How many former Saturn buyers do you figure have come back to GM for their next car? What about consumers who last purchased a Pontiac? How about HUMMER? Since we’re not bound to a strict inverted pyramid around here, why don’t you think of an answer (in terms of percentage of customers retained) for each brand and then hit the jump to see how close you were.
With recent models like the Countryman, MINIs have become larger than ever. So it was inevitable that the next model in the brand’s lineup would try to reconnect with the value of small. When I first saw the concept of this MINI Coupe, my thought was “just what the market was asking for… a MINI with less space,” but in the context of a MINI Countryman that hulks over its brand-mates (not to mention a coupe-ified version of same), this fresh, saucy little coupe makes a certain amount of sense (if only in the “endearingly pointless/pointlessly endearing” sense, as it’s actually 44 lbs heavier than an equivalent Hatchback). Of course, it will make even more sense as a drop-top roadster, but that’s another subtle-yet-profitable variation of the basic MINI formula for another day… (watch a MINI Coupe prototype go ’round the ‘ring here)
Alfa’s four-year product plan has leaked to autoblog.it, and though it takes a little deciphering it confirms what we’d been hearing: that key Alfa products will be “Imported from Detroit” (to borrow a phrase). Here’s what we’ve been able to piece together: the 2012 models are the 4C “supercar” (note Alfa’s use of scare quotes around the term) and the Compact-Wide “C-SUV,” which will be built alongside the next-gen Jeep Compass and Patriot in Italy. Then, in 2013 the midsized Giulia sedan and sportwagon will debut, underpinned by the developed-in-Detroit next-gen 200/Avenger platform. That same year, the MiTo will gain five-door and convertible versions as well, with a more-mysterious D-SUV that will likely be closely related to the next-gen Jeep Liberty. Finally, in 2014 Alfa will update its C-segment Guilietta, at which point it should be ready for global (i.e. US-market) duty.
The sad story of Maybach’s mini boom-and-bust, reborn in the go-go 90s only to die in the “Great Recession,” may not have the tidy ending we’ve been expecting for years now. Yes, Automotive News Europe [sub] reports that death is one of the three official options for the Maybach brand… and it’s certainly the option I’d pick. But if Daimler didn’t want to hold onto the plutocratic appeal of its zombie brand, Maybach would have died with a little dignity some time ago. And remember, the decline of Maybach is not the result of a decline in the über-luxury market… Rolls-Royce is selling cars hand-over-fist.
Accordingly, Daimler is exploring two “death alternatives” for Maybach: One, is rebuilding the brand in partnership with Aston-Martin, the other is relegating Maybach to a range-topping trim level. Aston has reportedly built four concepts on the next-gen S-Class chassis, so a new lineup is a real possibility, but then turning Maybach into “the AMG of Luxury,” and offering high-end trim for the S, GL and CL models would be cheaper and possibly even more profitable. And of course there’s always the eternal option: death. Which strategy would you suggest to Daimler before spending your giant consultants fee on a Rolls-Royce Ghost?
Nothing drives like a Mercedes. Toyotas are reliable… but expensive. Honda makes great stickshifts. 20 years ago you could say all of these statements with complete confidence. The world had been a simpler place with brands that offered a very stringent range of offerings to a very particular audience. Now it seems that all the lines of differentiation have been smudged and greyed out.
Remember the Cobalt? In many markets, Chevrolet’s much-maligned small-car nameplate is not a rolling reminder of the brand’s small-car struggles, so while the US gets a new Sonic and Cruze, other markets will get Aveo and Cobalt. Unlike the new Aveo, which is exactly the same as Sonic, this new Cobalt is probably an evolution of the previous Cobalt’s Global Compact platform, and offers engines ranging in size from 1.3 to 1.8 liters. The Cobalt is being shown at the Buenos Aires Auto Show, and will eventually be sold in South America, the Mideast, Africa and Europe. Meanwhile, GM has released no English-language presser on the debut [Spanish release here], possibly in hopes that Americans who remember the previous Cobalt’s weak reputation don’t clutter the internet with tales of their previous run-ins with the predecessor. Oops!
According to Auto Motor und Sport, this Opel “Junior” city car (A-Segment) could be sold in the US if Opel isn’t sold first and if union boss Klaus Franz gets his way. Though GM has ruled out selling the Opel brand in the US, Franz tells AM und S that
I can see strong demand for this car in the cities of the East and West coasts.
But if the Opel brand is off the table, what will this car be sold as? There’s been no rumor yet of a Buick-branded microcar, but Cadillac did recently show an A-Segment concept, called the ULC, that could tip the strategy for this car’s US-market design and branding. It’s just too bad TTAC’s Best and Brightest answered the question “Does Cadillac Need A MINI-Fighter?” with a resounding “NO”. But would a ULC-style micro-Caddy be any less appealing than a baby Buick? This car will be a tough sell coming from any of GM’s remaining brands, but with CAFE increases in the cards (and as prices rising anyway) this may an unavoidable conundrum.
Strap on the man-pants, Saab fans, because there’s another heaping load of bad news for the Swedish brand this morning. First off, Saab’s mysterious Russian backer Vladimir Antonov has backed out of a deal in which he was to buy property at Saab’s Trollhättan plant and lease it back to the company, stabilizing its short-term cash position. Automotive News [sub] quotes an Antonov rep as saying
The property sale is now being discussed with external investors
Apparently the Swedish real estate investor Hemfosa has stepped into the breach and sources say a deal could happen quickly. Antonov’s man added that his boss was still interested in securing a shareholding in Saab, a move that has been awaiting approval by the European Investment Bank for some time now. But despite Antonov’s insistence that he’s not going anywhere, the real estate deal pullout is troubling. After all, if Antonov were really the Saab zealot he claims to be, willing to support and revamp the brand at any cost, wouldn’t he want to own the Trollhättan plant? Wouldn’t he want deed to the factory in case Saab, as it exists now, goes into bankruptcy? This is the first indication that Antonov is treating his Saab involvement as an investment rather than a crusade, which is frankly a bad sign for what’s left of the Swedish brand. On the other hand, with Chinese firms chopping up Saab, what’s a businessman to do?
The auto enthusiast world has been torn apart of late by the re-boot of the Lotus brand, which is transitioning from hard-core enthusiast niche manufacturer to mass-appeal, high-end, branded premiumness. The photo above shows the first steps towards building a Porsche or Ferrari-like brand: Lotus Originals sells leather jackets and other branded goods in order to build up the exclusive appeal that the brand needs to bank on once its new cars arrive. But in China, Lotus’s branding issues are going to require more than just some sexy young things pouting in leather jackets while artlessly assembled around a piece of Lotus’s brilliant past. China Car Times reports that Lotus parent company Proton’s China-market deal with new Saab partner Youngman has already created some issues, namely
UK’s Lotus will enter the Chinese market on June 15 this year, but its Chinese name is Lu Te Si (“路特斯” – a transliteration of Lotus) rather than the well-known Lian Hua (“莲花” – Chinese for Lotus Flower), because China’s Youngman Lotus has used the famous brand to market its cars first, and Lotus does not want consumers to get confused between the low cost products from Youngman and its own high end sports models.
OK, so it’s a somewhat facetious headline: as an auto manufacturer, Saab either builds and sells cars or it disappears. But in the aftermath of Saab CEO Victor Muller’s pledge that “We will definitely ensure that this [production stoppage] will not happen again,” Saab’s most recent shutdown sent shockwaves of concern through the Saab community. After all, Saab’s official line is that “we knew this would happen,” a position that’s more than a little at odds with Muller’s now-broken promise. And though the just-signed Youngman deal could mean more cash with which to get production at Trolhättan back up and running, there’s a bigger question that remains unanswered: why restart production at all?
Just a week after GM CEO Dan Akerson slammed Ford’s Lincoln revival, Ford is asking its Lincoln dealers to put big money down on the brand’s future. Automotive News [sub] reports
A group of 120 Lincoln dealers had been invited to the meeting to hear Ford’s plans to rebuild its remaining luxury brand, say dealers who attended.
Ford expects stand-alone Lincoln dealers to spend an average of $1 million on renovations, dealers say. Owners of Ford-Lincoln duals are expected to spend about $1.9 million to remodel, dealers who went to the meeting say.
If dealers do not invest in renovations, Ford says it will seek to take back their franchises in exchange for compensation. The investment requirement applies only to urban dealers — for now.
And what do the dealers get in return for their hefty outlays? Hot new Lincoln product, or, in the words of a Lincoln rep “seven new or significantly refreshed vehicles coming out in the next three years.” Which means that if you want to get aboard the Lincoln express (destination:viability), you’ll have to get your store to Lincoln standards by the end of 2013, when a redesigned MKZ and a Focus-based Lincoln compact hit dealers.
Cadillac dealers were disproportionately targeted by GM’s bailout-era dealer cull, with some 900 cut before GM reinstated many of them after enduring a downturn in Cadillac sales. The problem, as we noted in a meditation on “Detroit’s Small Town Luxury Lament,” is one of identity:
Is Cadillac a European-grade maker of world-class, dynamically-focused and fashion-forward driving machines, or the small-town America symbol symbol of petty-bourgeois success, with an emphasis on the old-school American values of wide seats, big power, and a cosseting ride? The brand’s product line displays this identity crisis (compare CTS and DTS) as much as the dealer network does.
The answer: yes. GM is keeping a lot of small-time Cadillac dealers on the roster, and is asking them to upgrade their facilities to a new design created by San Francisco-based architecture firm Gensler. GM talks up the new look’s “contemporary architecture and premium materials” in its presser, but it too seems to try to bridge the yawning gap between a fashion-forward, Euro-inspired look and a more traditional, conservative look aimed at a more “traditional” customer (see image above?). But does it work? Does the new look communicate “Cadillac values” to you, or does it strike you (as it does me) as a bit of a compromise?
When is a brand not a brand? Or, perhaps the real question here is “when does a brand become a brand?”. In any case, Chrysler introduced its Street and Racing Technology “brand” way back in 2002, and has sold SRT versions of Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep vehicles ever since. But for 2011, a model-year which saw the launch of the group’s Fiat-fettled lineup, the SRT lineup dwindled to just the Challenger SRT8. Now, Chrysler is announcing the “re-creation” of the brand, while noting that
While we still made SRT vehicles, there wasn’t as concerted effort in development and marketing in recent years.
So… does this look like a BMW to you? Blame the camo if you must, but this forthcoming BMW-branded “0-Series” looks like it’s shaping up to appear as mundane as anything BMW has ever slapped a roundel on. Which makes sense, I suppose, given that it’s going to be the most mundane BMW-branded car yet built, constructed as it is on the next-gen MINI’s transverse, front-drive platform. Even BMW’s forthcoming i3 sports a freakier, funkier high-roof baby hatch look… and despite our initial fears, it’s apparently rear-drive as well. On the other hand, we’ve been here before with Mercedes… and they pulled a surprisingly sexy design out of a humble, front-drive mule. Here’s hoping BMW can pull off some equally adept styling magic, otherwise we’re looking at the BMW Cimmaron right here…
No, this is not another installment of Steve Lang’s “Lease, Rent, Sell or Keep?” series. Wards Auto is reporting that Toyota facing a decision over whether to kill its Matrix hatchback when a new version of the Corolla on which it is based debuts sometime “before 2013.” Toyota’s Bob Carter tells Wards that
There’s no change right now on the car, (but) we haven’t made the decision yet
So, what to do? Toyota doesn’t break sales of the Matrix out from the Corolla, but according to Wards:
The hatchback reached its pinnacle in 2002, selling 66,836 units, Ward’s data shows.
Annual deliveries have declined since then, except for 2008, the second-generation model’s first full year.
However, Matrix volume plunged 47.3% to 26,121 in 2009, from 2008’s 49,567, and last year slid 44.5%, with only 14,492 deliveries.
Toyota’s Carter insists that the forthcoming “Prius C” compact hatch “attracts a different type of buyer,” an argument he’d probably also apply to the Scion xB, another Corolla-based hatchback. So, should Toyota develop a new Matrix along the lines of its predecessors in hopes that the third iteration brings back some magic to the nameplate? Or, would a re-styled xB make a better Toyota than Scion, opening up Scion’s lineup for a version of the Verso-S? Or perhaps Toyota could offer its European Auris as a Hyundai Elantra Touring-style contrast to the very American Corolla. Or, Toyota could look to the Verso for a larger, more utilitarian alternative to a traditional Matrix.
In any case, with so many possible options, it’s no wonder Toyota hasn’t made a decision yet…
Recent Comments