![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
A working definition of "badge engineering" is the notion of a company sticking on the badge on one vehicle and trying to pass it off as another, rather than "engineering/manufacturing" a new product. There are many vehicles in this article which do not fall under this definition:
This article should focus on the rather crass and opportunistic "badge engineering" that was used to market cars.
I propose this article needs a prune to:
This seems like an opinion based matter. I would support including any car that is not substantially different from one that it was designed with or from. If two or more vehicles are purposely designed together, they should be discussed together. My understanding of the concept includes both the same car made for more than one market or for the same car being sold by different brands in the same market or even joint ventures. The point is it's the same, regardless of minor visual differences in interiors or body kits (though there are degrees). I understand there are business reasons why this practice is done, but it seems disingenuous on some level and I would call it out where I see it. I'm not necessarily suggesting that any company isn't doing it's share of work, simply that if two cars are fundamentally the same, we should all be honest about that. falkin42
69.150.209.129 (
talk)
19:12, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
The entire article seems to focus disproportionately on cars, yet rebadging is widespread throughout the consumer market and affects a lot more industries. Power tools and appliances come to mind as an exemple. 76.71.231.130 ( talk) 19:55, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
A working definition of "badge engineering" is the notion of a company sticking on the badge on one vehicle and trying to pass it off as another, rather than "engineering/manufacturing" a new product. There are many vehicles in this article which do not fall under this definition:
This article should focus on the rather crass and opportunistic "badge engineering" that was used to market cars.
I propose this article needs a prune to:
This seems like an opinion based matter. I would support including any car that is not substantially different from one that it was designed with or from. If two or more vehicles are purposely designed together, they should be discussed together. My understanding of the concept includes both the same car made for more than one market or for the same car being sold by different brands in the same market or even joint ventures. The point is it's the same, regardless of minor visual differences in interiors or body kits (though there are degrees). I understand there are business reasons why this practice is done, but it seems disingenuous on some level and I would call it out where I see it. I'm not necessarily suggesting that any company isn't doing it's share of work, simply that if two cars are fundamentally the same, we should all be honest about that. falkin42
69.150.209.129 (
talk)
19:12, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
The entire article seems to focus disproportionately on cars, yet rebadging is widespread throughout the consumer market and affects a lot more industries. Power tools and appliances come to mind as an exemple. 76.71.231.130 ( talk) 19:55, 21 March 2016 (UTC)