Given that European luxury brands have generally had their way with Detroit-based competitors in the US market, it should come as no surprise that Cadillac has failed to make any appreciable headway in the European market. The brand has been launched and re-launched in Europe four times in the last twelve years, according to Autocar, and its latest relaunch was supposed to boost sales to 20,000 per year by 2010. Despite that ambitious goal, Cadillac has fallen flat with European buyers, having moved about 1,300 units this year. As a result, the latest re-launch of Cadillac has been accompanied by dramatically scaled-back expectations: 2,500 units per year within the next “several” years (Cadillac expects the new ATS to make up about 1,500 units of this volume). Only limited numbers of CTS sedans and wagons will be converted to right-hand drive for the UK, and diesel engines for the CTS range are on hold. But even with a more modest approach to Europe, Cadillac is widely expected to keep struggling in Europe. After all, Lexus spent some $2.8b attacking the European luxury market, but sales which peaked at 60k in 2007 have retreated to a mere 30k units. As Cadillac gets stuck into its fourth re-launch, analyst Ferdinand Dudenhoeffer is not optimistic
The brand Cadillac has no fascination for Europeans and no customer base. Why should I go from Audi, BMW, Volvo or Mercedes to Cadillac? Lexus has shown us how much investment is needed to do that… My forecast is, they (Cadillac) will not be in the market in Europe by 2020. Some people might buy one in the U.S. and export it to Europe. That’s it
Former Audi stylist and Kia chief designer Peter Schreyer may be on a tear right now, giving Kia some of the sharpest shapes in the mainstream market, but when it came to the old Sedona, Schreyer clearly didn’t put in a ton of effort. As Examiner.com‘s Brady Holt points out, the 2011 Sedona minivan’s “restyle” was so simple, Kia didn’t even need to take new press shots. Instead they just photoshopped the new corporate grille and some side-mirror turn indicators onto the previous year’s press photos, and called it good. Weak sauce, guys.
Notice a difference between these two pictures? No, not the fact that one is a sexy press shot and the other is a bush-league amateur snap. Both pictures show the 2011 Volkswagen Jetta, but one of them has a torsion beam rear axle, the other has a variation of the Golf’s multilink setup. One has a 2.5 liter blunt instrument of an engine and a slushbox, the other has a high-tech “twincharger” engine that won the International Engine Of The Year award two years running, mated to a dual-clutch ‘box. One has a nasty, plasticky interior, the other offers “higher quality materials and trim.” By now you’ve probably guessed that the less desirable of these two Jettas is the US version, and the fancy-pants version has just been announced for the European market… (Read More…)
This is America man… you can have your electric car and your freedom too.
There’s no doubt about it, the Chevy Volt sounds best when you’re just selling the concept. And no wonder: the concept came was born of Bob Lutz’s unique insight into the American psychology… not to mention a psychologically-charged desire to rub the Prius’s nose in some mud. But what nobody seems to be pointing out is the fact that the flip side of being “all things to all people” is fundamental compromise. And in the case of the Volt, the risk is that it won’t be as good of an electric car as the Leaf and it won’t be as good of a gas-powered car as any other hybrid. If GM’s pitch that Volt equals EV plus Freedom doesn’t take, the car will go nowhere fast… so how does the first attempt strike you?
As surveys go, the Morpace Omnibus Study [full results in PDF here] isn’t perfect. But even though it’s based on only 1,000 online respondents, it’s chock full of provocative insights. Of course Automotive News [sub] misses the best one, in its haste to trumpet the headline
Buyers usually don’t consider loyalty when choosing dealerships
Fine, that pulls uniques out of the dealership bullpen. The real news: when asked to rate how “influential” different media sources are on their “likelihood to visit a dealership,” respondents gave the category “magazines” the weakest scores. A mere three percent rated magazines as the top rating “high influence,” the lowest such number in the survey. A whopping 32 percent gave it the lowest “low influence” rating, the highest result in the test. And all this from a sample in which only six in one thousand rated “an effective marketing/advertising campaign” as the most influential factor in their dealership selection process, while giving top marks to “best deal offerings” (40%), “positive prior experience” (20%) and “referrals from family and friends (10%). But here’s the twist: respondents were asked to assume they already had a brand and model in mind. The plot thickens…
I had the pleasure of spending part of a dinner at last week’s Volt press launch chatting with GM’s marketing honcho Joel Ewanick, better known for his work as “marketer of the year” at Hyundai. Ewanick’s a confident, engaging guy, and when the “Don’t Call It Chevy” mini-embroglio came up over desert, his eyes took on a mischievous twinkle. As other GM communications and PR staff recounted their stories of the 24-hour madness that followed the release of a memo which indicated that the term “Chevy” was no longer a welcome marketing feature, it became clear that neither Ewanick nor any of his staff had any regrets about accidentally launching a full-blown public debate over the value of the term Chevy. The very debate, it seems, reconnected the brand that had tried everything marketing-wise with its hidden core: consumers care enough about Chevrolet to have a popular and affectionate nickname for it. And what started as an unnecessary PR blunder seems to have given birth to Chevrolet’s newest marketing tagline: Chevy Runs Deep. Or, as Chevy’s ad man Jeff Goodby puts it
It’s such a deep, wide, connected brand in America. All things being equal, Americans want to buy Chevys. And we have to put them in that position
Reaction to recently-released images of the updated Dodge Journey interior has been varied, but if there’s a consensus, it’s that improvement is undeniable, but that Dodge will need to update more than the interior in order to make the Journey truly competitive. And that’s the diplomatic way of putting it. One reader even wrote in (in the spirit of International Caps Lock Day) to say
I OWN A 2009 DODGE JOURNEY AND IT IS THE BIGGEST PIECE OF CRAP I HAVE EVER OWNED DODGE SHOULD BE ASHAMED TO SELL THIS KIND OF CRAP TO HARD WORKING AMERICANS I WISH I COULD DRIVE IT RIGHT THOUGH THE SHOW ROOM.
Point taken: the Journey needs to be improved. So why is Dodge selling the (as yet unimproved) crossover as “World’s Best Vehicle(?)” Sure, they’re trying to be cleverly ironic, but doesn’t it just highlight the fact that you’d need to be cross-shopping a bare metal armored car in order to think highly of the Journey? On the other hand, we’re not exactly sure how we’d sell the benighted Journey ourselves. Hit the jump for more questionable (or not?) cross-shopping, courtesy of Dodge’s too-cool-for-reality Mad Men. (Read More…)
As we’ve noted before, Hyundai and Kia have been quick to exploit the weakness of the domestic auto industry by advertising their American-made cars as American-made cars. Now, they’re taking the attack to a whole new level, as Hyundai USA President John Krafcik tells CNN Money that his brand will build 80 percent of its vehicles in the United States by next year. If the Korean brand can actually achieve that goal, it would make Hyundai’s lineup the most American-built full line on the market. And though he insists that Hyundai doesn’t make decisions about production based on PR, Krafcik can’t help but twist the knife, saying
I’m going to build my three best selling cars in the US. Ford builds its best selling car in Mexico.
Scientific studies are all well and good, but sometimes the simplest studies can provide the most fascinating insights. Take, for example, the recent series at Autosavant entitled “Brand Awareness? It’s Elementary” (part two here). The study was inspired by a simple question: if you ask kids to name their favorite car, what kind of results will you get? Their answers reflect not only the power of automotive brands in popular culture, but also the basic level of automotive competency of the next generation of gearheads. Somewhat shockingly, not a single kid appears to have answered “Bumblebee.”
Part three in our ongoingseries features Honda’s Odyssey, and makes “hipper than thou” minivan marketing an official trend (remember kids, you need three to make a trend). Post-irony never saw this one coming…
Built on GM’s “Theta Premium” chassis alongside its Cadillac SRX sister in Ramos Arizpe, Mexico, the Saab 9-4X crossover is less than completely Swedish but more than just a rebadged SRX. Specifically, at a base curb weight of 4,431 lbs (with GM’s 3 liter V6 driving the front wheels), it’s over 200 lbs more crossover than a base SRX.
TTAC’s long been used to playing the “heel” of the auto journalism world, and sure enough, our skeptical approach to the Chevy Volt is already renewing accusations that TTAC “hates GM.” For the record, this accusation doesn’t fly. We have the tendency to obsess on GM because that company’s rise and fall is the most compelling story in the automotive world. To read GM’s history is to watch a person claw their way up a cliff by his bootstraps, and upon reaching the top, spend the next several decades strangling himself with the very same bootstraps. I challenge anyone who is interested in the world of cars to look away from that.
In any case, our Volt coverage has focused thus far on dispelling myths, so in the interest of seeking the truth everywhere, I thought we should take a moment to make a few Volt myths of our own. After all, despite planning to build only “10-15k” Volts next year and 60k in 2012, Automotive News [sub] says
Chevrolet is taking its message to a mass-market audience with television commercials during World Series broadcasts.
And even though my personal and professional obligations to the truth make me the worst marketing candidate ever, I may just have an idea of where to start…
According to our latest sales data, the Detroit Three have enjoyed something of a comeback relative to the “foreign” competition this year. And though it’s not clear how long that trend will last, the media is catching the Detroit-boosting bug again. The NYT’s Bill Vlasic epitomizes the mood, focusing on improvements in GM and Ford’s products in a piece titled American Cars Are Getting Another Look. Between IQS score improvements and anecdotal evidence of consumer interest in Ford and GM’s “gadgets” and “value,” Vlasic’s sidekick, Art Spinella of CNW Research, forwards an interesting theory for the death of the “perception gap” (a construct he helped create, by the way):
Ford has become almost the ‘halo brand’ for G.M. and Chrysler. Because of Ford’s success, people are less resistant in general to considering all of Detroit’s products.
Well, that’s not the dumbest thing ever said about the destruction of the perception gap… but it sure is a head-scratcher. Did Nissan and Honda just spend the last several decades skating by on Toyota’s sterling reputation (RIP)? Still, it might be interesting to hear Ford’s perspective on all this.
A longtime critique of General Motors here at TTAC is that it needs to pick enduringly appealing names for its products and stick to them, instead of shuffling through some eighty nameplates for midsize and smaller cars since Toyota introduced the Corolla. Still, this approach doesn’t advocate simply freezing time, and calling every compact Chevy a Cruze from here to eternity. If you’re going to stick with a name, it has to be good, and it has to mean something.
Enter the Aveo, which is about to be replaced by another Daewoo-developed hatchback (made in the US this time), but should (if GM can be believed) represent an improvement over the unlovable outgoing model.GM’s North American supremo Mark Reuss is still wavering on the name, refusing to commit to Aveo, but unwilling to suggest an alternative nameplate. Which brings us to today’s question: is it nobler for the car to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageously poor associations with the name Aveo? Or should GM put the name to sleep, perchance to dream up a better, more enduring one? Is consistency good even if it means keeping one of the most maligned nameplates this side of “Sebring”? Aye, there’s the rub.
According to Automotive News [sub], both General Motors and Hyundai-Kia have reduced their fleet sales percentages in the last year, as the two firms seek retail-level pricing for their recently-improved products. Ford and Chrysler? Not so much. As the top-selling brand in the US, Ford is simply using fleet sales to boost itself to the top of the pile. Winning the annual sales volume race is good for morale, but The Blue Oval should be careful not to delude itself into unrealistic expectations. For Chrysler, on the other hand, the continued practice of sending 40 percent of sales to fleets is big, big trouble.
Not only has Chrysler been barely making its minimum “survival volume” numbers (and some months, not), it also had a “come to Jesus” moment on the fleet issue back in April. At the time, Chrysler swore it would limit fleet sales to 25 percent of overall volume, but since that announcement, its fleet percentage has held steady at around 40 percent. For a company on the brink, the lost profits are just as important as the lost credibility. Meanwhile, each new Chrysler that ends up in a fleet cements the perception that Chryslers are the automotive purchase of last resort. And at this point, the perception probably isn’t too far from the truth.
Recent Comments