Why are Canadian and US options so different?

[grumzy]

I live in Canada, so I can actually get the options I want for my SEL, but I cant figure out why in the US, if I want Navigation I have to also buy the utility package which includes BLIS, whereas in Canada as long as I have Sync 3 I can just add navigation. (I don't like BLIS, I prefer the curvy blind spot mirror)

 

Same goes for seats, In Canada I can have premium cloth seats or leather, but in the US I have to have leather if I want SYNC3 etc. (Again I prefer cloth seats to leather, its not a cost thing, its a preference)

 

As I say, I CAN get the options I want, but if I lived 70 miles south in NY state I couldn't. Cars are made in the same factory, but these differences aren't due to different regulations and it can't be a technical issue. Just don't understand the logic.

 

 

[akirby]

It's been that way for decades. I remember on the 2000 Lincoln LS you could get heated cloth seats in Canada but not in the U.S. In 2003 you could get a luxury or sport V6 or V8 in Canada but in the U.S. you could only get a v8 Sport or a v6 luxury model.

 

It all comes down to marketing and what they think customers want or are willing to buy. Now whether there really is a difference between Canadians and Americans on heated cloth seats or if that's just an old myth that marketing has continued to perpetuate is anybody's guess.

[cab2g]

I'm not sure why, but almost every car in the US forces you to bundle a ton of options together. In my Camaro I had to bundle heated seats with summer tires. There was no option to opt for all seasons if you got heated seats.

 

akirby is right, it's mostly about what they think customers are willing to buy. In the US cars are a lot cheaper than in Canada and most other countries due to taxes/exchange rates etc. My first guess is that more profit is built into the base pricing of the Canadian Edge than the US Edge. To make up the difference, Ford forces you to buy more options at once to pad the profit margin.

 

Then again it could be that Canadians simply don't buy cars with bundled options historically. Most Luxury cars in Europe are sold with manual seats in the base trim because Europeans see little value in power seats. Americans on the other hand seem to think that it's easier to hold a button for 10 seconds than it is to use your legs for half a second to pull a seat forward or push it back. You won't find a single german luxury car in the US sold without power seats for this reason.

[Waldo]

Canadians and Americans are different and they like to buy different things and they have different priorities in how they balance what they spend their money on. Thus the Canadian marketing team (which is 100% separate from the US marketing team) makes adjustments to try to suit the market. This is the same as is done in every other country in the world.

 

The reason you don't understand the logic is because the marketing teams are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. They are giving you - a Canadian - exactly what you want. You shouldn't assume that an American would ever want exactly what you want. Your question really should be "Why do Canadians and Americans want different things?"

[akirby]

But it is a little bit of a chicken and egg question - do Americans really want leather with their heated seats or is that what they buy because they don't have a choice?

 

I think it's probably the former but sometimes it can be a self-fulfilling prophecy if you're not careful. But it does make sense that buying preferences are different.

[grumzy]

Yeah, I guess my issue is the lack of choice or maybe more the reason behind the lack of choice. With everything being fully automated and with some configurations allowed in Canada that arent in US and (to a lesser extent) vice versa, it isn't a technical issue. I guess I just don't understand the marketing.

 

Seems to me, if you offer everything that is technically feasible as individual pricing options, but bundle some together as cheaper packages, people could walk away with exactly the vehicle they wanted instead of compromising. Most people would take the bundles, and feel happy they got a discount or an extra feature for free, whereas assholes like me would be happy to get exactly what they wanted at a slightly higher price.

 

Sometimes there are technical reasons two items cant go together or need to be together, but for the life of me, if I lived in the US, I don't see why Ford would force me to have leather seats, if I would rather have cloth. I'm not asking for a discount, I'm saying give me Sync 3 and the navigation, but I'll keep the cloth seats and not upgrade to leather please.

 

If you go to the etis site and look at the configuration of your vehicle it's a huge selection of + this and - that already.

 

I guess this falls into the same category as Cable tv bundling... there is no technical reason you have to buy packages instead of individual channels, it's just the way they do it and even public revolt doesnt seem to change it ever.

[cab2g]

I'm pretty sure the truth is that they make more money when bundling together options than when selling them a-la-carte. Can you imagine if you had the opportunity to buy just the 5 cable channels you wanted? Do you think you'd be paying anywhere close to the $100+ on average that people are paying today? Same goes for options. Most people don't care about half of the options bundled with one that they do want. Some people love ambient lighting but don't care about having a garage door opener because they park outside. Others love that garage door opener but could care less about that foot well lighting. But if you want that foot well lighting, you have to pay for that garage door opener too. More money for Ford.

[akirby]

It would also be a nightmare for dealers to stock all those variations or just to keep track of all the different options. There are very few people who demand those options a la carte so they get by with it. It just makes it harder and more complicated to build and sell with lots of options - ask dealers about the F150.

[Waldo]

Exactly, it's all about dealer stocking. I think it's something like 90% of retail purchases are off the lot, so dealer's need to stock what people want. They can't afford to stock every combination and they certainly don't want a vehicle sitting on their lot for months because it has cloth seats that nobody wants. Maybe they figure only say 2% of Americans would buy cloth seats with Sync 3, but maybe 15% of Canadians would. That would make a big difference if you're a dealer trying to figure out how to equip the ~10 vehicles you keep in stock.

[akirby]

Dealers complain about the F150 options for the same reason. I think there are literally billions of combinations. But when you sell 800K a year you can get away with it.

[grumzy]

I agree that dealer stock is an issue, but if I'm prepared to wait 3-4 months for a factory order, I don't see why Ford wouldn't allow me to be able to order a la carte at a premium.

[akirby]

Because it's simply not worth the hassle.

[cab2g]

Also, the more configurations you allow, the more errors crop up during manufacturing. Can you imagine how hard it would be to install and verify hundreds of different configurations? They used to do that, look at all the colors and "unique" options offered by collector cars. Ever see those "only one of X" sales pitches? That's because they allowed people to build their vehicle however they wanted no matter how popular the option was. In the end, it led to production quality issues because all those options could not be tested individually for reliability thoroughly and once assembled, they couldn't be easily validated to work well together reliably.

 

There has been a push for decades to reuse common parts between product lines. The main reason for this is for reliability. The secondary reason is for cost savings. In the same thread, reducing the number of options allows for more thorough testing of less options, which increases reliability. And the secondary benefit is they can increase the net profit on per vehicle due to bundling options.

[grumzy]

I understand and agree to some extent, and yeah, maybe a full a la carte is a step too far, but I'm not even saying I want a unique configuration, The configuration already exists and can be bought in Canada. I was originally questioning why I can buy configuration X in Canada but not in the USA. If I lived 70 miles south of where I am, I couldn't have the car I have. And I love my Edge, but if I lived in the US and had to have BLIS and leather seats just to get Sync and navigation I'd probably buy a different vehicle. Unless of course I faced the same situation with all manufacturers, which of course may actually be the case. I'm not trying to turn this into a project so investigation stops here.

You could also argue that my actual point was... 'I Don't like leather seats... why do I have to have them? wah wah wah' :-)

[akirby]

That's pretty much the case in the states - most mfrs bundle those options together. There are a few mfrs and models that may not follow that but that seems to be what we as customers want so that's what we get.

 

You're right about the factory impact being the same if it's a package that's offered in Canada, so that part is entirely a marketing issue.