Jaguar created the world quality standard with defining and delivering the 4 pillars of quality: Space-Pace-Grace-Afordability
Prior to that no one ever got more than 2 of those things

Then they set the quality standards forever for a saloon, it could be fast and have handling- who would've thunk.

They set the bar for beauty as a requisite to quality- and there has not been a car more culturally popular since the Etype.

Range Rover set the global standard for quality of a Utility Vehicle, prior to them, no one had considered offering a luxurious quality utility vehicle, today its the most popular category of transportation- worldwide.

In England, we referred to Jaguar as a working man's Rolls Royce.

 

Many of the same appointments and better performance for less than half the price of a Roller.

 

There have been at least four articles in the Financial Times about JLR recently. There were interviews with the CEO and the Strategy Director and two points were made which may relate the the "dead last" position. One, since the BREXIT vote, JLR has had trouble attracting talent to the UK because JLR just doesn't know if will be able to stay in England. Two, if you are uncertain about where you are going to build vehicles you stop investing in plant and equipment. Unfortunately the FT has a tough pay wall, but with a little ingenuity sometimes a way can be found around it. And I suppose the interviews have been reported elsewhere.

 

Lets also bear in mind, Rolls Royce became synonymous with quality because the refined never quibbled about its maintenance.

The joke always was, your Rolls could breakdown in the factory where it was built, in the hands of the man who built it, and he would not be able to find spare parts.

 

Remember, a Roller doesn't breakdown, it just has a condition described as 'failure to proceed'.

 

Being loyal to a brand is great, but being uncritically loyal is stupid. If other brands making better cars, that are more reliable, and at comparable prices, then the very least you should be willing to ask Jaguar is why are they behind.

Why F-type doesn't have handling characteristics of C7?
Why F-type doesn't have initial reliability of 911?
Why F-type doesn't have features found on a cheap KIA?
Why F-type parts prices are up and now cost double of what Ford charged?

 

I don't think they're behind. I'm fine with how the car is, just as it is. That's why I bought one. I'm loyal to NO brand.

If everything was clinically perfect on paper, all cars would be boring.

You can't use math to analyze why people make emotional or preferential decisions. It does not apply.

If the cars ACTUALLY suck, they will go out of business.

It's not Jaguar's job to get the approval of statistical analysts.

They can design and sell cars however they want, provided they meet the regulatory requirements, AND I AM GLAD THEY DO. One passionless person's imperfection is another's joy. If they can't sell cars because 0.75 of a problem per car puts them out of business, that's on them, and that's their decision.

Enough with the perfect cars. They're boring. It is three quarters of a first world problem-per-car that separates the best from the worst.

If this joke of a "quality problem" relative to Kia causes them problems, they'll work on it.

Perception is 99% of reality anyway. I'm sure they will figure out how to trick buyers just as well as Kia has tricked theirs.