|
|
Back in March of this year, the Tata Nano — dubbed “The People’s Car” due to it’s affordability — was unveiled in India, causing quite a stir around the globe. During the booking period, which ran from April 9 through April 25, nearly a quarter million were sold, with actual delivery beginning in July.
While the basic model of the Nano is relatively stripped down, the car has been widely hailed as revolutionary due to it’s most important feature: it’s $2,500 price tag. This price makes the Nano the cheapest/least expensive production car in the world.
Considering the tough economic times many of us our facing, coupled with the general woes of the U.S. auto industry, the idea of a small, fuel efficient and very cheap vehicle is certainly very appealing to the American consumer. That being said, would these factors be enough to make it worth it to Tata to sell the Nano in the United States?
According to a recent poll on Daily Fuel Economy Tip, it seems that bringing the Nano to North America is something Tata should seriously consider. Here’s how nearly 500 people responded when asked, “would you be interested in buying a Nano (the inexpensive Indian car) if it became available in the U.S.?”
- No – Definitely: 48%
- Yes – Definitely: 22%
- Probably Not: 12%
- Probably: 10%
- Unsure: 8%
While the statistics may not be overwhelmingly in Tata’s favor, think of it this way: if 2010 auto sales come in around the currently projected 12 million units, and 20% of consumers did in fact seriously consider purchasing a Nano, Tata could conceivably sell 2 million or more cars. Granted this is a very simplistic overview that makes a lot of assumptions, but at the same time it’s not hard to fathom how a $2,500 car would be appealing to many Americans.
In addition to the financial appeal of the Nano, there is also the environmental appeal: according to Tata, the Nano is designed to achieve a fuel economy of around 50 miles per gallon. After last year’s spike in gasoline prices and the big push in the “green movement,” it seems that more consumers are looking to purchase smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles. Both factors — fuel economy and size — play right into the Nano’s strengths.
That being said, there are some pretty obvious reasons why only 22% of respondents would seriously consider purchasing one of these vehicles.
According to Tata’s website, the standard Nano lacks air conditioning, power locks and windows, and a trunk that opens, so obviously anyone purchasing one of these cars wouldn’t be getting the “standard options” that most of us have become accustomed to. Additionally, you’re never going to mistake the Nano for a performance vehicle, especially considering it tops out at about 50 miles per hour. Finally, because the Nano is so small, you lose a lot of the uitility even a standard sedan provides.
Let’s be honest, you’re not going to cart around the kids to soccer practice in a Nano.
Taking all of this into consideration, it seems to me that the Nano would be a perfect commuter car: small, fuel efficient and cheap!
What do you think? Leave your comments below!
{ 1 trackback }
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Nano is a commuter car and nothing else. It could replace your bike / scooter. Think of all the activities you do with a scooter, you can do the same with a roof over your head.
As for as its quality is concerned, even if it runs only for 2 years and dies, you can still buy 10 nanos and use for 20 years instead of buying a 25k car and use for 8 to 10 years.
Yes it maybe cheap but does that also mean its made cheaply!
This is usually the case and because of this the car will only last a short while and then need repairing etc.
I have been watching the recent stories on this wonderful little car.
Even though it is cheap its launch in India will soon show how rugged the car is as India has one of the highest rates of car crashes in the world.
The NANO was designed cheap to meet the transportation needs of poor people in third world countries, who earn a few thousand dollars per year. It’s a disgrace that people earning 20 or 30 or 40 times as much from the richest country in the world would try to get these cars diverted to the US. The average US worker earns enough in 25 weeks to pay for a new Ford Focus. An Indian worker earning $30 per week would need to work more than twice as long to buy a Nano. It’s bad enough we steal the doctors these countries have spent millions to educate and desperately need. Now we want to deprive them of basic transportation.
I’d buy this car in a minute. Of course, my the time they brought it up to American safety requirements it would be more expensive, but it could double in price and still be the cheapest thing on the market. Go Nano!
Fridge Magnate:
The average US American has more bills/debt than an average Indian will ever encounter.
Stealing doctors? No one is forcing these doctors on a plane and putting them to work. Most Indian Dr’s prefer to work here.
And we aren’t depriving ANYONE of their transportation. We’re supplying India with more funds to boost their economy. They aren’t offering less cars in India because they offer cars to the US.
WAKE UP and get out from underneath that rock you live under.
THIS IS THE ONLY WAY OUT OF OIL DEPENDENCY AND DO THE RIGHT THINH FOR THE ENVIROMENT, THIS IS A PERFECT CAR TO GO BACK AND FOURTH TO WORK, ITS THE PERGECT CAR FOR A STUDENT. PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY STILL TREAT CARS LIKE GODS, I HAVE SEEN PEOPLE LOOSING THEIR HOMES AND HAVE TWO 400-600 DOLLARS A MONTH CARS PARK OUTSIDE.
22%?
American car makers would KILL for a 22% share of the market.
I suspect that in the U.S. most families have at least two cars because Mom and Dad both work. Only one has to be large enough for the whole family. It makes sense that the second car should be very compact and fuel effecient. Right now, many of the second cars are purchased as used cars and still cost more than a brand new Nano. Hell yes I would buy one for $2500.