Is the ZL1 a Loss Leader?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Q'smuscle

I think he means the ZL1 is more car than the Z/28 because of all the comforts and gadgets you get with the ZL1! Which is why the Z/28 is called the Stripped down strictly track camaro. The Z/28 don't have the HUD, four pack gauges, AC or radio unless you order and pay extra.

True...but the blanket "more or less car" statement is subjective...I don't particularly like it when the Z/28 is assaulted for being ridiculously over-priced. Expensive? Hell yes - but you could not start with a 1SS and build that car for less than they're charging from the factory...just can't.

Originally Posted by BaylorCamaro

Tell that to Volkswagen, they get railed on every Bugatti they sell. Granted that car and the ZL1 are WORLDS apart and the Veyron is more of a statement.

Apparently the Smart Fortwo and Jaguar X Type also lose money. Not sure about the facts on that one though..

http://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-loses...bug-1426504241

Originally Posted by HDRDTD

Not always true.
For example the Chevy Volt. Ask GM how much money they lose on every one of them.

In some instances - it makes sense for a company to initially "loose" money on specialized, cutting-edge products...they justify it as either reputation, or marketing "costs" in the board room. Toyota did this with the Prius...I'm sure Nissan isn't getting rich off the Leaf, and as mentioned, Bugatti looses out on the Veyrons (though I have to imagine at a million and a half each, after so many years - they're starting to make a few pennies....), and GM is doing this with the Volt. I could have sworn I read somewhere that they are starting to profit a bit off of those, though...after all they did drop the price $5,000 last year (as predicted, when battery production came in-house, and became cheaper).

But....the ZL1 and Z/28 - besides being go-fast fun cars that annihilate the competition - they offer no significant marketing or reputation points for the company. So if they don't make money - the projects likely wouldn't be approved.

[Msmall143]

Originally Posted by HDRDTD

Not always true.
For example the Chevy Volt. Ask GM how much money they lose on every one of them.

Reread, I said MEANT to be profitable. Even the Chevy volt program was and is still meant to be profitable. I didn't say all cars are profitable.

If a manufacturer can't forecast profits for a program they cut it. If the zl1 wasn't currently making, or scheduled to make gm money, it wouldn't still be in production. Same goes for the volt, that cars going to be around for another 10 years with the brunt of expenses already incurred.

The saying "you need to spend money to make money didn't come from no where"

[ZZZL1]

Every Volt is subsidized by the government in a BIG way. Same way with every other electric vehicle produced in the US (and some abroad) AKA your tax dollars are paying to make a car you wouldn't drive...

[Blueclyde]

The new GM doesn't lose money on cars any longer.

[OldScoolCamaro]

...when it comes to lolly pops versus ass kickings in MSRP, the ZL1 rules in comparison to the Z/28....bang for the buck. But....this decision was thought out in a board room. It's muddied water. It is what it is. Things will shake out and fly straighter with the advent of the Gen 6 Camaro.