certain amount of competition? Sure. Some people are going to cross-shop the VW CC and the B8 A4. But is it enough competition to hurt each brand? I don't think so. I don't think that a bunch of "pleasant and safe" FWD Volvos are going to cannibalize a bunch of "aggressive, sporty, and luxurious" RWD Bimmers.



Once again, I'd point to Audi and VW. I don't think the presence of VW pushes Audi any further upmarket than it actually is. It still competes squarely with BMW and Mercedes, and until recently was arguably a half-step below them on the prestige scale.

Volvo's more upmarket than VW and always has been. I don't see Volvo hocking anything in the Rabbit's price range and if there were a $60,000 Volvo people wouldn't sneeze at it like they do at a $60,000 VW. It's not that fair of a comparison. VW's ascendency to that market tier is a very very recent one and one that is not being met with resounding success. The Phaeton was a failure, the Passat CC is a niche vehicle, and the Touareg's doing fine but not great and I don't think we're going to see another luxury SUV from VW.

Volvo's more like Acura or maybe even Infiniti or Saab. Above the fray of the standard brands but not 100% with the top dogs. All three of those brands are luxury brands that lack models in the stratospheres of the market, but they certainly run with the A4/A6 3-series/5-series C-class/E-class. So I definitely see Volvo conflicting with BMW's model range, at least much moreso than Mini/BMW, VW/Audi, Honda/Acura, Nissan/Infiniti, Toyota/Lexus, etc. Those brands all have some overlap at the tippy top of the lower brand and the bottom rung of the upper brand (Cooper S and 1-series, Passat CC and A4, and so on) but Volvo goes halfway up the BMW model range and the S40 doesn't start much below the 128i.

The cheapest VW is certainly cheaper than the cheapest Volvo, and the most expensive Volvo is more expensive than the most expensive VW. But IMO a MkV Jetta 2.0T is absolutely comparable to a Volvo S40 T5 (not to mention an S40 2.4i) in terms of both luxury and prestice, while beings significantly cheaper. I think a Passat 2.0T is absolutely comparable to an S60 2.5T in both luxury and prestige, Passat VR6 to S60 T5, etc etc. Sorry if it wasn't clear.



But is a $32,000 S40 T5 really in the same league as a $32,000 G35?



The S40 2.4i currently starts at $28,500, but does it really deserve to be priced anywhere near that? That $28,500 gets you a Mazda3 platform with a 170-hp naturally-aspirated five-cylinder and cloth seats (power driver's seat and manually-adjustable passenger seat; no seat heaters standard). Sounds pretty close to a Jetta SE to me, which costs $19,900.

And the most damning thing to show how overpriced the S40 is is Volvo's own C30. In my opinion, the C30 is the only appropriately-priced Volvo right now. The S40 T5 starts at $32,300. The C30 T5 starts at $23,800. If the C30 T5 is priced against the Volkswagen GTI, why isn't the S40 T5 priced against the Jetta GLI?

So is that a 'Yes' or 'No'?

I wasn't saying yes or no to the question, I was debating Mitlov's perceptions of Volvo. They are without a doubt a luxury brand to me. I don't have an answer to the original question...to me a BMW-owned Volvo doesn't seem to make a lot of sense but if anyone's going to buy Volvo, BMW seems like one of the better suitors.

And yes the S40 2.4i starts with a ridiculous MSRP, but that's because for 2009 they lumped a ton of standard features into it and jacked up the base price. Plus it was never a very good deal to start with.

...and that's the crux of it. The C30's pricing is absolutely fair for what you get, and just so happens to match the pricing of the very-comparable GTI. The S40's isn't remotely fair for what you get.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts. I think it's a good move financially for both Ford and BMW, but I don't necessarily think its a good idea for Volvo. I think Volvo would lose some of it's uniqueness since they would become a stew of BMW and Volvo parts. I like to think of Volvo as the last real Swedish brand (yes, I know Ford has owned them for a while, but I think they're much more Swedish than GM-Saab) and I like that. I'll vote yes to it being a good idea, but not an idea I particularly like...if that makes sense.

Currently, half of their cars are built off a platform jointly designed with Mazda and Ford, and many of those cars aren't built in Sweden (I think the S40 and some of its kin are built in Belgium?). Still, they are more Swedish than Saab currently is.

It was just my opinion...plus I'm slightly biased. I realize they aren't the pre-Ford Volvo's they once were, but I still think they show a lot more Scandinavian design cues than Saab (even if they're faux-Scandinavian designs).

I liked the V50 for being decent wagon with really comfy seats. Besides that I really dont care about any of the new Volvos. For a fact the S60 has the worst steering feel of any car i have driven recently.* And for the life of me I cant figure the appeal of the tiny S40s. Wayy too much money for pretty much no real good selling point.


* I don't consider the PT Looser as a car. Its more of a torture device.

No, the more extraneous brands a company has, the less focus and more commonality(read less unique character) the cars get. GM is probably the best example of this....

...says a guy in a Jetta?

What can I say I speak from experience...