The Mazda CX-9 sales mystery

[jal142]

I was looking at goodcarbadcar.net, and the CX-9's yearly sales are really eye-opening:

2007 25,562
2008 26,100
2009 21,132
2010 28,908
2011 34,421
2012 24,442
2013 24,628
2014 18,496
2015 18,048
2016 16,051
2017 18,082 (YTD through October)

When I bought in 2010, the CX-9 was (in my opinion) much nicer than everything else we looked at. I looked at a 2017, and it is nicer than my 2010. However, the redesign didn't improve sales at all.

The best years were 2010-2011, for a model that was basically a 4-5 year old vehicle with some tweaks. I don't get it.

 

[JPL]

Yeah, the 2nd gen is far and away a better vehicle. I didn't even like the 1st gen, yet I just bought an '18.

One large factor is that the segment is much broader now with great contenders across the board. Still, the CX-9 wins every comparison test.

The other large factor is brand and model misinformation and frankly ignorance. When shopping for vehicles, Mazda doesn't even enter people's psyche. People automatically only shop the best selling models.

There's a general consensus in the auto press that Mazda makes the best looking lineup, the most engaging and fun to drive, now the nicest quality interiors with a designer look, while being on the more reliable side of the industry. Yet Chrysler sells more cars?

I think there's also a few factors keeping the CX-9 down and it's sad.

- 4 cylinder only in a segment where most people seem to think you have to have a V6. A very outdated notion.

- Feature desires like pano roof, Apple Carplay, Android Auto, ventilated seats. Stupid reason not to buy the best vehicle.

Lastly, those that must have the most space. This is more legitimate but you are left with an unseemly box but that's what you must accept.

 

[tex2670]

More choices which are more competitive in the marketplace? When I bought my '12, the Pilot was lame, the Highlander was nice but nothing special, there was no quality Kia offering, Hyundai was in the last year of the Veracruz. There's a lot of good choices out there, and most people don't do too much homework, so I'm willing to bet many buyers are turned off by the turbo 4 vs. V6 from most competitors. And I agree about the missing features on the Mazda. This actually isn't that much of a mystery.

 

[JPL]

More choices which are more competitive in the marketplace? When I bought my '12, the Pilot was lame, the Highlander was nice but nothing special, there was no quality Kia offering, Hyundai was in the last year of the Veracruz. There's a lot of good choices out there, and most people don't do too much homework, so I'm willing to bet many buyers are turned off by the turbo 4 vs. V6 from most competitors. And I agree about the missing features on the Mazda. This actually isn't that much of a mystery.

That was my point. Competition is better now then it was then.

The "mystery" exists somewhat because the CX-9 is best in class in many ways. But people apparently don't care about the important qualities in a vehicle.

 

[Fruitwolf]

That was my point. Competition is better now then it was then.

The "mystery" exists somewhat because the CX-9 is best in class in many ways. But people apparently don't care about the important qualities in a vehicle.

Strange because I was thinking about this very subject while riding my bike this afternoon.

One reason could be that many people are worried about what others think. They gotta have that BMW or Audi logo to impress the social circle.

I've test driven a few SUV's in the last year... Ford, Kia, Volvo, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW, Lexus, Acura, Jeep and Audi. The new CX-9 is the winner.

 

[NewMazdaFan01]

Another thing that doesn’t help is not being able to rent the CX-9. If it weren’t for me renting a 2016 Kia Sorento I would have never looked shopped before purchasing the CX-9. I was very impressed with the power, room, highway gas mileage, etc.. I told myself I would not buy another vehicle without being able to rent it but then I came across the CX-9 Signature in Metallic Gray. I had to have it just the way it was when I saw it, I think it was an Internet ad but can’t be sure.

In my opinion the CX-9 was the best choice for me out of the Highlander (Didn’t really care for the looks), the Kia Sorento (the seats killed my back on the long trip I rented it for), the Explorer (smaller on the inside that I thought so wasn’t an option), etc. The luxury SUVs were more than I wanted to pay and I have eliminated everything else in the segment for one reason or another.

 

[Aviboy97]

Another thing that doesnt help is not being able to rent the CX-9.

Another reason why the sales numbers are lower....no fleet sales like in years past. Mazda used to dump thousands of CX-9s into rental service, mostly Sport or base Touring models. Those numbers padded their overall sales numbers and hurt resale value.

 

[JPL]

Another reason why the sales numbers are lower....no fleet sales like in years past. Mazda used to dump thousands of CX-9’s into rental service, mostly Sport or base Touring models. Those numbers padded their overall sales numbers and hurt resale value.

Yup. You don't want a car that's a volume rental or other fleet vehicle. Take the Explorer. While it's the best seller, it's now the main law enforcement vehicle. Dodge Charger being the other leading choice. You see these vehicles and just think "police car".

Plus, rentals are known to be cheap choices rather than premium offerings. The CX-9 is a premium vehicle now and just doesn't fit that rental fleet image. The old one had a full hard plastic interior.

 

[jal142]

The previous generation had a V6, and still sold like crap, so the 4 cylinder argument doesn't hold any water. Everybody is moving to 4 cylinder engines (even the "premium" brands).

Similarly, I don't think it is that the cars are missing key features. The 2016 was missing a few things, but the previous generation was pretty much on par with everything else at the time it sold. The big complaints seem to center around Android Auto/Apple Carplay, and a giant sunroof. I haven't checked recently, but everybody seems to be dragging their feet on Android Auto and Apple Carplay, so it isn't just Mazda here.

I've reached the conclusion that Mazda's marketing flat out sucks. Do they even have a marketing department? If so, I have no idea what they do. They really need to raise people's awareness of the brand - right now, I suspect that most people couldn't name more than one Mazda model, and if you asked them to name something other than the Miata, they'd be stumped. Maybe they need to push a few into rental fleets so people actually would drive a Mazda, because right now, whatever they are doing does not seem to be working.

I remember many years ago, when Subaru was the "wierd" or "quirky" Japanese brand - they were in real danger of leaving the US market, but managed to hit a home run with the "Outback" branding. It seems to me that Mazda has become the new quirky Japanese brand. Subaru now sells 2x the number of cars in the US that Mazda does.

 

[JPL]

They do market, although not heavily, but maybe the message isn't connecting with people. It centers around driving (Driving Matters). After that, recent ads have focused on design that shows the expressive soul of motion theme - even showing designers molding full scale clay models. And thirdly, Mazda is now marketing the new wave of "smart premium" interiors.

So you have 3 fundamental qualities of the automobile that Mazda does better than any other mainstream brand, but people still don't care.

 

[bebopdeluxe]

I think a big issue - at least where I live (western suburbs of Philadelphia) - is a less-than robust dealer network. I live in the 5th largest metropolitan area in the country, in one of the premium demographic areas that Mazda should be targeting...within three miles of me are Audi, BMW, VW, Toyota, Honda, Infiniti...but the closest Mazda dealership is 10 miles - and a meaningful hassle of a during-the-week-drive - away.

It is a issue for me...and a BIG issue for my wife as I look to pitch buying a CX-9 to her.

 

[Gunbuster]

They keep spending marketing money on me through Facebook and Twitter. News flash, I already own it. I don't need to see a CX-9 advert every day.

 

[GJ-Molestor]

They keep spending marketing money on me through Facebook and Twitter. News flash, I already own it. I don't need to see a CX-9 advert every day.

And they are supposed to know that you own a CX-9 by checking your Facebook how?

 

[Horton]

There may be something to the rental thing. A friend got a CX-5 as a rental, and said he was very impressed to the point he might consider one for his next car.

 

[arock712]

I think a big issue - at least where I live (western suburbs of Philadelphia) - is a less-than robust dealer network. I live in the 5th largest metropolitan area in the country, in one of the premium demographic areas that Mazda should be targeting...within three miles of me are Audi, BMW, VW, Toyota, Honda, Infiniti...but the closest Mazda dealership is 10 miles - and a meaningful hassle of a during-the-week-drive - away.

It is a issue for me...and a BIG issue for my wife as I look to pitch buying a CX-9 to her.

I think this is a big issue. For me the closest Mazda dealership is almost an hour away, while most others are within 20 minutes. Lack of dealerships definitely hurts and it has caused me to have second thoughts because of how far away it is.

 

[Aviboy97]

They keep spending marketing money on me through Facebook and Twitter. News flash, I already own it. I don't need to see a CX-9 advert every day.

Do you know how SEO/SEM works? Adds of Facebook, Twitter and other sites are sold by search engines like Google. It matches your web searches and places adds from those companies on websites you visit that have sold advertised space.

By you visiting Mazdas247, you will see Mazda ads on pages where as space is sold...

 

[Guest2018]

I was looking at goodcarbadcar.net, and the CX-9's yearly sales are really eye-opening:

2007 25,562
2008 26,100
2009 21,132
2010 28,908
2011 34,421
2012 24,442
2013 24,628
2014 18,496
2015 18,048
2016 16,051
2017 18,082 (YTD through October)

When I bought in 2010, the CX-9 was (in my opinion) much nicer than everything else we looked at. I looked at a 2017, and it is nicer than my 2010. However, the redesign didn't improve sales at all.

The best years were 2010-2011, for a model that was basically a 4-5 year old vehicle with some tweaks. I don't get it.

From what I can glean (which is not much given data out of context) after placing a 3rd order polynomial trend line on the underlying data is that CX-9 sales on an annual basis is about to start booming again. To put that into some context and to explain why the boom might appear on the surface to be late, I can recount about three (3) conversations I've had with neighbors who tell me that they just bought XYZ SUV and now after seeing my CX-9 Signature in-person on a daily basis they wish they had done more homework and bought one themselves. One bought a Honda Pilot, another bought an Audi Wagon and another just recently bought the Mazda CX-5 believe it or not.

I think this SUV is building a following, as opposed to snapping the neck of new potential buyers. The woman who bought her Audi wagon about 4 months ago walked all the way from her home down to my house just to inquire about the "Napa Leather Seats" she's been reading about. She's fairly frizzled on the ends for not buying the CX-9 Signature. She says she really likes it "now." Emphasis on the word "now." The new Honda Pilot neighbor says that in his mind the CX-9 Signature is "just more refined." People are starting to come around to the CX-9. Slowly but surely. If this thing is capable of making Audi buyers suffer buyers remorse, then Mazda can probably look forward to increasingly higher sales through 2020 most likely.

Both did not initially know that I had brought home a "Mazda." I think people are still a little shocked that Mazda could or would do something like this. But, I think the shock is starting to settle in. When people do their Cost Analysis homework and Value Analysis homework, they find that in the seven passenger cross-over SUV market that there really is no competitor that does it better right now. Mazda needs to work on:

- Power Tilt & Telescoping Steering Wheel
- Rear Seat Tilt (Driver side) and matching articulation on passenger side
- Cooled Seating (Front and Second Row)
- Carbon Fiber-like replacement for Piano Black Plastic Trim
- More soft touch plastics to replace hard black fitments and interior trim items (glove compartment door, etc.)

These are small things that can be added without drastic price increases. These things already exist on Mid-Size SUVs that cost $20k to $40k+ more and would easily widen the gap between the CX-9 from all other sub $50k competition.

Personally, I would appreciate adding a CX-9 Signature with 325hp, but that's just me. I would pay an extra $2,000 to $3,000 for that kind of added torque and higher end horsepower, no question.

 

[Guest2018]

More choices which are more competitive in the marketplace? When I bought my '12, the Pilot was lame, the Highlander was nice but nothing special, ...

That's odd. I thought the Highlander was "special" until Toyota screwed it up with that bloated new design that doesn't really know what it wants to be when it grows up. Like the MDX, from a purely esthetic standpoint, both Acura and Toyota should have improved an already nice looking design theme. The new MDX, while I love the way it drives (except the overly aggressive SH-AWD system) nimble and somewhat quick, looks out of balance from front to back. The new front styling look great but the rear is indescribable and disjointed. And, the old Highlander design should have been pushed forward into a fresh new future not out of existence. The new mode shapes of the new Highlander are awkward and bloated.

The CX-9 on the other hand can be known from 100 miles away coming head-on and from 50 miles away from the rear. From the side, you can't mistake it for anything else. Mode shapes, longitudinal lines, shoulders, roof lines - everything fits together nicely. Two dimensional images don't do the CX-9 justice. But, when you meet it in-person, it becomes clear that this SUV is different and in a really good way.

 

[DeepCrystal17]

Still, the CX-9 wins every comparison test.

No it doesn't. For example, Consumer Reports ranks it 11th in midsize SUVs in overall score, 6th in road test score, and rates its predicted reliability poor. That's only 2 spots above the 7 year old Explorer design (which I just bought). Granted that doesn't seem to hurt the Explorer's sales since it's still the best selling SUV (including police sales).

A lot of people look at Consumer Reports.

 

[JPL]

No it doesn't. For example, Consumer Reports ranks it 11th in midsize SUVs in overall score, 6th in road test score, and rates its predicted reliability poor. That's only 2 spots above the 7 year old Explorer design (which I just bought). Granted that doesn't seem to hurt the Explorer's sales since it's still the best selling SUV (including police sales).

A lot of people look at Consumer Reports.

OK, almost every comparison. Which one's beat the CX-9 and on what merit on CR? Once you look at, sit in, and drive the CX-9 it's not even that close which is why the CX-9 is the only one on class that is often mentioned alongside Volvo XC-90, Audi Q7, and Acura MDX.

This "poor" predicted reliability score is nonsense. Not sure what issue that is but the issue I looked at this past month had a predicted reliability of average (hollow circle). And even then, what is that based on? The Ford based first gen? This model just came out a year and a half ago with mostly trouble free reporting from owners. Car and Driver has perhaps the longest term example at 25,000 miles and not a single problem. Do you honestly think this car will be poor? What would that make a Jeep, Fiat, Land Rover, etc.?