Talk:Captive import

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Cars Portal This article is within the scope of Wikipedia Project Automobiles, a collective approach to creating a comprehensive guide to the world of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you are encouraged to visit the project page, where you can contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

I know nothing about the Australian and European models which have been lately added to the article, but it appears to me from the text that they are not appropriate here. If a foreign design is assembled within its target market, it is not an import. This kind of arrangement would be more appropriately covered in Badge engineering, I believe. RivGuySC 04:55, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

As there's been no dissent on this point, I'm planning to edit accordingly. RivGuySC 23:30, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Mexican/Canadian

It's interesting to note that many Big 3 (or 2 and a half) models marketed in the U.S. are assembled in (and imported from) Canada and Mexico. The 2006 Ford Fusion, Chrysler PT Cruiser, and Chevrolet HHR are examples of Big 3 cars assembled in Mexico. But I wouldn't consider them to be captive imports because they were designed in the U.S.

True, and the Canadian-built vehicles include the Ford Crown Victoria. This is a somewhat difficult point, but on the whole I agree that they are probably not true captives. Perhaps for North American purposes in this article we should specify assembly outside the NAFTA area. RivGuySC 04:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Done. Wizmo (talk) 20:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Domestic dealer body?

Does a captive import necessarily have to be handled through a domestic dealer body? When Suzuki sells GM Daewoo product which Suzuki did not manufacture (like the Suzuki Reno), surely that's a captive import even though the "captor" is another import.Meersman 17:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, otherwise, it's not a captive import. No, the Reno is not a captive import. It is an example of badge engineering. If it was distributed through a domestic dealer body, then it would be a captive import. Wizmo (talk) 20:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First

The Nash Metropolitan was not the first American-designed car to be made entirely in Europe. The Model T was made extensively in the UK. Take a look at Ford of Britain. At first, it was made using imported parts, but after 1914 the British eventually created the entire car in Britain for their own consumption. The Nash is probably the first American-designed car made in Europe for American consumption, however. However, I am removing this statement from both this article and Nash Metropolitan. Chaparral2J (talk) 07:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The statement is true: "The Nash Metropolitan was the first time an American-designed car had been entirely built in Europe." The examples that you provide are all automobiles that were designed and built first in the United States. The Nash Metropolitan was never assembled in its domestic market. CZmarlin (talk) 00:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It isn't true. "The Nash Metropolitan was the first time an American-designed car had been entirely built in Europe" does not make any claims about whether American designs that were made in Europe were not also made in America, it merely says that it was the first occasion when Europe took an American design and made it entirely themselves. The key distinction is "built entirely" in Europe. The first American-designed that was entirely built in Europe (that is, without importing preassembled parts of it) was probably the Ford Model T. You are taking the distinction "built entirely" to mean "built only", which it does not imply. If you want to say that "The Nash Metropolitan was the first time an American-designed car had been built only in Europe" (as opposed to also being made in America) then that's a different fact entirely. Chaparral2J (talk) 15:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

It was "built entirely" in Europe, and "the Metropolitan was never assembled in the U.S." means it was not a copy of any previously existing automobile -- like the situation with the "European" Model T. Ford's Model T was first designed and built in the U.S. On the other hand, Nash's Metropolitan never saw production in its primary "domestic" marketplace! I am glad that you fixed the language to make this distinction clear. Thanks! — CZmarlin (talk) 15:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. I hope the new wording is sufficient. Thanks for your concern! Chaparral2J (talk) 07:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)