# Pricing Speculation



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

I was discussing pricing with a few friends several days ago when the topic of Audi Australia's pricing came up. Apparently the new Sportback in Australia is being priced between AUS4000-AUS5500 (USD$3700-$5000) lower than the previous model - and this is with S-tronic being made standard (manual transmission is a sold-order only option).

In pricing an outgoing 2.0TFSI Sportback S-tronic+Quattro over at Edmunds with everything except for the Titanium package we end up with $40,545 MSRP ($37,773 invoice). Considering that things like S-tronic and the sunroof are now going to become standard ($1100 for sunroof, $1400 for S-Tronic), I'm beginning to think that Audi is going to package and price based more upon powertrains than on options and packaging. While I'm sure we'll have Premium, Premium Plus and Prestige, I wouldn't be surprised if the packaging and pricing differences are relatively minor and the big bump will come in powertrain. 

If we see the 1.8T S-Tronic FWD start at around $28,000 - this time including s-tronic and the sunroof (~$2,500 worth of options), we'll likely see around $2,500 for Navigation, around $875 for B&O, probably about $500 for heated seats, $2,000 for Premium Plus. That would place the 1.8 model at around $32,000-$33,000, loaded. I would then expect the 2.0TFSI model to start at the Premium Plus level at around $35,000 and top out at around $40k - perhaps more if they make a lot of the automated nannies available. 

The S3 would probbaly pick up at around $39k and head around $45k.

Of course, this all depends on what the economies of scale are with MQB and the costs of bringing the car to the US - but from what I'm seeing in packaging it sure looks like Audi is cramming a lot more into the cars than they have in the past. 

Just some food for thought during the long drought.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

... and the RS3 we're sure to see come out from under that sheet, Trav?


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Odd

Ok now in Canada they have pretty much stripped apart the 2013 Audi A3 web site, because I am sure they have next to nil stock.

So the 2.0TFSI + Quattro + S-Tronic is going for $37,500 MSRP, but you get no other options, just fully loaded. If we are looking at $5g's lower here in Canada, the simple fact it's cheaper then the US will make me want to take 2!!

Even if it's $3,700 that's excellent....leaving the S3 nicely in the low to mid $40's. 

Planning a trip to Spain before it gets cold here, was thinking car rental, now thinking Audi A3 to get me through the cold winter and cold 'Audi get it here now' syndrome


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

speaking about the electronic nannies; i see the price for Audi Side Assist on other models is $500. Then if you choose the driver assistance package (for example on the A6), you get the adaptive cruise control, pre sense plus and the side assist for $2500. Finally the whole shebang (all the nannies together) is $5650 for the Innovation package on the A6. Yeah thats a little too pricey even for me . I hope Audi can control the cost of options on this car...


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

*2014 VW Jetta 1.8TFSI to start at $18,895*

http://jayscarblog.com/2014-jetta-1-8t-priced-from-18895

Given that the 1.8T Jetta will start at 19k and that a reasonably equipped 1.8T Jetta (with sunroof and etc...) will be roughly 22k manual or 23k automatic.

The 1.8T FWD A3 needs to be priced very competitively or needs a lot more fancy features to come standard.

If the A3 starts at 28k, in addition to leather, panoramic sunroof standard, it better comes with bi-xenon and 17" wheels standard as well.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

VWNCC said:


> http://jayscarblog.com/2014-jetta-1-8t-priced-from-18895
> 
> Given that the 1.8T Jetta will start at 19k and that a reasonably equipped 1.8T Jetta (with sunroof and etc...) will be roughly 22k manual or 23k automatic.
> 
> ...


You can bet your last dollar that Audi will do everything in its power to ensure that very few people make the comparison between the Jetta and the A3 sedan. Having driven several Jettas and new GLIs I can assure you that there differences between the two cars could not be more clear. There will be absolutely no mistaking the A3 for the Jetta - with the exception of people in the forums comparing the two and doing photoshops showing the design similarities. 

The two cars are built on completely different architectures and thanks to MQB the A3 will incorporate substantially more alternative metals, sound insulation and a more refined suspension setup than the Jetta. The interiors could not be more different.

Just because both cars utilize the same engine doesn't necessarily mean that there will be that much cross-shopping. That would be like comparing the A4 or A6 to a GTI just because all three cars come with the available 2.0T engine, or comparing the Tiguan to the Q5 because of the same.

In fact, I would go so far as to argue that the 1.8 and 2.0 A3s will probably forego the displacement badges and simply state "TFSI" on the back. 

I am hoping that Audi gets aggressive with packaging. It's already very clear that MQB's cost savings, plus the assembly in Hungary versus Germany, will give them the opportunity to pack a lot more into the cars. That Seat can put full LED headlamps into the Leon and Audi place MMI into all A3s sold here are examples of the cost savings. 

It's also possible that Audi goes a completely different packaging route for the new A3 and packs a substantial amount of equipment standard, then makes the major distinctions based on power trains. The 1.8T starting at around $28,900 (speculation, of course), tack on Premium Plus and Navigation and you're at around $33,000. The 2.0T would then start with Premium Plus at around $35,000, with options being things like Nav, B&O, and S-Line, taking you up to around $39-$40 where the S3 will pick up. 

I'll just go back to beating my dead horse: I want a manual transmission option on the 2.0 model, even if it means making it a no-cost-change option (pay the same for the 6MT as the S-Tronic).


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

It's always been a problem...

Looking back to the years of B5 especially, the pricing and 4-Motion, made more so the A4 a tough sell against the Passat, if you saw the value. I would love to see sales figures comparing the two from the 2000's. 

The economy may be similar in many aspects...tech bubble of 2000 vs everything that has happened since 2008. You will have those that see the value in the Jetta / Golf, while others will opt for Audi A3.


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

Travis Grundke said:


> In fact, I would go so far as to argue that the 1.8 and 2.0 A3s will probably forego the displacement badges and simply state "TFSI" on the back.


This is probably gonna be true as they have been using "TFSI" for both the 1.4TFSI and 1.8TFSI in Europe.



Travis Grundke said:


> I am hoping that Audi gets aggressive with packaging. It's already very clear that MQB's cost savings, plus the assembly in Hungary versus Germany, will give them the opportunity to pack a lot more into the cars. That Seat can put full LED headlamps into the Leon and Audi place MMI into all A3s sold here are examples of the cost savings.


It is probably just me, but I'd rather they give us better mechanical bits standard than MMI.



Travis Grundke said:


> It's also possible that Audi goes a completely different packaging route for the new A3 and packs a substantial amount of equipment standard, then makes the major distinctions based on power trains. The 1.8T starting at around $28,900 (speculation, of course), tack on Premium Plus and Navigation and you're at around $33,000. The 2.0T would then start with Premium Plus at around $35,000, with options being things like Nav, B&O, and S-Line, taking you up to around $39-$40 where the S3 will pick up.


That's what I have been preaching as well. Unlike the current generation A3 (8P), the 8V quattro 2.0T will not be priced only 2k higher than the 1.8T FWD, but more in line with 5k or so.

Given the significantly lower starting price, its much better fuel economy (~15-20% better based on sportsback specs), and the market segment (afterall, the bulk of the CLA250 is gonna be FWD), I am sure the 1.8T FWD A3 will be the volume seller and will outsell the Quattro 2.0T.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

I may have missed it somewhere in the past, if it's been said- what's the estimated fuel economy for the 2.0TQ? I realize it will decrease some for the S3, too.

I filled up my car yesterday and determined that I saw 20 miles to the gallon on the previous tank- yes, 20. There are a lot of cars I could have if I were content with a combined 20MPG. :banghead:


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

Dan Halen said:


> I may have missed it somewhere in the past, if it's been said- what's the estimated fuel economy for the 2.0TQ? I realize it will decrease some for the S3, too.
> 
> I filled up my car yesterday and determined that I saw 20 miles to the gallon on the previous tank- yes, 20. There are a lot of cars I could have if I were content with a combined 20MPG. :banghead:


They never released the official spec for the 2.0T quattro. My statement in the last post was based on the sportsback 1.8T FWD vs. 1.8T quattro (available in both Audi UK and Germany websites). There is a 15-20% difference in fuel consumption. 

So, I can only expect the 2.0T quattro to be a bit worse and the S3 2.0T quite a bit worse. Of course, whether someone getting the S3 cares about fuel economy is another story.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

VWNCC said:


> Of course, whether someone getting the S3 cares about fuel economy is another story.


You're talking to one who plans to and who does. :laugh:

I don't expect to see 30MPG+ in the S3, but I do expect that, as far as VW Group's engine technology has advanced in eight years, they should be able to produce upper-low 20s in the city and upper-high 20s on the highway, with something slightly north of 25MPG for combined economy.

I don't put enough miles on a car for 21MPG combined vs 26MPG combined to be a deal-breaker at this point, but for a small car, such as the S3, I don't think my expectation is unrealistic- especially with the lighter weight materials Audi uses for some components.

Now, the RS3? 22MPG combined would be acceptable there, IMO.

Whether I end up with an S3 or an RS3, I intend to be out of the market for at least ten years after the purchase... so, should my driving habits have to change over that period, I don't want to find myself totally screwed by fuel economy.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Rudy_H said:


> It's always been a problem...
> 
> Looking back to the years of B5 especially, the pricing and 4-Motion, made more so the A4 a tough sell against the Passat, if you saw the value. I would love to see sales figures comparing the two from the 2000's.
> 
> The economy may be similar in many aspects...tech bubble of 2000 vs everything that has happened since 2008. You will have those that see the value in the Jetta / Golf, while others will opt for Audi A3.


Rudy -

While I get the argument, that was 13 years ago when Audi was in a vastly different position than today. At the time there was a LOT of cross-shopping between the two cars. I know this because in the '99-'00 period I worked for one of the largest VW dealers in the Midwest. 

Fast forward to today. I still keep in touch with the former dealership I was with and they hardly ever get cross-shoppers and almost never have an Audi trade-in for someone buying a VW. 

I think the market that would be concerned about cross-shopping is relatively small, especially today.


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> I may have missed it somewhere in the past, if it's been said- what's the estimated fuel economy for the 2.0TQ? I realize it will decrease some for the S3, too.


I have seen several reviews that mention anywhere from 39mpg to 45mpg. I would swear that those figures were for the S3. I don't remember seeing anything about the A3 so far.

On a different note...I am going to the dealership this weekend to do some driving and looking and asking questions. I really hope that I can wait and at least drive an S3 before I make any new car decisions.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Cyncris said:


> I have seen several reviews that mention anywhere from 39mpg to 45mpg. I would swear that those figures were for the S3. I don't remember seeing anything about the A3 so far.
> 
> On a different note...I am going to the dealership this weekend to do some driving and looking and asking questions. I really hope that I can wait and at least drive an S3 before I make any new car decisions.


Surely that's imperial MPG. If not...


----------



## steve111b (Jun 2, 2011)

Just a reminder that a UK gallon is bigger than a US gallon so a comparison is not so simple. Also the European fuel numbers are more generous than the US numbers.

Now if someone can tell me which gallon (UK or US) comes up when I punch up imperial on my Canadian A3 computer it would make my day.


----------



## blum3416 (Jul 21, 2013)

Dan Halen said:


> You're talking to one who plans to and who does. :laugh:
> 
> I don't expect to see 30MPG+ in the S3, but I do expect that, as far as VW Group's engine technology has advanced in eight years, they should be able to produce upper-low 20s in the city and upper-high 20s on the highway, with something slightly north of 25MPG for combined economy.
> 
> ...


I'm expecting to see 30+ MPG combined easily. Comparing it to the current S4, which gets 18 city and 28 highway, the S3 will have a smaller engine (4 cylinder), is a smaller car, and weighs significantly less. I read somewhere that it was 34-36 MPG, but I guess we will find out for sure when more info is released. Either way I know it's not going to be bad by any means.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

steve111b said:


> Now if someone can tell me which gallon (UK or US) comes up when I punch up imperial on my Canadian A3 computer it would make my day.


UK


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

From the Top gear review of the S3:
The basic S3 philosophy remains the same, so you get a 2.0-litre turbocharged four-cylinder driving a front-biased, quattro four-wheel-drive system. This time, though, you get 296bhp (up 35bhp) and 280lb ft, in a car that weighs 60kg less than before. The numbers are impressive: zero to 62mph in 4.8 seconds (0.4 more for the manual), 155mph, a smidge over 40mpg and 159g/km CO2. Win, and indeed, win.
http://www.topgear.com/uk/audi/a3/road-test/s3-s-tronic-driven

I know that I have seen some other specs elsewhere...but can't find them


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

The interesting question is what the HP that the A3 2.0T quattro and the S3 will have. AoA's press release says that they'll announce the numbers at a later time.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Rudy -
> 
> While I get the argument, that was 13 years ago when Audi was in a vastly different position than today. At the time there was a LOT of cross-shopping between the two cars. I know this because in the '99-'00 period I worked for one of the largest VW dealers in the Midwest.
> 
> ...


What would you cross shop between Audi and VW today? It's really only the Passat and A4 front trak, maybe Touareg and Q5?

Personally I could careless about SUV's so I would never compare and defend one way or another. As for Passat and A4, wouldn't spend a dime on an A4 front trak and grab a CC or Passat in a second. Both are front trak so well, again nothing I care about in the end...since we are stuck with FWD, I would also consider a vast multitude of other cars before the Passat and CC...throw in a 2.0T CC /w 4-Motion, and I wouldn't look at the A4 for a second.

I guess in the end...'apparently sedans sell better the sportbacks' was the case...so it's a mute one...
but makes you wonder all those years Jetta GLI vs Audi A3 2.0T, why no one cared to own an A3 compared to the GLI's I constantly see floating around.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Rudy_H said:


> but makes you wonder all those years Jetta GLI vs Audi A3 2.0T, why no one cared to own an A3 compared to the GLI's I constantly see floating around.


In my case, it was a matter of the relative bargain price of the GLI back in 2005. Only recently (as in MY13) has the GLI come anywhere close to being an equivalent value to the fifth-gen version, IMO. The A3 just wasn't a value proposition back then. It may not be next year, either, but what I perceive as value has changed with my income and my desires between then and now.

If I were in the same position now as I was in 2005, it's likely I'd still be considering the GLI to be the better value- but that would assume I never bought the one I have now, 'cause who the hell would justify trading a MkV GLI for a MkVI GLI, especially when the MkV has seen a couple key modifications to make it "just right?"


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Just as we like to compare VW and Audi so to will others when they are looking. I think it would be normal for the buyer looking at any A3, and especially the 1.8T to also look at the GLI. 

We recently purchased a 4 dr sedan for my wife and looked at upper end Jetta's, Passat's, and lower end Audi A4's, along with others (ended up buying something off of this group).


----------



## steve111b (Jun 2, 2011)

You made my day Dan, thanks.


----------



## gizmopop (Feb 6, 2000)

Dan Halen said:


> Surely that's imperial MPG. If not...


http://fourtitude.com/news/Audi_News_1/first-details-audi-s3-sedan/



> This version of the Audi S3 Sedan, paired with the S tronic, accelerates from 0 to 100 km/h (62.14 mph) in 4.9 seconds; with the manual transmission it takes 5.3 seconds. The car’s top speed is electronically limited to 250 km/h (155.34 mph). The four-cylinder turbo has a *combined fuel* consumption of just 6.9 liters per 100 km (*34.09 US mpg*) or 7.0 liters (33.60 US mpg) (with S tronic or manual transmission), respectively – for a CO2 equivalent of 159 or 162 grams per km (255.89 or 260.71 g/mile). A fast-operating multi-plate clutch in the quattro drivetrain distributes forces to the front and rear axles (provisional data).


Combined cycle is 34 US mpg, so Highway mileage could be close to 40 mpg.:thumbup:


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> In my case, it was a matter of the relative bargain price of the GLI back in 2005. Only recently (as in MY13) has the GLI come anywhere close to being an equivalent value to the fifth-gen version, IMO. The A3 just wasn't a value proposition back then. It may not be next year, either, but what I perceive as value has changed with my income and my desires between then and now.
> 
> If I were in the same position now as I was in 2005, it's likely I'd still be considering the GLI to be the better value- but that would assume I never bought the one I have now, 'cause who the hell would justify trading a MkV GLI for a MkVI GLI, especially when the MkV has seen a couple key modifications to make it "just right?"


Great points, Dan. In my case in 2005 when I purchased my A3 I wanted the larger cargo capacity. I also put more of a premium on the design of of the A3 because I simply did not like the look of the MK V Jetta. Finally, I really had had it with VW service departments after years of crappy service. So if you put together my personal requirements at the time: service improvement, warranty improvement, design and cargo - to me the A3 was worth the additional $5,000 over the GLI.

Ironically enough - and you will all laugh when I say this - I'm looking long and hard at the MK 7 GTI next year as a replacement for my A3. The driving factor behind that decision is the lack of manual transmission offering, which is a big consideration in my book. The A4 really doesn't excite me, the S4 is still a bit too rich for my budget, and the new A3, while exciting - will be S-tronic only, which makes me feel like I will have to make too big of a compromise on powertrains to make me really happy with the purchase. 

That new GTI, though....hmmmmmmmm


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

the next gti is getting great reviews. i too would consider it but lack of trunk space kills it for me. audi's decision to kill the manual is forcing me to buy a bmw next.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Rudy_H said:


> What would you cross shop between Audi and VW today? It's really only the Passat and A4 front trak, maybe Touareg and Q5?


I really wouldn't cross-shop between the two. If I were in the market for an SUV it would be a Q5. I don't consider the Passat to be in any way comparable to the A4 in any manner whatsoever. If I were in the market for a $20-something sedan it would end up being an Accord or Mazda 6 if I couldn't afford the A4 Quattro.

Frankly, VW's product line has two interesting models: The GTI and the CC, and the CC in its current state is getting very long in the tooth. Everything else is beyond pedestrian and I would just as soon purchase the equivalent Honda, Mazda or Ford product.

I know that comes across as sounding both snotty and condescending toward VW, but the truth is that their move downmarket in content, features and fit+finish now put most of their products into the same category of mass transport that I class the Accord, Camry and Corolla.  

So cross shop the two brands in VW's current state? Nope. Fifteen years ago there was a lot of valid comparison to make between the Passat and A4 and even the A6, but the way things stand today...nope.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

kevlartoronto said:


> the next gti is getting great reviews. i too would consider it but lack of trunk space kills it for me. audi's decision to kill the manual is forcing me to buy a bmw next.


Yeah, I just can't bring myself to do a Bimmer. I just drove the F30 and for lack of a better term found it very "A4esque". The bigger problem is pricing: BMW seems to be hell bent on gouging for everything these days - I just can't justify it.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

gizmopop said:


> Combined cycle is 34 US mpg, so Highway mileage could be close to 40 mpg.:thumbup:


Remember, though, that those numbers were generated on a totally different test cycle than the EPA uses, so our "official" numbers will probably come in fairly differently than that.

-Tim


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> I really wouldn't cross-shop between the two. If I were in the market for an SUV it would be a Q5. I don't consider the Passat to be in any way comparable to the A4 in any manner whatsoever. If I were in the market for a $20-something sedan it would end up being an Accord or Mazda 6 if I couldn't afford the A4 Quattro.
> 
> Frankly, VW's product line has two interesting models: The GTI and the CC, and the CC in its current state is getting very long in the tooth. Everything else is beyond pedestrian and I would just as soon purchase the equivalent Honda, Mazda or Ford product.
> 
> ...


lol well, ya...that's true...

I have to agree the GTI / R, and CC are the only models I would look at. Border line GLI...but all are FWD, and I don't care at all for them. The Japanese have always made great appliances, Korea has been taking over the appliance world of late with Samsung too...Germans have always made a 'cooler' appliance. :banghead: I want a car that is fun to drive though...

If I were to cross shop, it would be an all new Mazda3 vs A3 (FWD vs FWD), well actually I wouldn't even consider the A3 unless it was priced close to the Mazda3 with similar options. 

Quattro A3 vs WRX / STI. All of which aren't on the market yet...but don't want to get current expecting the latest to be the greatest.

In the end, this is likely why I haven't pulled the trigger on a car yet

AWD or RWD, at least 200hp with easy power mods, end goal 300-350hp, 4 / 5 door 'compact' sedan...and go?

I know the list you will make, will contain all cars that are coming out with refreshes in the next 6-8 months...


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Yeah, I just can't bring myself to do a Bimmer. I just drove the F30 and for lack of a better term found it very "A4esque". The bigger problem is pricing: BMW seems to be hell bent on gouging for everything these days - I just can't justify it.


The gouging is annoying me as well. There is also a stigma attached to bimmers but the options are narrowing quickly for manual transmissions. :banghead:


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

kevlartoronto said:


> The gouging is annoying me as well. There is also a stigma attached to bimmers but the options are narrowing quickly for manual transmissions. :banghead:


http://jalopnik.com/dealer-in-calif...ource=jalopnik_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

Jump on it.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Yeah, I just can't bring myself to do a Bimmer. I just drove the F30 and for lack of a better term found it very "A4esque". The bigger problem is pricing: BMW seems to be hell bent on gouging for everything these days - I just can't justify it.


Actually I missed this post and well it's not just BMW...and agree completely. Partially I think lack of competition is to blame. When no one is competing with you then you can charge whatever you want.

Give me something small fun to drive, RWD or longitude AWD for better weight displacement

I dream of a day Lexus uses the GT-86 platform and builds a small RWD sedan!!
There is the potential for a 2-series Gran Coupe.
I would be content with my Genesis Coupe + 2 or more doors to be perfectly honest. RWD and current 2.0T, bargain price. It's a blast to drive, and actually from technical aspect beats the BRZ / FRS in every statistic when you compare them, except opinion of the writer.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> http://jalopnik.com/dealer-in-calif...ource=jalopnik_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
> 
> Jump on it.


i wish. i'm canadian and i live about a three or four day drive from that dealership. bmw canada would never offer an option like that. they won't even allow us to get a 328i with m sport. this is one of the reasons it sucks so much to have audi refuse to offer us a manual in the a3/s3. the 2 series gran coupe sounds great but it's 2 years away!


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> http://jalopnik.com/dealer-in-calif...ource=jalopnik_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
> 
> Jump on it.


That 320 with M-Sport is a very reasonable enthusiasts model. Very nice, and it would be even better if BMWoA would market it specifically. 

One of the things I discussed with Audi of America was a specific 6MT version of the A3. My suggestion was that a unique model variant would be the 2.0TFSI + Quattro + 6MT "Sport". BMW's 320 6MT is their 'unique sport' offering. Audi's equivalent would have to include quattro, no? ;-)

This 320 is a really compelling option, actually. $35k with the M-Sport package makes it *really* compelling. Maybe even moreso than a 6MT A4 Premium Plus+Sport which will run around $40k.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> That 320 with M-Sport is a very reasonable enthusiasts model. Very nice, and it would be even better if BMWoA would market it specifically.
> 
> One of the things I discussed with Audi of America was a specific 6MT version of the A3. My suggestion was that a unique model variant would be the 2.0TFSI + Quattro + 6MT "Sport". BMW's 320 6MT is their 'unique sport' offering. Audi's equivalent would have to include quattro, no? ;-)
> 
> This 320 is a really compelling option, actually. $35k with the M-Sport package makes it *really* compelling. Maybe even moreso than a 6MT A4 Premium Plus+Sport which will run around $40k.


Travis, that is a brilliant idea. i would go for an a3 quattro sport or a s3 with a manual in a second.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

I'm not sure how I didn't find this before now (it's dated August 8), but...

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...ts-to-sell-150K-plus-vehicles-in-U.S.-in-2013

_Keogh said the A3 will start in the low-$30,000 range, which will help attract buyers._

To me, that's in the $31,000 or $32,000 neighborhood. Uh oh.


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

Dan Halen said:


> I'm not sure how I didn't find this before now (it's dated August 8), but...
> 
> http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...ts-to-sell-150K-plus-vehicles-in-U.S.-in-2013
> 
> ...



EHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH........................I agree......

Uh...oh.....

$32000 US starting????, 4k higher starting price than now???

:banghead:


----------



## Leke (Jul 29, 2013)

The current A4 starts just under 34k USD


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> I'm not sure how I didn't find this before now (it's dated August 8), but...
> 
> http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...ts-to-sell-150K-plus-vehicles-in-U.S.-in-2013
> 
> ...


Hmm - that's never a good sign. Of course, wouldn't it be nice if they've re-evaluated the market and decided to ditch the 1.8TFSI and go 2.0TFSI across the board?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Travis Grundke said:


> Hmm - that's never a good sign. Of course, wouldn't it be nice if they've re-evaluated the market and decided to ditch the 1.8TFSI and go 2.0TFSI across the board?


I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 4


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.


Ha! As my wife jokes: "Travisland must be a GREAT place to live!"

But seriously, Keogh was interviewed by Bloomberg back in January http://www.bloomberg.com/video/audi...-power-keogh-says-FsFTaMMERaaoHj~ynOS~mA.html and the takeaway is that he is very concerned about pricing power and maintaining a premium image for the brand. 

In a follow-up interview I recall him saying that he feels the sweet spot for a premium brand is in the $40k up and up market. Anything below that tends to damage the premium brand perception.

Now bringing things back around to the Detroit News article linked above it does not entirely surprise me that Audi may be adjusting their original business plan for the A3 and is looking to bump up the price point. 

So dabbling more into the speculative world, I wouldn't mind the starting price at $31, $32 or even $33 if the A3 sedan is an excellent value and they place more standard equipment into the car at that price point. Frankly, I'd ditch the 1.8TFSI altogether and start the range at $33k with a 2.0TFSI, virtually loaded, add another $2k for the Quattro version.

In fact, from the standpoint of simplicity, wouldn't it be great if Audi eliminated all kinds of packages and made most everything standard at $33k. Next step up at $36-$37k would get you a loaded A3 2.0TFSI Quattro and finally $40-$42k would get you a loaded S3? 

Makes for an interesting experiment and it would give Audi a massive leg up on BMW and Mercedes without sacrificing brand image.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

i think you are right on the money travis. they are going to include a bunch of extra options into the base price. unfortunately one of those will be automatic. i've pretty much decided to go with bmw from now on. a shame because the a3 is the car i really wanted.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Travis Grundke said:


> Ha! As my wife jokes: "Travisland must be a GREAT place to live!"
> 
> But seriously, Keogh was interviewed by Bloomberg back in January http://www.bloomberg.com/video/audi...-power-keogh-says-FsFTaMMERaaoHj~ynOS~mA.html and the takeaway is that he is very concerned about pricing power and maintaining a premium image for the brand.
> 
> ...


the $31 or $32k price for a 1.8T model will not fly. The CLA250 is coming in at $29,990 for a 2.0T with DCT. But if Audi wants to try the experiment you described, then it makes sense. I would totally go for a loaded A3 2.0T at 37k...if the S3 was loaded at 42k then why not. The CLA i want is going to be $42k MSRP (everything including Pano sunroof). I fear the S3 is going to be near 50k though. Reading that article though, no mention was made of the 1.8L, just S3, Diesel, and a 2.0L engine. Maybe they have decided to ditch the 1.8T


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

caliatenza said:


> the $31 or $32k price for a 1.8T model will not fly. The CLA250 is coming in at $29,990 for a 2.0T with DCT. But if Audi wants to try the experiment you described, then it makes sense. I would totally go for a loaded A3 2.0T at 37k...if the S3 was loaded at 42k then why not. The CLA i want is going to be $42k MSRP (everything including Pano sunroof). I fear the S3 is going to be near 50k though. Reading that article though, no mention was made of the 1.8L, just S3, Diesel, and a 2.0L engine. Maybe they have decided to ditch the 1.8T


If AoA thinks they are going to beat MB for brand image in the US and that justifies their premium pricing then I want some of whatever they are smoking.

the A3 needs equivalent pricing AND superior features to beat MB, not lower performance and premium pricing:screwy:


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

caliatenza said:


> the $31 or $32k price for a 1.8T model will not fly. The CLA250 is coming in at $29,990 for a 2.0T with DCT.
> 
> Reading that article though, no mention was made of the 1.8L, just S3, Diesel, and a 2.0L engine. Maybe they have decided to ditch the 1.8T


I think you are probably right. The article did not mention the 1.8TFSI. If they have decided to ditch the 1.8T and have the 2.0T quattro start at 32k, that makes much more sense.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

VWNCC said:


> I think you are probably right. The article did not mention the 1.8TFSI. If they have decided to ditch the 1.8T and have the 2.0T quattro start at 32k, that makes much more sense.


32k is definetly a price i can get on board with, this would bode nicely for the S3 being around $39k, which would mean the S3 will come pretty fully loaded, hopefully. Or Audi will play that Premium Plus and Prestige game again...like with their other models, where the price sharply increases.


----------



## blum3416 (Jul 21, 2013)

Yeah I'm sure AoA will do the same as they do with all of the other models, but there will probably be just a Premium Plus and Prestige package with the Premium Plus being the base model. It will probably be pretty loaded with everything but the navigation, safety features, LED headlights, quilted sport seats, etc. I'm hoping that the full LED headlights are available as an option on the Premium Plus package.

That would be perfect if it started around 40k for the Premium Plus with the automatic transmission. The options that I would get just depends on what's available and pricing. I'm ultimately hoping that the S3 specified how I would want it doesn't come out to anything more than 44-45k MSRP. If its more, I may have to look at an alternative, which may be the Golf R or something else more reasonable. Anxious for the pricing to come out! :/ when do you think pricing will be available?


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

blum3416 said:


> when do you think pricing will be available?


I would expect pricing to start coming into focus between the LA Autoshow in November and the Detroit Autoshow in January.


----------



## blum3416 (Jul 21, 2013)

Travis Grundke said:


> I would expect pricing to start coming into focus between the LA Autoshow in November and the Detroit Autoshow in January.


Yeah that's what I was thinking too. I talked to a salesman at my Audi dealership and he was thinking sometime in January would be when they will have more info on it.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

The only price that matters to me is the price for the model with the options I am interested in and the out the door price (what you can actually buy it for). Car companies come up with stripped models that are good for advertisements and some also do big discounts on high MSRP's. I will cross shop the car I am interested in with others and for the price I can actually buy them for.

A4 starts at $33,800 ($34,695 with Freight) with FWD CVT, again irrelevant to me as I am not interested in this model.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Audi is going to have to be careful, because they very well could out price themselves.

http://www.acura.com/Pricing.aspx?model=ILX&modelYear=2014
http://www.buick.com/2013-verano-luxury-sedan.html


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

Rudy_H said:


> Audi is going to have to be careful, because they very well could out price themselves.
> 
> http://www.acura.com/Pricing.aspx?model=ILX&modelYear=2014
> http://www.buick.com/2013-verano-luxury-sedan.html


they won't care. audi is german.
The S3 will be $39-40k for base. loaded around $47k and higher.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Rudy_H said:


> Audi is going to have to be careful, because they very well could out price themselves.
> 
> http://www.acura.com/Pricing.aspx?model=ILX&modelYear=2014
> http://www.buick.com/2013-verano-luxury-sedan.html


I'm a very atypical buyer, so I realize this may seem outlandish or unrealistic, but...

I can't really see the ILX, the Verano, and the A3 being cross-shopped- at least not seriously. Maybe someone would consider them together in the tire-kicking phase of the buying process, but I imagine most customers will quickly drop the ILX/ Verano combo or the A3 from consideration.

That ILX interior is damn sharp for a Japanese car, though.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

All I care about is Quattro+2.0t A3. The A3 already will come packaged with MMI & Pano roof, and a host of other standard features. I think any talk about perceived perception of premium because of price is BS. Look the realistic competitors are the Acura ILX (already pretty weak IMO, the TSX is a much better value but only 1 year left before disco'd), the Buick Verano, the new Merc, and the BMW 320i (since the 1 series has no 4 door right now)...and then of course the requisite VW pimped out.

From everything I have read VW/Audi group are looking at moving a lot of product, they are looking to take on the top dogs in the worldwide sales.

I assume:
a. A3 1.8 FWD (non AWD option)
b. A3 TDI FWD (non AWD option)
c. A3 Quattro AWD (non FWD available)

With packaging similar to the A4:
premium
premium plus
prestige

Right now an A4 Quattro 2.0 starts at 34700. I expect the A3 Quattro 2.0T to be priced at 32,000 range... maybe 31,500, then add the requisite packages+freight. As it is you could get an A4 for 33,800 FWD, Audi does not want these cars stepping on each others toes.

My hope is that an A3 with LED, paint, freight, convenience package(IMO should be standard, since you get all this in an Accord already Iphone/ipod integration), and some sort of smaller package like cold weather put it at under 35000 MSRP.

B.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> I can't really see the ILX, the Verano, and the A3 being cross-shopped- at least not seriously. Maybe someone would consider them together in the tire-kicking phase of the buying process, but I imagine most customers will quickly drop the ILX/ Verano combo or the A3 from consideration.
> 
> That ILX interior is damn sharp for a Japanese car, though.


I'm with Dan on this: most A3 buyers are going to seriously cross shop the A4, 320/328, CLA, C-Class.

While they may see the Verano/Regal, ILX, TSX/TL on their radar while shopping I don't think too many people will be serious cross-shoppers.

Acuras are great values, but Audi isn't interested in attracting the 'value' customer. In fact I would expect that anyone who cross shops the two would stretch their budget to afford the Audi once they try it out.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

BrutusA3 said:


> All I care about is Quattro+2.0t A3. The A3 already will come packaged with MMI & Pano roof, and a host of other standard features. I think any talk about perceived perception of premium because of price is BS. Look the realistic competitors are the Acura ILX (already pretty weak IMO, the TSX is a much better value but only 1 year left before disco'd), the Buick Verano, the new Merc, and the BMW 320i (since the 1 series has no 4 door right now)...and then of course the requisite VW pimped out.
> 
> From everything I have read VW/Audi group are looking at moving a lot of product, they are looking to take on the top dogs in the worldwide sales.
> 
> ...


To me, that says that we're not that off-base with our suggestions that Audi may be reconsidering the 1.8T car at this point. If Keogh's comments in the article I linked earlier weren't just off-the-cuff remarks, it has to be a likely scenario. Most of us have questioned the value in a 1.8T A3 in various threads over the last couple months, anyway.

If by "paint" you mean the ability to order Ipanema Brown or Nogaro Blue or Samoa Orange, for example, well... may be best to prepare for disappointment and welcome the surprise if we do actually get an Exclusive program on the A3/ S3. Nothing has been confirmed one way or the other (and I wouldn't expect it to be confirmed for a while yet), but the bits I've pieced together don't have me feeling particularly confident. I'm pulling for it, though.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

Travis Grundke said:


> Acuras are great values, but Audi isn't interested in attracting the 'value' customer. In fact I would expect that anyone who cross shops the two would stretch their budget to afford the Audi once they try it out.


Yes, they are a great value depending on the car. Have tried out the Acura TL SHAWD and the Audi A4, the TL easily wins that, the SHAWD paired with the 6 cyl was so sweet. Now the A3 assuming it drives great and is priced right is IMO will kill anything in that price bracket from Acura/buick/BMW or otherwise. That is why I am excited by it.

All this waiting is killing me, too much build up. I can't believe at this point we have not heard about the 2.0 even.

B.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> To me, that says that we're not that off-base with our suggestions that Audi may be reconsidering the 1.8T car at this point. If Keogh's comments in the article I linked earlier weren't just off-the-cuff remarks, it has to be a likely scenario. Most of us have questioned the value in a 1.8T A3 in various threads over the last couple months, anyway.


I suspect Audi is watching initial market reactions to the CLA (reactions = actual sales) and will adjust packaging accordingly, as well as anticipating what BMW is going to bring to market in the 2-series next year.

I think that Keogh's previous statements about brand positioning and pricing are illustrative. A car priced *below* $30,000 really does undermine their desire to push the brand upmarket and introducing an A3 1.8TFSI at $32-$33 doesn't seem terribly competitive in my mind. 

I have no doubt that Audi's scale will allow them to provide better packaging than Mercedes. The question is whether they will take advantage of this or not.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Travis Grundke said:


> I suspect Audi is watching initial market reactions to the CLA (reactions = actual sales) and will adjust packaging accordingly, as well as anticipating what BMW is going to bring to market in the 2-series next year.
> 
> I think that Keogh's previous statements about brand positioning and pricing are illustrative. A car priced *below* $30,000 really does undermine their desire to push the brand upmarket and introducing an A3 1.8TFSI at $32-$33 doesn't seem terribly competitive in my mind.
> 
> I have no doubt that Audi's scale will allow them to provide better packaging than Mercedes. The question is whether they will take advantage of this or not.


Audi waiting to see CLA's pricing? Are they going to wait forever to introduce the model? The CLA was only recently announced and it is already heading for the shores, while the A3 has out forever in europe and they are still waiting to bring it over? Instead of getting a 1 year head start on the entry level lux sedan, they lost whatever time advantage they had, and if they are going to wait for others to come out first, then they will be seen as a also ran.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

LWNY said:


> Audi waiting to see CLA's pricing? Are they going to wait forever to introduce the model? The CLA was only recently announced and it is already heading for the shores, while the A3 has out forever in europe and they are still waiting to bring it over? Instead of getting a 1 year head start on the entry level lux sedan, they lost whatever time advantage they had, and if they are going to wait for others to come out first, then they will be seen as a also ran.


I don't really see the automarket as having much of a 'first mover advantage' like in other markets. Audi was exceedingly late to the game with both full and mid-size SUVs and will be very late to the game when it comes to compact SUVs (Q3 - in late 2014). 

Let the competition do the heavy lifting by being the first to market, first to be criticized, first to be picked apart. Were I Audi I would be studying the packaging/pricing and critiques and then try to package my product to look that much better in comparison. 

We've got six months before the cars are on lots. Pricing and packaging should be known by the end of the year. So long as Audi can one-up the CLA in terms of packaging/pricing there is absolutely no harm in being later to market.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Being second to market with a similar product is always a negative. They may surpass the CLA with a better car or pricing but there is no benefit to being second. It is always easier to get things started with fewer competitors. If this car had come out a year ago (or even now) they would have been far ahead of a couple of their competitors and without this competition it would have been easier to sell more of the cars at a higher price. 

Not sure I have ever seen a concept that looks close to production take 2 years (maybe more) to come to market. I'm amazed at how long it has taken and less excited about the car compared to two years ago when we started seeing renderings. Two years ago (or even one for some) there was no CLA (or even talk of one), no soon to come out new 1 series, no ATS, no talk of a new TL, no 320, no new GTI, no new IS, etc.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> I'm with Dan on this: most A3 buyers are going to seriously cross shop the A4, 320/328, CLA, C-Class.
> 
> While they may see the Verano/Regal, ILX, TSX/TL on their radar while shopping I don't think too many people will be serious cross-shoppers.
> 
> Acuras are great values, but Audi isn't interested in attracting the 'value' customer. In fact I would expect that anyone who cross shops the two would stretch their budget to afford the Audi once they try it out.


Though I didn't even bother looking at the Verano (overweight), the ILX is actually one heck of a car for the price. Mind you the 2.4L, I didn't care to even test drive the 2.0L...just like I could care less about the A3 1.8TFSI...

The only reason I decided against grabbing the ILX 2.4L was the A3 2.0T Quattro which will cost more, and well S3. Excellent interior, though a lot of buttons, phenomenal manual transmission - not offered in the A3, missing a sports diff which is in the Civic, and something the 1.8TFSI is rumored to have. 

The rest of the Acura line-up is well...lacking...at least the TL is going to be downsized to the Accord platform and the RL can remain being a useless vehicle at the top end that very few buy


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

dmorrow said:


> Being second to market with a similar product is always a negative. They may surpass the CLA with a better car or pricing but there is no benefit to being second. It is always easier to get things started with fewer competitors. If this car had come out a year ago (or even now) they would have been far ahead of a couple of their competitors and without this competition it would have been easier to sell more of the cars at a higher price.


Here's what I don't understand: what advantage(s) does being first impart? In certain industries I get it: you can be first or you can be best, but I don't think that applies here. Positive and negative are always relative to what the corporate goals are. If the goal is to be first to market, well, Audi fumbled. If the goal is to hold margins, improve luxury brand perception and to sell with the minimum of incentives then they're likely succeeding. 

I'm not trying to be flip, but Audi seems to be doing just fine with the Q5, Q7, A7 - all three were very late entrants to the market. All three have the lowest incentives in their respective markets. In the past five years the average transaction price for an Audi has increased by $10,000. Sales are on pace to top 150,000 this year compared to 87,000 five years ago.

As far as being easier to sell - it's all relative: you enter a new market as the leader and you face all of the criticism and attention alone. You end up pricing and packaging in unknown territory with no guarantee that the market will respond positively with open arms. Why not let your competition do the dirty work for you, hoeing the road and opening the space, learning from their mistakes?

While Audi has been first to market or popularization of certain technologies, if you haven't noticed, Audi is very loathe to open new markets or segments first. They almost always let BMW and Mercedes do that, then follow up several years later with a competing product. They've been very canny about positioning their vehicles so as to avoid direct comparisons (ie: pricing and packaging of the S and RS models to avoid direct comparos to, say, the BMW M-models).

Audi is going to be almost three years behind BMW's X1 and a good 18 months behind Merc's GLA when it comes to compact crossovers in North America. I hardly think that will prevent it from likely becoming their #1 best seller within a few years. 

My point being: it's not always best to be first, just so long as you have good product to compete. I have no doubt the A3 will be very competitive against the CLA and 2-Series.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Travis Grundke said:


> Here's what I don't understand: what advantage(s) does being first impart? In certain industries I get it: you can be first or you can be best, but I don't think that applies here. Positive and negative are always relative to what the corporate goals are. If the goal is to be first to market, well, Audi fumbled. If the goal is to hold margins, improve luxury brand perception and to sell with the minimum of incentives then they're likely succeeding.
> 
> I'm not trying to be flip, but Audi seems to be doing just fine with the Q5, Q7, A7 - all three were very late entrants to the market. All three have the lowest incentives in their respective markets. In the past five years the average transaction price for an Audi has increased by $10,000. Sales are on pace to top 150,000 this year compared to 87,000 five years ago.
> 
> ...


Being first to market allows you to sell a product without the competitor being there. If the A3 had come out last year the chances of them selling their goal numbers at the margins they wanted without redesign or cutting the selling price would have been greater. 

If you are interested in buying the CLA when they come out you will go there and look at what they have to offer and the fewer other cars available the more likely you to buy the CLA. Pretty simple. If the CLA is first to market, even if it isn't as good as the A3 it will win at least until the A3 comes out as they are missing this competitor. If it turns out to be better than the A3 then it will be even tougher for the A3.

The whole idea of the Q5, Q7 or A7 "doing fine" is a strange one. What is doing fine? If they had come out with the same vehicles sooner the total sales of these vehicles would have been higher.

Audi may be doing "fine" but if they developed new models (exactly the same car) sooner they would be doing better. Look at the sales numbers of the A3 in the last couple of years. Having the new A3 sooner would have improved these numbers.

With the X1 and GLA, at some point Audi will compete in this segment and may do well, currently they are not and every month they aren't in this segment is sales numbers (production numbers and profit) they won't get.

I also disagree with the first to market faces the most criticism. When Audi competes against the X1 and GLA they will go head to head and be picked apart based on them. The first to market has far less to compare against. You can also price it higher the first couple of years and add packages or incentives to get to the price your competitor pushes you to. Having a competitor go to market sooner with a lower price than you planned doesn't make things simpler.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

I thought it would be interested to build a 1.8T on the UK site, I took the base and added stuff like sport trim, leather, LED, Auto, comfort package, approximating what we would see in the U.S. typical what most cars likely to be set up as (I assume LED for example will be an option here in the U.S., but most dealerships will order it with, was a $2000 gbp option)
29,630.00 GBP (non destination).

Some things I heard we will not get are Automatic Start-Stop function, but something I did not see for UK was panoramic sunroof which I have seen we will get.

Seems in line with my thoughts of 1.8T swinging in at 28,500. Unfortunately no 2.0T to speak of which is what I want.

So beyond the obvious complaining about lack of manual, I thought the cloth seats looked really cool the rallye cloth, with the different colors, even though I would not get the cloth, just thought it looked neat, lets say if you had a blue car.









I also really hope these wheel option are available to us, the 19" wing design is so sweet, the 4th one going from left to right:


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

They can kill the second from the left with fire. Lots of fire of the white variety. 

Pano roof is in the configurator, it's just not readily apparent. It must be combined with one of four additional options, the least expensive of which would be illuminated vanity mirrors for 55GBP. With the 950GBP tag on the pano roof, the effective minimum cost for pano is 1,005GBP.

This was on an S-tronic 1.4L TFSI car, so a fairly base car.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

Anyone know if you are a member of of Audio Club NA if Audi will honor the 6% discount on the new A3? I know they have certain cars they say no to, I would assume no prob on the A3 but we all know what assuming something gets you.

B.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

They *just* updated the program for MY14 vehicles this week. Seeing as MY14 units have been on the lots for about six weeks now, we may see some delay in them acknowledging the MY15 A3. I intend to take advantage of the program, though, so you can be sure that I'll be inquiring if the cars are close to arriving and they haven't ironed it out.

That said, the exclusions they currently have don't seem to imply that anything A3-related will be an issue. The only potential snag would be the sportback e-tron car, but that's still a long way off.


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

They don't leave out any other 'S' cars, so I very much doubt that the S3 would be left out. The e-tron and the RS3, could be excluded(if we get the RS3)


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

If I go the A3 route, I'll be using this program also. Let us know if you hear anything. It looks like only the really high end cars are typically excluded.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Chimera said:


> If I go the A3 route, I'll be using this program also. Let us know if you hear anything. It looks like only the really high end cars are typically excluded.


One must be a member of ACNA for no less than six months before becoming eligible for the purchase certificate- so if you aren't already a member and foresee making your purchase shortly after the A3 begins showing up, it may be worth going ahead and joining.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> I'm with Dan on this: most A3 buyers are going to seriously cross shop the A4, 320/328, CLA, C-Class.
> 
> Acuras are great values, but Audi isn't interested in attracting the 'value' customer. In fact I would expect that anyone who cross shops the two would stretch their budget to afford the Audi once they try it out.


Agree completely. Audi is the luxury and luxurysport brand in the group. VW is the value brand. (at least in the US)


----------



## aodmisery (Aug 31, 2013)

Dan Halen said:


> One must be a member of ACNA for no less than six months before becoming eligible for the purchase certificate- so if you aren't already a member and foresee making your purchase shortly after the A3 begins showing up, it may be worth going ahead and joining.


what are the requirements for joining ACNA? do i need to own an audi beforehand?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

aodmisery said:


> what are the requirements for joining ACNA? do i need to own an audi beforehand?


Nope! You won't be an "active" member if you don't currently own an Audi (you'll be an "associate" member, as I am), but you can still register with the club. The discount applies to all members, not just "active" members. I imagine that, upon getting my S3, I just update my bio information with the club and become an active member.

The "classes of membership" section at http://www.audiclubna.org/join-renew gives some further detail.

-Brian


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Dan Halen said:


> One must be a member of ACNA for no less than six months before becoming eligible for the purchase certificate- so if you aren't already a member and foresee making your purchase shortly after the A3 begins showing up, it may be worth going ahead and joining.


That is why I joined a few months ago (hell, I even bought a raffle ticket). If it works out, great. I've got to rotate out of my current vehicle within the next year.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

take it for what its worth, but the salesgirl i spoke with (i was looking at used A4s a few months back) said that the car should be out by March/April time and that they would get more information in a few months.


----------



## b-R-ad (Mar 17, 2012)

My 2 cents...

The S3 will be about 5-8K more than the new R. If they price it too far out of the range of the R (36-38K) it will kill the sales potential of the S3 as people would just buy a very similar car in the MKVII R.

It's a tricky pricing problem for them to have. They don't want it too similar in price to the R, but they can't ask too much more than the R since they share a lot of the same components, engine, etc...

Still, a great problem for us enthusiasts to have when looking for our next car!


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

b-R-ad said:


> My 2 cents...
> 
> The S3 will be about 5-8K more than the new R. If they price it too far out of the range of the R (36-38K) it will kill the sales potential of the S3 as people would just buy a very similar car in the MKVII R.
> 
> ...


I imagine the concern is primarily about encroaching on the S4. Secondarily, they may be concerned about the Golf R, but I think it's going to play out in a way that shows us that people aren't cross-shopping the Golf R and S3 nearly as much as we like to think/ hope.

VW and Audi are separate entities. I doubt they're having many conversations about the Golf R at AoA HQ, but I guarantee they're concerned about the S3 relative to the S4's entry price of $48,100.

I don't intend to give the Golf R even a single look, for example. I don't want a hatchback built to the extreme upper end of VW's product line; I want a sedan built to the upper low range of Audi's product line. The A3 is low range, if for no other reason than the lack of an A1 in the US. That aside, the fit and finish is said to be... upper end. The new Golf R may be on the MQB platform, but I'm going to be astonished if the fit and finish is markedly better than the current car. It leaves a lot to be desired for a mid-$30k car, IMO. There's just stuff that's... sloppy about it. I'd lodge that complaint about the MkVI in general, though. I do hope that they've put the MkVI behind them and will pay a bit more attention to the details in the MkVII fit and finish.

Of course, if the S3 were coming here as anything other than a sedan, I'd be staying in my current car. I just don't have a need for a hatchback; our Rabbit covers that.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

I think Dan has it absolutely correct: the target for the S3 will not be Golf R buyers. The bigger concern will be packaging and pricing to distinguish the S4. In the long range this won't be an issue as the A/S 4 will be moving up-market a bit, but until the B9 arrives Audi will be straddling the line. This is why I think you'll find the S3 top out at $45k or lower.


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

Travis Grundke said:


> S3 top out at $45k or lower.


that would be the deal, the a3 3.2 pig i had was something stupidly expensive in the low 40s so 45 with not too many deleted options wouldn't break the budget


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Yeah, $45k top end may allow me to justify the addition of another set of wheels for winter duty. I'm already going to have a pretty hefty bill on the front end for the mandatory extras- assorted Optimum treatments, clear bra, radar detector mounting gear, etc. 

Ever since someone posted a 'shop of the A3 in grey on the BBS CH-R in the titanium finish, I've been convinced that I'm going to need to shoehorn in a wheel purchase. :facepalm:


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

Dan Halen said:


> One must be a member of ACNA for no less than six months before becoming eligible for the purchase certificate- so if you aren't already a member and foresee making your purchase shortly after the A3 begins showing up, it may be worth going ahead and joining.


Since you seem to be on top of this ACNA deal, if I understand it correctly it is 6% off MSRP (including dest or not?), not 6% off of negotiated price?

If it is 6% off MSRP (no dest) is this really the best deal one can expect on an Audi? I am asking since never bought this make, 6% seems kinda low. For example doing a TMV on edmunds for an A4, the expected price is better then the 6%, and my experience is that I usually see better then TMV on cars anyhow. I completely understand that when a new model just first comes out the tendency is that prices hold a bit higher, but not for long. The $49 price for the membership is not much, but only worth it if you are 100% going to buy an Audi, and why stress about a membership this early if at the end of the day it is really a no better then getting a deal anyhow.

Sorry to ask so many questions, I just need to drive and physically sit in this car before I am sold on it, thus will be comparing it to a few different models in the Spring. Thanks for your help Dan.

B.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Travis Grundke said:


> I think Dan has it absolutely correct: the target for the S3 will not be Golf R buyers. The bigger concern will be packaging and pricing to distinguish the S4. In the long range this won't be an issue as the A/S 4 will be moving up-market a bit, but until the B9 arrives Audi will be straddling the line. This is why I think you'll find the S3 top out at $45k or lower.


oh man, $45k top out or lower, it could move back into contention for me .


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

BrutusA3 said:


> Since you seem to be on top of this ACNA deal, if I understand it correctly it is 6% off MSRP (including dest or not?), not 6% off of negotiated price?
> 
> If it is 6% off MSRP (no dest) is this really the best deal one can expect on an Audi? I am asking since never bought this make, 6% seems kinda low. For example doing a TMV on edmunds for an A4, the expected price is better then the 6%, and my experience is that I usually see better then TMV on cars anyhow. *I completely understand that when a new model just first comes out the tendency is that prices hold a bit higher, but not for long.* The $49 price for the membership is not much, but only worth it if you are 100% going to buy an Audi, and why stress about a membership this early if at the end of the day it is really a no better then getting a deal anyhow.
> 
> ...


You've pretty much hit my reason for joining six months in advance. I fully intend to be the first order for the S3 at my dealership when it becomes available for ordering, and I'm accepting that it means little to no discount off MSRP. While I could probably wait six months and have no problem getting more than 6% off, I don't intend to wait. I want to get out of my current car before it takes another major hit in value- ergo, before there's word of an imminent seventh-generation Jetta, and before I'm in danger of clocking 100,000 miles on mine.

As for whether it's 6% off MSRP, plus the full destination charge, or 6% off MSRP plus destination, I don't know. Six percent of destination shouldn't be anything more than $60 tops, though.

FWIW, I did run a TMV check on (I believe) a new S4 when I was first considering the ACNA option. At the time- and it's been a couple months, now- TMV for the S4 was greater than 94% of MSRP. That may well have changed by now.

For those considering an A3, I suspect the 6% may not be as lucrative as it will be for the S3, at least initially.

Also in play for me is that I would like to deal with my local dealer, and I know they're much more averse to "dealing" than others I could use- but I'm putting a priority on getting this one locally, if for no other reason than to avoid having to put it into service on a long highway trip before being able to take care of the preliminary protective wishes.

-Brian


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

are there any savings on S cars if you do European Delivery? Also im shocked that there are no True Car certified Audi dealerships in Southern California


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

Dan Halen said:


> I imagine the concern is primarily about encroaching on the S4. Secondarily, they may be concerned about the Golf R, but I think it's going to play out in a way that shows us that people aren't cross-shopping the Golf R and S3 nearly as much as we like to think/ hope.
> 
> VW and Audi are separate entities. I doubt they're having many conversations about the Golf R at AoA HQ, but I guarantee they're concerned about the S3 relative to the S4's entry price of $48,100.
> 
> ...


I don't understand the Golf R hate/dislike. The Mk6 Golf's have a much better interior than the previous gen A3's imo. Some would argue the Golf R/GTI even has a better interior than lower end A4's, more soft touch materials etc. I can verify this personally, I have a Golf R and my coworker has a A4 quattro. 

The major differences between the Mk7 Golf R and the new S3 are this:
- Sedan Vs Hatchback (at least in the US)
- More options on the S3 (Features, colors etc.)
- Perhaps more lightweight materials used in the S3 (not sure)
- S3 will be available in the US sooner

And I think you're wrong about people not cross shopping the R with S3, both of these are enthusiast models so majority of the enthusiasts should know about their similarities. The general public won't but then again most of them will probably be looking at the A3 and not an S3. They might skip the S3 and look at an A4 instead.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

caliatenza said:


> are there any savings on S cars if you do European Delivery? Also im shocked that there are no True Car certified Audi dealerships in Southern California


Believe so, but that would imply the availability of Euro Delivery for a given model. 

That's not to say we won't see Euro Delivery (damn I wish I could abbreviate that, but I hate that acronym) on the A3/ S3, but I suspect it won't be immediately available.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Dan Halen said:


> Believe so, but that would imply the availability of Euro Delivery for a given model.
> 
> That's not to say we won't see Euro Delivery (damn I wish I could abbreviate that, but I hate that acronym) on the A3/ S3, but I suspect it won't be immediately available.


hmmn it is tempting, but having to wait for the car to get built, and THEN another what, at least 2 months for it to coem back, i dunno. I would rather try and get a good deal on a car in the dealer inventory. I had a really good expierence with Mercedes, they were willing to make really good deals on their cars, how is Audi?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

DaLeadBull said:


> I don't understand the Golf R hate/dislike. The Mk6 Golf's have a much better interior than the previous gen A3's imo. Some would argue the Golf R/GTI even has a better interior than lower end A4's, more soft touch materials etc. I can verify this personally, I have a Golf R and my coworker has a A4 quattro.
> 
> The major differences between the Mk7 Golf R and the new S3 are this:
> - Sedan Vs Hatchback (at least in the US)
> ...


It's neither hate nor dislike; the car simply isn't within the scope of what I'm willing to fork out stacks to buy. Maybe my friend's Golf VI R is a unique case, but there are finish issues in multiple places in that interior. It's my hope that they are a bit more tidy with the Golf VII R.



caliatenza said:


> hmmn it is tempting, but having to wait for the car to get built, and THEN another what, at least 2 months for it to coem back, i dunno. I would rather try and get a good deal on a car in the dealer inventory. I had a really good expierence with Mercedes, they were willing to make really good deals on their cars, how is Audi?


That's what would kill me is the wait for it to come across the water. Besides the wait time, my understanding is that it doesn't get wrapped back up the way a car coming straight from the factory would. I'm not a fan- if that's true.


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

DaLeadBull said:


> The major differences between the Mk7 Golf R and the new S3 are this:....
> .


include transmission because w/ only a manual R there will be much less cross shopping


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

mookieblaylock said:


> include transmission because w/ only a manual R there will be much less cross shopping


Well we don't know if the next R will come to the states w/ manual or DSG or both.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Obviously this is a speculation thread...but I thought I would sort of summarize...

High End -> priced lower then the S4 ~ $48,000

Low End -> priced higher then a Golf R, and A4 ~ $35,000

So in the end the ~$40k is the base to expect for the 2015 S3?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Rudy_H said:


> Obviously this is a speculation thread...but I thought I would sort of summarize...
> 
> High End -> priced lower then the S4 ~ $48,000
> 
> ...


That's a fair assessment. The number Travis has been throwing around is $39,000, with the assumption that the A3 1.8T would start around $29,000. I don't know his credentials, but I do give some credibility to his input based on his postings thus far about the A3, S3, and Audi in general.

Keep in mind, too, that we now have some doubt about the existence of the A3 1.8T due to some comments from Scott Keogh in an interview about a month ago. He stated that he expects a "low $30,000 range" starting point for the US A3, which would sort of price the 1.8T base car out of the equation if the assumed price points for the 2.0T, 2.0TQ, and S3 are reasonable.

... or, Audi could completely shake our world up and come in with a $31,990 A3 1.8T and a $41,990 S3. I hope we're not headed that way, though, and frankly, they need to not be headed that way.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

DaLeadBull said:


> Well we don't know if the next R will come to the states w/ manual or DSG or both.


I *hope* that the VW US boardroom discussion has transmission option priorities for the Golf R set up as:


Manual and DSG,
Manual only,
DSG only.


While I still don't expect that we'll see wide cross-shopping of the S3 and Golf R (outside of the enthusiast camp), I would like to think that the Golf R will be available with a do-it-yourself transmission to offset the S-tronic-only S3.


----------



## jrwamp (Mar 25, 2011)

Dan Halen said:


> While I still don't expect that we'll see wide cross-shopping of the S3 and Golf R (outside of the enthusiast camp), I would like to think that the Golf R will be available with a do-it-yourself transmission to offset the S-tronic-only S3.


This.


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

BrutusA3 said:


> If it is 6% off MSRP (no dest) is this really the best deal one can expect on an Audi? I am asking since never bought this make, 6% seems kinda low. B.


6% is roughly the best that you can expect from most negotiations. If you are getting an A4 (the highest volume model) you might get a bit more. If you are getting something like an S5, the only way you will get 6% is to have a predetermined discount. I would expect the S3 to fall into the same category....at least for the first year.

With all that said, if you have the skill and determination, you can get a better deal. The ACNA discount has 4% coming from dealer and 2% coming from ACNA. So, if you really wanted to haggle, it is possible to get the dealership to take 6% off a car and then get the ACNA discount of an additional 2% for a total of 8%.
I wouldn't expect that it would be easy and some dealers may flat refuse....but it is possible.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

Cyncris said:


> 6% is roughly the best that you can expect from most negotiations. If you are getting an A4 (the highest volume model) you might get a bit more. If you are getting something like an S5, the only way you will get 6% is to have a predetermined discount. I would expect the S3 to fall into the same category....at least for the first year.
> 
> With all that said, if you have the skill and determination, you can get a better deal. The ACNA discount has 4% coming from dealer and 2% coming from ACNA. So, if you really wanted to haggle, it is possible to get the dealership to take 6% off a car and then get the ACNA discount of an additional 2% for a total of 8%.
> I wouldn't expect that it would be easy and some dealers may flat refuse....but it is possible.


Ahh now this is useful info, I would be one to try to work that angle as I will drive outside of my geographical area for the best deal if need be. I think at this point I will risk the $49 club membership even if I don't end up with an A3. 

One question, I assume this 6% is only for New not CPO?

B.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

BrutusA3 said:


> Ahh now this is useful info, I would be one to try to work that angle as I will drive outside of my geographical area for the best deal if need be. I think at this point I will risk the $49 club membership even if I don't end up with an A3.
> 
> One question, I assume this 6% is only for New not CPO?
> 
> B.


http://www.audiclubna.org/audi-reso...16-acna-content/about-acna/137-acna-discounts

While it doesn't expressly count out CPO vehicles, my inclination is to believe that it applies to new, never-titled vehicles only. If one could find a MY13 CPO vehicle, I guess that would be a pertinent question.


----------



## djdub (Dec 30, 2001)

Any word on any other wagons or sportbacks coming to america besides the allroad and Sportback E-Tron (if ever) from Audi? Not that I don't love the fact that Dan is the biggest sedan advocate ever to moderate these forums...but with the Sport Quattro Concept and the forbidden fruit of the S3 Sportback...I just can't justify the S3 Sedan. 

I really don't want to consider another brand outside of the VW/Audi camp unless I drop a metric load of cash on a Porsche. (Which won't happen any time remotely close to these time frames.)

Getting a little depressed again as I don't think I'm going with Audi and I really wanted to.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> http://www.audiclubna.org/audi-reso...16-acna-content/about-acna/137-acna-discounts
> 
> While it doesn't expressly count out CPO vehicles, my inclination is to believe that it applies to new, never-titled vehicles only. If one could find a MY13 CPO vehicle, I guess that would be a pertinent question.


I'm pretty certain the ACNA discount does NOT apply to CPO since the prices for CPO'd cars are set completely at the dealers' discretion. 

The only benefit for CPO is a low APR offer.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

djdub said:


> Not that I don't love the fact that Dan is the biggest sedan advocate ever to moderate these forums...


LOL!


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

djdub said:


> (MQB)RS3/S3/*GolfR(Mk7)* hmm, plot thickens...(


I know I am still in the same boat, I'm quasi on the sedan band wagon. Then I see the Mazda3 sportback, and start rethinking, do I need another 100+ hp and AWD...

Then I start looking at the STi's since this is the last chance to grab one really...interior though

Focus ST, I would rather for a Mazdaspeed3 if it makes it...

Leaving a plethora of sportbacks under 200 hp and under $30k. How about a nice CUV? :screwy: 

On the plus side!!! 3 more years until you can buy a B5 S4 Avant or RS4 and drive it in Canada!!!!


----------

