“Sweet” Peter DeLorenzo, the self-styled Autoextremist, has some extreme thoughts on the General Motors predicament. Specifically, his latest “Rant” suggests that General Motors is so compromised as a brand that he’d go as far as to rename the artist formerly known as “the world’s largest automaker.” “If GM is able to emerge from all of this with a strengthening pulse,” writes DeLorenzo (without getting too hung up on that “if”), “then I have a recommendation. Substitute the word ‘Precision’ for ‘General’ in the company title and then move on, burying the old company name – and the associated negativity – once and for all.” Holy unpronouncable symbols, Batman! Precision Motors? What, was “Patriotic Motors” taken? More importantly, how can Sweet Pete think a name change will make a lick of difference, while rejecting bankruptcy, brand cutting and other meaningful reforms? For more insight into DeLorenzo’s Extremist Makeover Branding Edition, check out some of his thoughts on GM’s brands over at the New York Times.
In a round table discussion on the fate of GM’s brands, DeLorenzo practices some intellectual yoga in a hopeless attempt to justify GM’s clinging to its dead brands. “In past decades, brand loyalty was paramount and a very real and powerful aspect of the auto business,” writes DeLorenzo. “Those days went away long ago. When Detroit began its 20-year slide into oblivion (around the late ’70s), the concept of traditional brand loyalty eroded along with Detroit’s dwindling market share. But does that mean that brands like Pontiac are totally dispensable? No. Which is why G.M. is very likely going to retain at least two, if not three Pontiac models going forward (and probably sell them through G.M.C. dealerships).”
And why does the Autoextremist believe that “there are probably enough people who would keep the Pontiac brand in existence as a niche performance vehicle within the abbreviated G.M. product portfolio.”? You guessed it: the same brand loyalty he admits “eroded” long ago. And DeLorenzo completely fails to identify the need for a separate “enthusiast” brand when the Corvette is already a fundamental (and pretty damn sporty) part of the Chevrolet brand. DeLorenzo’s analysis isn’t quite as asinine as Colin “I Want My GTO” Comer, but but for a man who advertises his insights as “the bare-knuckled, unvarnished, high-octane truth,” blind justification of GM’s “strategy” of the moment rings awfully hollow.
I liked the Cadillac Motors idea on TTAC earlier. Cadillac has the most credibility out of anything that is part of GM.
I thought “Precision Motors” was a sarcastic joke. When I realized he was serious, I really started to question the quality of crack he’s on.
Brand loyalty did not completely erode. It eroded for companies that make subpar products.
There is still a great deal of loyalty to Honda, Toyota and even Nissan. There is also a great deal of loyalty to GM and Ford full-size pickups.
There isn’t much loyalty to Pontiac because there hasn’t been much in the showroom that engenders loyalty.
Mr. Niedermeyer,
Great insight, but don’t you realize that Autoextremist has a new motto? It’s now “the bare-knuckled, unvarnished, high-octane truth- but only according to me and my insider buddies; all others can f–k off.”
I wish I was kidding, as I used to really respect DeLorenzo. It’s kind of ironic that Detroit’s implosion — something he saw coming and made his cybername railing against — has made him nothing more than a home team apologist.
Sweet Pete says he’s not living in the past, but he is. His worldview will always be shaped by the wide-track goodies that his Head of GM PR Daddy brought home in the Sixties. DeLorenzo still clings to the belief that all would be right with Pontiac if GM would just listen to HIM.
Did you see the c–ksucking eulogy that he gave Lutz last week? It was just ridiculous. So we’re all the fawning and equally out-of-touch letters.
I know it didn’t work out with TTAC, but with what’s happening now, God how I miss Brock Yates.
Off the deep end again, so sad. One of Detroit’s problems these past several decades has been the shameful habit of tarnishing names and then throwing them in the scrap bin.
How have Pontiac, Cadillac and Buick sales done since they scrapped their historic model names and replaced them with new mumbo-jumbo? Mostly tanked.
Throwing away brand names does not attract enough new customers to replace the old ones you have sent away.
Pitty to long time Buick buyer who came in for their new LeSabre only to find out that it was such a piece of crap they did away with the name.
Loved your Bonneville? Tough luck, we killed it.
Changing GM’s name wouldn’t help anything.
PM – Post Menstrual or Pre Menopausal
I suggest SM: “Sergeant Motors”
Pushrod Motors…that works.
One of the other contributors to the NYT’s roundtable was Donna LaSalle, a marketing consultant. She raised the issue of the cost to GM in terms of customer alienation by killing brands. The people who currently own Saab, Hummer, Saturn and Pontiac models may negatively react to GM killing those brands and decreasing resale value. It’d be interesting to survey people who owned Oldsmobiles when GM killed that brand and see if they have since bought another GM product.
While it’s clear that GM has mismanaged its brands and squandered a lot of brand equity, I’m still not persuaded that killing a brand entirely is a good thing. Better to license a brand for $1 than to throw away all that brand name recognition. Killing car brands costs money. On the other side of the coin, Chinese and Indian car companies have no brand recognition in North America at all and building a brand name takes time and money. I can’t see GM’s shuttered brands going unlicensed. I wonder how much Chrysler wants for the Willys brand.
Things could be worse for GM. They used to have many more brands. As the auto industry exploded in the post WWI era, GM introduced lower priced companion brands to its established car lines. Cadillac had LaSalle, Oldsmobile had Viking, Buick had Marquette and Oakland introduced Pontiac in 1926. Most of the offshoots died during the depression but in Pontiac’s case it survived its parent.
Hmm,
Well, while I find “precission motors” pretty funny, I don’t think he’s wrong about Pontiac.
It’s #3 in sales (among GM divisions), and there must be some reason for this. I’m not sure Peter should have said brand loyalty has disappeared – I’m not sure it has.
If it’s not brand loyalty maybe the product is differentiated enough in the minds of many buyers, that it is actually more appealing than buying a Chevy. Maybe a sporty split grill is all that is needed. Maybe building on that sporty image with better suspension tuning and more powerful engines and sportier interiors is just the thing for Pontiac. By becoming a niche brand, maybe GM can actually do a good job with Poncho, and bring it back as the “exitement” division. Possibly we are seeing the begining of actual brand identity at GM?
Government Motors
American Leyland
American Motors Corporation
Pontiac could be fine if GM would cut the redundancy. Reduce the G6 to two models: Coupe and convertible. Expand the G8 range to include the wagon and ‘ute as intended. Keep the Vibe, or replace it with a sportier, restyled Delta variant if Toyota takes NUMI away.
Give the Solstice a proper coupe, not a damn targa thing that still has 2 cubic feet of storage.
Kill the rest. No more overlap.
Pipe dream concluded.
It’s #3 in sales (among GM divisions), and there must be some reason for this.
I think you’d find out why, if you saw the sales by model instead of by brand. Pontiac moves a lot of G6s because they’re, quite frankly, the cheapest midsize sedan you can buy that isn’t a piece of crap like the Dodge Avenger. The same logic applies to the G5 and Torrent, and in Canada to the still-for-sale Montana and always-has-been-for-sale Wave/G3.
Pontiac sells because it’s cheaper than Chevy or Ford, more widespread and Kia and not as outright awful as Dodge. That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement for keeping it around, unless selling cars at a loss is really a viable GM business plan.
Side note: I got some time in a G8 V6 recently (because it was there when I was looking at a Montana, which I have no intention of buying unless I go insane). I found it a remarkably nice car, but also rather sad because, well, it and the Vibe are about the only worthwhile vehicles in the showroom and neither are native GMNA designs.
Dynamic88 & psarhjinian- One word on Pontiac sales.
FLEET!
Checker v2.0 in the making.
Bunter
I think that GM may loose many of the customers of the nameplates it kills, and announcing the impended death will likely speed the process.
I was a faithful Datsun buyer for many years. When the announcement was made that the name was being dropped, I swore I would never buy a Nissan and I haven’t!
Western Family Motors
Private Lable Motors
Bunter1: FLEET!
Checker v2.0 in the making.
In fairness to Checker, it never pretended to be anything else. Its cars were designed to be taxi cabs, and if a few hardy souls wanted to buy one as a personal vehicle, it would sell them one.
And Checker never insulted us by pretending that it sold “excitement.”
Precision Motors? DeLorenzo has fallen off the wagon more times than I care to remember, sad since at one time long ago, the unvarnished truth was exactly that, now it’s a meandering, pandering salute to his ego run amok.
And I agree with a fellow TTAC member above that his “Eulogy” on Lutz was so far off that it made his other annoying parables palatable.
GM doesn’t need to change it’s name, it needs to change it’s culture, it needs to change the lame ducks that call the wrong shots – repeatedly and without accountability.
To propose Precision Motors in the manner and context that DeLorenzo sites is…I don’t even have the words that don’t include every f-bomb variant ever uttered by Chef Gordon Ramsey to elegantly summerize my thoughts on this matter.
Maybe it’s all ego driven, as sweet Pete’s initials are PMD.
It really does not matter what you name a product you just have to build a great product consistently and you will eventually get loyal customers. Did people buy certain cars because they had alpha-numeric model names? No. They bought an LS400 or a 525i because it was a good car with a great reputation. Think about it, people lined up to buy Oldsmobiles in the seventies because the car and engines had an excellent reputation, probably very well deserved. The name from a marketing perspective is awful. It has “old” and “mobile” in it. People were not buying them by the millions because they had a hot sounding name. Basically they took away the reason people were buying them (the olds Super Rocket V8-ok that does sound pretty hot) in 1977 and then everything else that was truly “Oldsmobile” in the eighties and nineties and wondered why people weren’t buying them anymore. So stupid.
Precision Motors?
Not only is it stupid, it’s derivative.
Acura is meant to be derivative of “accurate” That’s why their logo is essentially a caliper.
geeber-LOL
You are right, Checker was an honest company, and Poncho Land is an illusion. I stand humbly and greatfully corrected.
Best regards,
Bunter
Precision Motors?
I would only read DeLorenzo as farce.
Bunter
SKT :
February 18th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
To propose Precision Motors in the manner and context that DeLorenzo sites is…I don’t even have the words that don’t include every f-bomb variant ever uttered by Chef Gordon Ramsey to elegantly summerize my thoughts on this matter.
Maybe it’s all ego driven, as sweet Pete’s initials are PMD.
That is hilarious, SKT! Thanks for making my day.
willbodine: Pushrod Motors–That works.
That’s hilarious; I laughed out loud. It says it all, especially with that dismissive “That works” right afterward. Brilliant!
Brand loyalty still exists – just look at the fanboys on any Honda or Toyota enthusiast website.