Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

    http://www.bangshift.com/blog/AP-Edi...No-Really.html

  • #2
    Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

    Be sure to check out the link to the Buick LaCrosse ad, to see what morons GM marketing execs continue to be.

    "GM has at least been quick to pull ads that aren't working, like a recent one for the redesigned Buick LaCrosse. The ad was widely criticized for, among other reasons, not having much to do with the vehicle. In the ad, where the sedan is featured as though it were a model, a director says he only takes pictures of "beautiful things" as the car is attended to by crew members, rests by a pool and on the beach.

    A male voice at the end says: "You've changed. And I love it."

    But few people did. Some in the marketing industry panned the ad for being too light and not making enough sense. Even when asked how the ad could have aired, Lutz said in an online chat that it tested well. GM pulled the spot after a month."

    A month?! That's quick, when millions of dollars are flowing to the ad agency and for airing? Why would I ever buy a car that it's own advertisements make into a joke? Lutz, in his new position, perhaps has only been pulled down into the swill.

    ...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

      Apparently Lutz wasn't too thrilled with the ad either.

      http://www.autoblog.com/2009/07/20/b...uick-campaign/

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

        >The story then goes on to dismiss build quality as a driver of sales...

        I believe that is right - I've owned a couple of GM cars in the past and their build quality certainly didn't invite a repeat sale 8)

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

          To loosely paraphrase Carroll Shelby . . . if the car's good, the ads won't matter, and if the car's bad, the ads won't matter.

          Of course, that's an oversimplification, considering how many millions of dreadful cars have been hawked with clever advertising. But to have any hope of surviving, Buick has got to build something that's better in material way to their import competitors. To claim you build a better mousetrap, you've got to catch a few mice . . . .

          And the marketers have to get that message to connect with a skeptical and mostly uninterested public. Vapid "lifestyle" ads won't cut it.

          There's nothing wrong with hawking Buicks on the basis of style, considering how important style has historically been in the sale of up-market automobiles. (And assuming, of course, that the Buick has anything to offer in this area) But it's dangerous not to attack the competition in the areas that the public has identified as crucial (quality, residual value, cost-of-ownership, reliability).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

            Speedy, your opinion...

            Do you think the buying public would respond to some good old fashioned, in your face, advertising bravado. I'm talking like agressive, targeted ads that place products head to head and pull no punches in telling why "we're better than them" (with respect to the cars).

            I'm wondering if we've weenied up so badly that people would be put off by that approach. Your take?

            Brian
            That which you manifest is before you.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

              Originally posted by Falcon67
              >The story then goes on to dismiss build quality as a driver of sales...

              I believe that is right - I've owned a couple of GM cars in the past and their build quality certainly didn't invite a repeat sale 8)
              hahahahahahaha , try toyota , hahaha

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

                hahahahahahaha , try toyota , hahaha
                Not the opinion of an experienced public...
                Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

                  Originally posted by Brian Lohnes
                  Speedy, your opinion...

                  Do you think the buying public would respond to some good old fashioned, in your face, advertising bravado. I'm talking like agressive, targeted ads that place products head to head and pull no punches in telling why "we're better than them" (with respect to the cars).

                  I'm wondering if we've weenied up so badly that people would be put off by that approach. Your take?

                  Brian
                  I, for one, would love to see advertising like that.
                  I R Bob
                  You can't drink all day unless you start in the morning!
                  2007 LH, 2008 LH, 2009 LH, 2010 LH, 2011 LH, 2012 DNF/BLOW'D UP, 2013 LH, 2014 LH

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

                    If Buick is going to use "Take A Look At Me Now" as their tagline, they better use that Phil Collins song, "Against All Odds". I'm just sayin'. ;)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: AP Editorial Says GM Must Concentrate on Cars. We Say No, Really?

                      Originally posted by Brian Lohnes
                      Speedy, your opinion...

                      Do you think the buying public would respond to some good old fashioned, in your face, advertising bravado. I'm talking like agressive, targeted ads that place products head to head and pull no punches in telling why "we're better than them" (with respect to the cars).

                      I'm wondering if we've weenied up so badly that people would be put off by that approach. Your take?

                      Brian
                      The ad war between Toyota Tundra, Ford F-Series, and Chevy Silverado still has a little "bravado." And I keep getting these tire-smoking e-mail ad bombs on the 2010 Mustang (albeit with no product comparisons to speak of), so we're not totally wimpified yet.

                      While some of the lifestyle ads sort of work (I suspect the children-as-plants Prius ad sends a certain segment of the motoring public into veritable nirvana . . . And those Cadillac CTS ads seem to hit their demographic as well), old-school "Feature, function, benefit" and "My widget's better than your widget" pitches will still work.

                      BTW, it's not coincidental that as NASCAR has become more homogenized and less relevant to real production cars, enthusiasm for it has waned. One reason why is that all those Walter Mittys in the stands dearly want to brag down at the local watering hole about the superiority of their "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday" whip. It's just human nature. You got to give 'em "talking points."

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X