My logic is not flawed. I pointed out in my post that Lincoln sales started at a lower number so it is easier to get percentage growth. Still, it is a feat to grow the brand by that much in just one year. I understand percentages thank-you.
My logic is not flawed. I pointed out in my post that Lincoln sales started at a lower number so it is easier to get percentage growth. Still, it is a feat to grow the brand by that much in just one year. I understand percentages thank-you.Your logic is flawed. Percentages lie and Lincolns is lying straight to your face. Because they have a lower sales volume YoY than rivals smaller incremental gains translate into much larger percentage gains, where as rivals have to post a much higher number to gain significantly.
If you sell 10 cars in one year and sell 1 more car the following year that is a 10% gain YoY
If you sold 100 cars per year you would need to sell 10 cars to achieve the same percentage growth YoY.
This is participation ribbon, everyone gets hugs me too culture. Luxury is exclusive and above all not cheap, what is cheap luxury? Vaporware, better yet a marketing strategy it doesn;t exist, and if someone says it does they're lying to you. If you believe them, well that's a different story![]()
If Lincoln keeps up the growth it is doing now as a percent then year over year the company will actually grow exponentially. So I still stand by my original point.Don't be defensive now, you mentioned that lincoln had a lower innitial figure but did not preface the skew it creates. When you say things like this...
...It makes it seem like you don't understand them one bit. As these levels of growth are ENTIRELY dependant on Lincoln's lower raw figures. IF steady raw gains continue the percentage of growth will actually start to fall as Lincoln sells more and more models...
On another note I posted this yesterday...
2014 YTD Sales
MKZ: 15,986
CTS: 13,834
ATS: 12,552