Chevy's at it again. As their advertising agency is [still] seemingly unable to connect with the youth of America– nothing to do with the product of course– GM's running another DIY Gen Y ad contest. In all, 64 colleges and universities competed for the honor of devising a hip and happening national TV ad campaign. The General's narrowed it to five finalists. This morning's Connecticut Post is focusing on a local group that plans "to eliminate the stigma of Chevrolet being perceived as a gas guzzler." Students of popular (if that's the right word) culture will recall that Chevy's last Gen Y advertising foray resulted in a TV spot showing a group of half-naked men writhing and convulsing all over an HHR in the middle of the street– to show how badly men wanted one of the brand's retro chickmobiles. We've heard reports that one group has devised an ad featuring a conga line of endangered salamanders dancing across the hood of a Volt humming the Beatles' Revolution, but they remain unconfirmed. 

The Shelby American Automobile Club has been keeping the flame alive for Shelby-built and badged vehicles for 33 years. Now its namesake wants them out of the picture. As of January 1, Shelby's yanked their license to use the club's name (which Shelby trademarked), AND he wants all club's registry data going back to 1996, AND he wants to see the club's financial records. The automotive equivalent of Howard Beale, Peter DeLorenzo, sees the move as nothing but a logical extension of Carroll Shelby's long history of unbridled greed. "Shelby has once again confirmed for everyone what he's been about since Day One," the Autoextremist writes. "And it's not about the legacy of the Cobra or 'protecting' his name or anything like that. It's not about the championships or the men and women who helped him achieve racing history. No, it's about the money, pure and simple." As Autoblog reports, Shelby has fired back. In a press release, the Texas racer accuses the club's managers of selling loaned memorabilia, failing to provide financial reports or proof of liability insurance, licensing Shelby products without the old man's permission and, get this, not even paying the $1 per year licensing fee. It all sounds credible enough– until you remember the shambles that is Carroll Shelby's Childrens' Foundation. Do as I say, not as I do? 

GayWired.com says Toyota has sent a letter to Daniel Grangier, president and CEO of Switzerland-based EBoys Studios. ToMoCo's demanding that the porn producer stop promoting the actor named "Lexus." The automaker claims the name Lexus is a trademark of Toyota Motors Sales USA., Inc., and "by using Lexus in connection with adult films, EBoys Studio is in violation of § 43 (c) of the Federal Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c) and tarnishes Toyota’s business reputation." Toyota wants EBoys to highlight and delete any and all materials displaying the Lexus name. Grangier says his CumEater and SpunkLand star selected his stage name in honor of the Greek god Lexus, rather than a Toyota-produced luxury vehicle. [If anyone can find a reference to a Greek God named Lexus, please post below.] Ironically enough (well almost), Lexus the automotive brand began life staring at the business end of a name-based trademark infringement lawsuit. "Just prior to the release of the first vehicles, database service LexisNexis obtained a temporary injunction forbidding the name Lexus from being used as they stated it might cause confusion," Wikipedia reports. "Upon reflection, the court lifted the injunction, deciding that there was a low likelihood of confusion between the two products." I'm no lawyer, but I reckon the same principle applies in the EBoys case.

Playboy and the Mazda MX-5 in the "2008 SCCA Playboy Mazda MX-5 Cup" race series. Hmmm. And there I was thinking that Playboy was all about ultra-expensive (or at least highly refined) European sports sedans, or at least something big, brutish and heavy on the testosterone. Unless they get actual Playboy bunnies to race the ultimate chick car (sorry guys, I know how great they are to drive), I can't really see the brand intersect. In the official press release, Jim Jordan, Mazda NA's [really] Alternative Marketing Manager, gave it a go. “This is a great way for us to grow the series and reach an audience of enthusiasts who may not have had the chance to see an MX-5 Cup race in person." They didn't have a chance to see the racing because it didn't have the T&A factor? How does that work? Never mind. Playboy's Vice President and Publisher Lou Mohn knows what's what. "“We look forward to putting all of Playboy’s brand assets into high gear to leverage this initiative and reach racing enthusiasts and Playboy fans alike.” In other words, we're going to give this sucker some good old-fashioned (i.e. pneumatic breasts and bleach blond hair) sex appeal. I dunno. Think it''ll work?

Well, there's a few million dollars saved, then. Still, with a $2.1b annual ad spend, you gotta wonder why The General would axe its Superbowl spectaculars. Adweek has the answer. "The reduced in-game spot count is 'driven by product launch timing,' the [GM] rep said. New introductions this year for the Malibu and Cadillac CTS models are essentially complete. 'The timing is such that we just don't need to purchase as many in-game spots.'" You know, I'm thinking that Chevy should've launched their $150m Malibu campaign at the Superbowl, as the brand should have a bunch of new 'Bu's on dealer lots by game time. Anyway, GM hasn't pulled-out of the biggest TV event of the year entirely; Chevy's bought eight spots in Fox' pre-game show and Caddy's stumped-up the dough for three post-game ads. As for the in-game ad, those of you expecting another flying car spectacular (last year's 100k mile warranty unveil) may be disappointed. Or you may not. AdWeek reports that "creative has not been finalized for the ad yet."

Honda got the biggest bang for their American advertising buck in 2006, according to Brandweek. A study by research firm Compete reveals that the Tokyo transplant spent just $118 in advertising per brand shopper last year, besting Toyota by $40 per. Ford was the biggest spender, forking-out $240 per vehicle to entice each shopper into their showrooms. Overall, foreign nameplates averaged $182 per shopper in 2006, while domestic manufacturers spent an average of $223 per shopper. Looking at individual brands, Scion spent a whopping $30 per shopper. "The smaller brands with a clearly defined target performed the best," Compete's Mike Jennings opined. "Brands like Scion and MINI have a product line that also corresponds, whereas Ford has to go from an F250 truck to a Fusion. It shows a fundamental of marketing, which is, ‘ID a target and hit it.'" It also shows that a product with a good reputation and high "gotta have it" factor doesn't need a lot of advertising. And we reckon GM's $150m Malibu launch campaign will probably help the General unseat Ford's ad spend per customer when the 2007 figures are released.

Surprise! The Detroit News reports that nearly half the vehicles listed in Consumer Reports' "most satisfying" list are manufactured by Japanese brands. And a quarter of the models listed were Toyotas. Only seven American brands showed up on the list. The Ford Fusion and Saturn Aura won high marks in the family car segment. While making up less than 10 percent of the market in the U.S., European models accounted for almost a third of the winners. The Toyota Prius was the overall most satisfying vehicle, followed by the BMW 335i and the Porsche Boxster. Domestic models dominated the "least satisfying" list, which consisted mainly of trucks and SUVs. Four of TTAC's Ten Worst winners are Consumer Reports bottom feeders: the Saturn Ion, Chevy Aveo, Chevrolet Uplander, Chevy Trailblazer/GMC Envoy. 

What was that song? I think I'm turning Japanese, I think I'm turning Japanese, I really think so. Well, apparently not. As an upscale buyer, Volvo wants me to embrace my inner Swede. Only I shouldn't get to feeling special. According to the chairman of Volvo Cars and president of Ford's European division, "We're looking to take customers from everybody." The Detroit News reports that Lewis Booth's immodest (not to say foolhardy) statement comes as part of Ford's decision to take the Swedish brand waaaaaay upmarket, to battle with the likes of Lexus, BMW and Mercedes [NB: no mention of Cadillac]. Booth reckons the move makes sense 'cause car buyers are catching up with Swedish values: "Care for the family, concern for the environment and a design aesthetic that values simplicity over all else." Needless to say, Peter Horbury, the British designer who penned Volvo's new look (and identified the average American Ford customer as "Dave"), agrees. Horbury issued the headline above, as well as declaring "Volvo is bought by somebody who is self-confident enough to make their own decision." So if Volvo is Ford's new upscale brand, where does that leave Lincoln? Perhaps their execs are busy asking each other talar du Ikea? 

No matter how many hip-hop artists they hire to shill their products, domestic carmakers just can't get through to younger buyers. Mediapost's Marketing Daily reports that a new J.D. Power survey shows that the younger carbuyers are, the more likely they are to avoid domestic nameplates. On the other hand, buyers who go for domestic vehicles are more likely to shun a particular vehicle because it's an import. The study also showed more domestic vehicle buyers are in the interior of the country while import buyers are more plentiful along the coasts. The reasons given for going with imports: perceived fuel economy, reliability, quality, depreciation. Domestic buyers go that way because of styling and cost. No matter which way they swing, consumers' decisions not to buy particular vehicles are most often based on consumer reviews on line, expert reviews, and manufacturer web site information. 

Bloomberg reports that recreational vehicle manufacturer Winnebago is about to announce that shipments fell for the first time in six years. The downturn reflects an industry-wide slump, indicating that the U.S. economy (including the new car market) is, as predicted, headed for the doldrums. "For the past three decades, deliveries of motor homes and travel trailers have dropped before each decline in the U.S. economy, giving the $15 billion industry a reputation as a bellwether." This time 'round, Winnebago is going down fighting. The company is unveiling more fuel efficient models, including one that can get 22mpg (highway, tail-wind). Meanwhile, Thor brand's Chief Operating Officer isn't about to concede defeat. "The industry is definitely not immune to macroeconomic factors," Dicky Riegel admitted. But with 11k Americans turning fifty each day, Riegel reckons "we still have the demographic wind at our back." [thanks to starlightmica for the link]

Remember the Ford commercial showing an F-150 being crushed between two bulldozers? Advertising Age [sub] gives us the rest of the story: Ford pulled the ad because it "generated anxiety" in viewers. Psychologist-turned-ad-exec Michael Bently works for JWT, the agency who developed the ad. He wondered if changing the music in the ad would change the way people reacted to it. Nope. No matter which music he tried, Emotional Brand Connection (EBC) and MRI testing showed subjects "reacted with fear and anxiety" to the spot instead of focusing on the point they were trying to make about safety. Ad agencies are expected to use EBC more in developing ads for all products, so expect to be inundated with ads for all products trying to tug at your heartstrings. Incidentally, in the Ford ad, test subjects' anxiety peaked when the commercial showed a "beauty shot" of an uncrushed truck. Whew!

To be fair, every automaker and their mother is running some kind of year-end sale in the U.S. market; offering incentives, cash-back, discounts and finance deals to delay the deleterious effects of the downturn in new car sales. But GM's "Red Tag" sale is kind of special, in that it offers all of these deals in different amounts to different brands depending on the model and/or the model year. The passive construction workers at the Wall Street Journal describes it thus: "Dealers will use red tags on selected vehicles to advertise a lower price than what typically is asked. The discounted price includes a so-called factory-to-dealer incentive of as much as $1,000 on certain 2008 models, and is combined with other low-interest or cash-rebate offers that in rare cases are also available. On the remaining stock of 2007 models, GM is offering cash rebates or no-interest loans spanning five years in most cases… Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick, GMC and Saturn products are covered under the program. GM's Saab and Cadillac brands are holding separate campaigns that revolve around the holidays." Why so much confusion? "GM generally has backed away from offering broad and sweeping incentive campaigns that make it appear the company's entire portfolio is on clearance." Even though it pretty much is.

Speaking to The Detroit News (DTN) at the LA Auto Show, Jim Farley criticized his new employer's history of pouring money into vehicle launches and then leaving the new models to languish in the market without… advertising support. You thought I was going to say "mechanical updates" didn't you? No such luck. While Ford's Toyota-poached multi-million dollar marketing maven (exact salary undisclosed) places a high value on hype advertising, he's doubly sure that "This is a time for us to be really realistic." In the spirit of this new realism, Farley said he wants to ignore/trample upon Ford's Volvo strategy and take Lincoln upmarket, "re-engage" Ford dealers (as opposed to long overdue euthanasia), meddle with product development ("That's where I can help Derrick and his team") and generally scare the **** out of Ford veterans ("What if we paid people if something went wrong with their car? It's an idea"). The DTN ends their "welcome to the club" feature by describing an encounter between Farley and an ex-Ford marketeer. "'There was no process. It was just chaos,' the former member of The Blue Oval Boyz told Farley. 'Now, I wish I'd stayed.'" Be careful what you wish for.

I make "typos" (a.k.a. spelling mistakes) all the time. Even though WordPress has a built-in Jacuba spell checker, like all such programs, it's an idiot savant (that doesn't recognize the word "Jacuba"). If you misspell a word, but it's a legitimate word (just out of context), the hidden school marm says nought. And Jac doesn't do Jack on the headline bit (i.e. this morning's Freudian header about the "Dodge Durange"). All that said, if I was a highly-paid copywriter carefully crafting laudatory prose for a glossy Car and Driver insert on the "world's first two mode [why no hyphen?] SUV," I'd make damn sure I correctly spelled the ALL CAPS text underneath the arrows pointing to the vehicle's seven salient features. And you'd kinda hope that if I did miss something, the next guy up the literary food chain would catch it. No such luck here: "LOW ROLLING RESISTENCE TIRES." An indication of GM's quality control? Perhaps. Oh, and Jacuba caught it. 

[Thanks to Arcata Eye for the tip.]

Advertising Age [sub] reckons a TV ad featuring actor/singer Harry Connick Jr. touring Katrina-ravaged New Orleans in a Lincoln MKX [YouTube] is unconscionable exploitation. In the great TTAC style, columnist Bob Garfield doesn't pull any punches. "They seem to have persuaded themselves somehow that they are doing something positive — celebrating the spirit of a city, shedding light on its challenges, recognizing its heroes. Bullshit. What they are doing is exploiting its victims to advertise luxury SUVs. It is vulgar. It is grotesque. It is disgusting." From there, Garfield returns to GM's contribution to the "automaker with a heart" ad theme. "Who can forget GM's 3,000-Dead Sale-a-bration, a yearend price promotion staged on the still-smoldering ashes of Ground Zero? Ford got in on the Sept. 11 sweepstakes too, with its own version dubbed "Ford Drives America." Yeah, to the brink of depravity" While we're not quite sure how these ads deprave American citizenry, hats off to Ad Age for calling out Young & Rubican's execrable example of Lincoln's dopey "Dreams" campaign.