Why a duck? Why no chicken? Hey, Ford asked the question. And by God, Ford’s answered it. On nationwide TV, the most compelling rational for sending your hard-earned money in Dearborn’s direction proffered is: “Why not?” [NB: “most compelling” does not necessarily equal “compelling”.] On the Why website, the Glass House Gang has another go. Why Ford. “Ford has the most fuel-efficient mid-sized sedans in America with quality that Toyota and Honda can’t beat.” Why Mercury. “Mercury Milan is the most fuel-efficient mid-sized sedan in America and Mariner Hybrid, the most fuel-efficient SUV on the planet.” Why Lincoln. “Lincoln has the luxury vehicles you want with the technology you need.” Like . . . an engine. Brakes. Rear window power sunshade. A 10GB hard-drive for photo storage. That sort of thing. So now I ask you, our Best and Brightest, to grade their answers and, perhaps, provide alternatives.
Ford’s is the only one that makes sense, but it still completely lacks any type of branding from Ford…what exactly IS a Ford supposed to BE! How about Ford Tough across the line…it tells me more in two words then all that other crap comparing yourself to Honda and Toyota.
Mercury: “Why Mercury? Because Pontiac is dead and for some inexplicable reason, we are not!” C’mon Mercury, what do you have to offer? Yes, I like how your cars look, but no, they’re not anything more then a different Ford trim-level….are you still here?
Lincoln: I almost get what they mean, but after having driven the supposedly heavily modified 2010 MKZ, I was horribly disappointed. The car is STILL not worth the money they charge, 35k for something that’s less well trimmed then something even 15k less. It seems like they’ve got the tag line first, and the cars will (supposedly) follow….oh, one more thing, what the hell is up with that stupidly high belt-line on the MKS, I want a car, not a cave.
Despite my blathering, I WANT to like Ford, I really do, and their exteriors have gotten polarizing- which is good – but their interiors are still “meh.”
@Trevor: It was determined by Marketing Geniuses some time ago that decent visibility is “feminine” and therefore BAD. As such, you’re a sissy if you drive anything with windows that aren’t slits.
…that being the case, if my xB makes me a sissy, so be it. At least I can park the damn thing.
why toyota and honda?
Because they field competative compact and sub-compact cars. A task that ford is only now addressing, 10 years too late…
(we’ll see when the fiesta and euro focus arrive)…
Why a $500 clunker? Up to a $4000 windfall if Congress renews the popular C4C program prior to the November 2010 elections.
Steriodal? She’s looking fit and fine…rockin’ arms…
I doubt that the average Lincoln buyer (read: senior citizen) needs technology. I’d venture to say that quite a few don’t understand it or just plain fear it. Plus Ford is pimping all the technology they crammed into the 2010 Taurus which steals the thunder of Lincoln (and totally leaves Mercury out in the cold). Then again, the price of the Taurus (especially the SHO) is approaching Lincoln prices so I guess the comparison works.
Using technology is a selling point seems to work better for the brands at the lower end of the price scale (like the Kia Forte with standard bluetooth and iPod hookup). At the high end of the price scale, the technology should be a given.
“rationale”
Why ask marketing (advertising) people to be logical? (or truthful? or factual?) Do you ask accountants to be engineers?
[I would need to see much more of her to be sure.]
Short answer –
Why Ford? I dunno. Why Mercury ? I dunno. Why Lincoln? Why indeed.
Longer answer-
Why Ford? Um, well, because I’m in the market for basic transport and I prefer not to have the reliability that the Japanese offer.
Why Mercury? Because I’m willing to pay a few hundred more for a better looking grill on my Ford.
Why Lincoln? Why indeed.
“Mercury Milan is the most fuel-efficient mid-sized sedan in America and Mariner Hybrid, the most fuel-efficient SUV* on the planet.”
*Fineprint*: The Ford Motor Company does not condone the practice(s) of towing, off-roading, or carrying anything heavier than groceries while using the Ford Escape Hybrid or Mercury Mariner Hybrid aka “The Most Fuel-Efficient SUVs on the Planet”
+1 on the better looking Mercury grills. Also, when we were buying a minivan, the Ford model name was a turn off: Freestar. FREEstar… Really? How much is free?!
Younger people and Lincoln:
http://www.reallifecomics.com/archive/080703.html
[spoiler: He’s in his 20s and he bought the Zephyr]
Trevor:
Ford’s is the only one that makes sense, but it still completely lacks any type of branding from Ford…what exactly IS a Ford supposed to BE! How about Ford Tough across the line…
I agree 1000%, and was just thinking this today.
Not just Ford tough – how about calling them the most durable cars on the road? Tell us that they’ll still get up and go when they’re beaten to death and the wheels are falling off.
Maybe that would sell folks on a Ford.
It reminds me of the old Boston Whaler ads where they’d saw the boat in half and it would stay afloat. Not a unique property to Whalers, but damn good marketing. For example: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/13/images/fisher220x356.jpeg
Computers are wonderful. They allow manufacturers to build and allow us to order an almost unlimited variety of colors, options,and even offer these things on several brands.
But is that always good?
What if Ford only had Fords? What if GM only had Chevys?
Ford could advertise and show everything in one picture. No separate ads for Mercury and Lincoln if they didn’t exist.
GM would not have had to get rid of LaSalle, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Saturn, Saab, or Hummer if they never existed and all their cars were labeled Chevy.
Each company could make simple market adjustments as needed to their one brand.
It’s not terribly impressed with any ad campaign that asks a question and effectively answers it for me.
Having said that, you can pose the question to a buyer of ANY brand of car and probably get a different answer. Why ____? Because, uh, I like it? Why? It suits my needs, the design appeals to me, it is a good value, is reliable, it’s comfortable, etc, etc. Take your pick. And depending on the model, that reason to buy is different. The reason I would want a Mustang is different than why an F150 buyer would give. What Ford needs to do now is put their thinking cap on and simply pick the best one (or maybe 2) and make it part of their branding.
ajla :
*Fineprint*: The Ford Motor Company does not condone the practice(s) of towing, off-roading, or carrying anything heavier than groceries while using the Ford Escape Hybrid or Mercury Mariner Hybrid aka “The Most Fuel-Efficient SUVs on the Planet”
Well then, 999 out of 1000 SUV owners will be just fine, then…
Ford’s most compelling “buy me” is it’s not GM or Chrysler.
why toyota and honda?
Because they field competative compact and sub-compact cars. A task that ford is only now addressing, 10 years too late…
(we’ll see when the fiesta and euro focus arrive)…
Try again. Ten years ago the Focus was introduced and was the best compact car on the market (unless you were prescient to see the recalls). Ford’s problem hasn’t been fielding a competitive compact car, it was that they essentially abandoned the mid-size market leaving Focus buyers with no upgrade path.
” Gardiner Westbound :
August 30th, 2009 at 6:06 am
Ford’s most compelling “buy me” is it’s not GM or Chrysler. ”
+1 to that. A much more appealing reason than what they are using.
My ex father-in-law drove a Lincoln. It was turquoise (interior and exterior), about 40 feet long, maybe more, the interior was filled with more chrome goodies than you can imagine (individual ashtray/cigarette lighters for each passenger, and wall to wall burled wood-like plastic. Now THAT was a Lincoln. It was mostly used for Sunday outings–the family would pile in and just drive to nowhere.
In those days, before the era of cheap leases, a Lincoln (and Cadillac) meant something. Now, these once proud autos are just grist for the C4C grinder, and no one under 40 would likely ever consider buying a Lincoln.
Not just Ford tough – how about calling them the most durable cars on the road? Tell us that they’ll still get up and go when they’re beaten to death and the wheels are falling off.
Maybe that would sell folks on a Ford.
But what happens when my neighbor realizes that he’s on his second Ford while I’m still driving the same Honda? IOW, don’t they have to back up the claims for this to work, long term?
Because I could transfer my (paid for) accessories from my old F150 to my new one.
Why Ford ? – Because you get class leading initial quality and long term reliability (so far for the first year of the Fusion it is just about tied with the Camry and Accord in TrueDelta’s tests) for a lower price than Honda or Toyota with features such as Sync that aren’t availible on either, with better interior materials than Toyota, and more polished electronics and infotainment options. If you are looking at the truck side, Ford has owned the full size pickup market for both consumers and businesses for years, so they have to be doing something right.
Why Mercury ? – Because you really like a certain Ford model but you don’t like chrome grills or accents.
Why Lincoln ? – Same as for Ford, but substitute Toyota and Honda with Lexus and Acura.
OK, I’ll take the other end of this trade.
Why Ford. Why not.
It’s a philosophical question to the prospective consumer. It’s really saying, are you looking for a new car? Why not try a Ford? We have competitive products (quality, performance, fuel economy), technology (Sync, etc.) styling, and a good price.
This is FoMoCo’s attempt to eliminate any “perception gap” buyers have of Ford products. Judging by Ford’s increased market share, I’d say they’re being more successful at it than GM/Chryco.
OK, Ford haters, have at me. ;-)
Why Mercury ? – Because you really like a certain Ford model but you don’t like chrome grills or accents.
Believe it or not, there is a lingering perception among Mercury buyers that Mercury’s are heavier and have a better ride than the Fords. Kind of like GMCs “industrial grade.” It’s nonsense, but people still believe it. If it sells cars and is profitable, carry on.
As for Lincoln, now that Mulally intends to improve the Ford brand so much, it is no longer good enough for Lincoln’s to be rebadged, tarted up Fords. Time for a unique RWD/AWD chassis for Lincoln that can field 3-4 models off it a la Infiniti.
Grrrrr, damn that Ford! Always spending time and money investing in bettering their quality instead of working on a clear branding message!!! This leaves me the consumer too stupid and illinformed to consider a Ford! If only I knew what they stood for I could totally get behind an F series or a Mustang or a something else and until they waste the money on a unique Mercury or Lincoln chassis I won’t buy from them because a car’s platform TOTALLY matters! Grrrrr, I need to get to a Tomoco dealer post haste and clean this domestic filth off of my hands!
More shots of Jill please, doesn’t matter what is in the background or being sold.
The girl is smokin’
FORD cars are their best ever. The problem with Ford’s becomes apparent when you see the inside of the new SHO. The interior design sucks. The Leather seats and armrests are ok, but the rest of the interior is plastic fantastic. Hyundai cuts better materials for their interiors right now.
The Mercury Milan was a little better, but, I wish Ford would put that kind of quality into the Fords rather than make you pay $2000 more for a Mercury.
The LINCOLN MKS shows what Ford is capable of. Wood bars and leather wrapped surfaces. Problem is, alot of the car reverts to plastic.
If Ford wants to get better at what they do, they should take a look at Hyundai’s interiors.
@ flashpoint
The problem with Ford’s becomes apparent when you see the inside of the new SHO
If Ford wants to get better at what they do, they should take a look at Hyundai’s interiors.
What? LOL………..I don’t even know what to say. To each his own I guess. You can’t please everyone. IMO the interiors on the newest fords are gorgeous. Taurus included.
Now the prices of them? Well, they’ve got some work to do. 33k for a loaded fuse? 39k for a loaded mustang GT coupe? 45k for a loaded SHO?
Flashpoint – I’m not sure what cars or pricing you were looking at, but a few corrections –
The Taurus has no more plastic inside than the Hyundai Genesis, almost every interior surface is covered in soft-touch faux-leather that is nearly indisinguishable from the real thing. In fact, sitting in the SHO vs the MKS, some of the salespeople at my dealership even prefer the SHOs interior.
Also, the Milan is the Mercury equivalent of the Fusion, not the Taurus, and the interior quality of both of those cars is identical. The only differences in the Milan are a few aesthetic choices – faux-woodish type stuff instead of metal, optional two tone leather inserts, and different backlighting for the gauges. Also, the Milan, when compared to a Fusion with the same options, is usually a $200 – $300 more, not $2000.
I’ve been in and driven 2008 and 2009 Hyundai Sonatas, and while worlds better than their stuff from even a few years ago, it still isn’t as nice as a Fusion or Milan. The cheap looking center stack silver plastic and audio system readouts are some of the most telling examples.
Why Ford? Because you chose to ‘settle’.
Why Mercury? Because paying more money for a rebadged Ford is your thing.
Why Lincoln? Because you are a fool that believes a Ford with silver paint in the interior is luxury.
—–
“Lincoln has the luxury vehicles”
I think you could file a false advertising lawsuit over that line…
“Mercury Milan is the most fuel-efficient mid-sized sedan in America and Mariner Hybrid, the most fuel-efficient SUV on the planet.”
some brands, including Ford, have more efficient SUVs in Europe, but Europe is a moon of Jupiter, isn’t it?
God, why has advertising gotten so complicated? Used to be, you see a hot chick on screen telling you to what to do, then you do it. It’s that simple. Nowadays, you people all think for yourselves and everything. Then you go out buying good cars from Japan. And it’s killing our country!
Flashpoint :
August 30th, 2009 at 10:12 am
FORD cars are their best ever. The problem with Ford’s becomes apparent when you see the inside of the new SHO. The interior design sucks. The Leather seats and armrests are ok, but the rest of the interior is plastic fantastic. Hyundai cuts better materials for their interiors right now.
Partially because South Korea has a huge leather-tanning industry. Even Kias have really nice leather on them. North American-sourced leather is more expensive for equal quality.
But the good news is that Chinese leather is Gawdawful.
The Ford pitch is the same as Toyota’s: quality, durability, dependability, and a car and/or truck for every non-luxury niche. After the new Focus and Fiesta are introduced, I wouldn’t be surprised if they take some market share from Toyota – Toyota’s product is deadly dull-looking.
Mercury is a dead brand walking, so the less said, the better.
Lincoln’s pitch is American-style luxury, which means smooth, effortless performance, if not BMW-style driving dynamics. Obviously the brand’s not there yet in terms of product, but I think there’s a good foundation being laid.
I personally think the future’s looking pretty good for this company – far better than GM.
dwford :
August 30th, 2009 at 9:17 am
sells cars and is profitable, carry on.
As for Lincoln, now that Mulally intends to improve the Ford brand so much, it is no longer good enough for Lincoln’s to be rebadged, tarted up Fords. Time for a unique RWD/AWD chassis for Lincoln that can field 3-4 models off it a la Infiniti.
Agreed, but let’s keep in mind Lincoln is basically a do-over at this point. They’re starting from square one.
Remember how long it took Infiniti to get to where they are now? Their first product line consisted of a badge-engineered econo-sedan, a badge-engineered coupe, and one legit luxury sedan (the Q45), and that’s pretty much what they stuck with for years. Their best sellers were the G20, which was a badge-engineered Sentra, and the I, which was a badge-engineered Maxima that they didn’t even bother to restyle.
Does anyone really remember this today? Not really.
For a start-over line, Lincoln actually looks pretty good. It’ll take time for them to make a new name for themselves, but I think they’ve got a good foundation.
The one thing that truly worries me about Lincoln is that their dealers (at least the ones I’ve visited here in Denver) are old-school operations. The guy who tried to sell me a MKS didn’t know as much about the car as I did. Walk into a Lexus or Infiniti dealer, and it’s a whole different experience. Ford really needs to focus on this.
My brother-in-law’s father worked for Ford in the late ’20’s, when most cars sold were very unreliable. Ford’s entire advertising budget bought loudspeakers outside the factory that intoned “If we take you there, we’ll bring you back”, over and over. Ford became America’s first car company by selling cars based on reliability and price. That’s still a winning formula for Ford’s advertising, if they’ll lower the MSRP’s closer to invoice and incorporate the cash-back offers into lower prices.
Because Ford and Mercury were smart enough to stick a smoking hot girl in-front of their cars…
I would probably never buy a Ford anything… But if I did Jill would have a lot to do with it…
The best and brightest miss the “truth” that more often then not automobiles are purchased based on emotion, based on hopes, dreams, and fears.
The hope that a smoking hot brunette walks up, flips her hair and says “nice car”. Goes a long way to overcome the fear that it will fall apart in 3 years and have a resale value on par with moldy bread.
Because Ford and Mercury were smart enough to stick a smoking hot girl in-front of their cars…
Umm…Ford has Mike Rowe
CamaroKid :
August 30th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
The hope that a smoking hot brunette walks up, flips her hair and says “nice car”. Goes a long way to overcome the fear that it will fall apart in 3 years and have a resale value on par with moldy bread.
Unless, of course, you’re a woman…and women either make or influence the purchase of 80% of cars sold.
Unless, of course, you’re a woman…and women either make or influence the purchase of 80% of cars sold.
Wrong, this is a commonly held misconception… Marketing like this works equally well for BOTH genders.
Men want to think that the car will get them beautiful women and women want to think that the car will make them beautiful.
This form of marketing is as old as the hills and it WORKS.
CamaroKid,
Interesting point there. I had been wondering why Merc was using Jill Wagner when Mercs are supposedly aimed at women (perceive Ford as too truck-oriented, macho, same reason why women were buying Pontiacs instead of Chevies).
Maybe Merc is hoping it’s a men want to be with her, women want to be her type of thing. (I think that’s why Ford is using Mike Rowe – guys think he’s cool, women think he’s hot)
Maybe Merc is hoping it’s a men want to be with her, women want to be her type of thing.
Bingo!
Nope. It won’t matter to me what they claim for some time. Two broken trannies at about 80k miles (Windstar and Contour SE) within the past four years is measure enough for me. I’m going to have to hear much much more about reliability and value before I would darken the door of a Ford dealership (or website) even to cross-shop for some time to come.
Also – I would never consider a Mercury. What is a Mercury.
Current solution – Lexus RX and a used BMW 325i (now at 108k miles)
This is an interesting question and seems to be getting answered by Ford itself.
I think Ford said that Lincoln sales will soon outpace those of Mercury.
It is only my opinion, but Ford already sees this and is letting Mercury die slowly and quietly.
Soon there are suddenly no Mercury models.
If that happens, this whole question is as mute as:
Honda, Acura or
Toyota, Lexis or
Nissan and Infinity or
Volkswagen, Audi.
Why? Because of Jill… do it for Jill, people. If Ford crumbles then Wipeout is all we’ll have left.
Samuel – That, and a woefully underutilized character from Stargate Atlantis.
The only Ford I would buy is their rear wheel drive products. They still make the best rear wheel drive products, at least until 2011.
Front wheel drive – you have to go Japanese if you want long term reliability and durability.
Why Ford? Because we are a full line manufacturer, from the Fiesta, the $40k+ Taurus SHO, and every kind of truck.
Why Lincoln? Because Caddy’s brand equity (no more DTS, going further downmarket) is going downhill by the month, and some people really want an American Acura.
Why Mercury? Because some day–one day–they might reskin a Mustang and I might add another Mercury Cougar to the den.
Why Ford? Because Ford makes fairly good trucks and USED Ford cars can be a bargain.
Why Mercury? No good reason. Let Jill try to sell me a Mustang!
Why Lincoln? It’s a white haired retiree thing. I wouldn’t understand.
You know, to be authentic you need to omit the question marks from the title of the post. After all, that’s what Ford’s advertising does these days.
I think the Milan is just better looking than the Fusion. Having Mercury along with Ford gives FoMoCo two swings at the same pitch. That is, fore a certain amount of engineering expenditure, they get two styling and marketing chances. With Lincoln, make that three. Also, if you think your local Ford dealership is run by d***h**ds, maybe you’ll like the Lincoln-Mercury folks better – or vice-versa.
Robert wrote:
Why a duck? Why no chicken? Hey, Ford asked the question. And by God, Ford’s answered it. On nationwide TV, the most compelling rational for sending your hard-earned money in Dearborn’s direction proffered is: “Why not?”
I’ve been meaning to say something about this effing “Why Not?” campaign. It is damned pointless and damned devoid of any REAL positive reasons for buying a Ford. I think that is why it annoys me so much I just cuss and swear at the screen when it’s on. Yeah, even when Jill is on. Mind you, I never call Jill bad names. But “Mike” gets all of my ire full bore.
This is a rhetorical question; please no answers needed. But who the f*** is “Mike” and who the f*** put him in front of a camera? They can take their lame ad campaign and shove it.
Hey, why not? Just askin’. (Hehe)
But seriously, “why not?” is the phrase I use after my lady says how about we go out for Thai tonight?
“Why not” is not a good enough reason for me to buy a car.
Zoom Zoom
“Mike” is Mike Rowe. He has a tv show called “Dirty Jobs” where he literally does dirty jobs. He also does the narration for Deadliest Catch.
Given my druthers, I’d choose the current Milan over the Fusion because I think the front and rear end treatments look better on the Mercury. I particularly like the SEAT-styled rear lights on the Milan.
And Jill. Duh.
taxman100 :
August 30th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
The only Ford I would buy is their rear wheel drive products. They still make the best rear wheel drive products, at least until 2011.
Ok, so you’d pick a Crown Vic over, say, a lousy rear wheel drive car like a Mercedes S550?
Q: Why Mercury?
A: Jill Wagner.
a lousy rear wheel drive car like a Mercedes S550?
Can you get a 30 MPG Mercedes S550 for 15K with only 10K miles on it? Will it last 300K miles with nothing but routine maintenance?