Can GM make hip happen?

[Flybrian]

Can GM make hip happen?
From YouTube to Jay-Z to student stunts, the automaker works the cool factor.
Sharon Terlep / The Detroit News
Link to Original Article @ DetNews

General Motors Corp. wants a hip replacement.

So the automaker infiltrated YouTube and put pop star Gwen Stefani in an SUV.

It let rapper Jay-Z create a paint color and got a bunch of college students to live for a week inside a compact car.

It's all part of a campaign dreamed up by the marketing minds at GM to create an aura of cool around the vehicle lineup they're working to reinvent.

But can a mega-company `like GM -- built on mass appeal and known more for trend-following than trend-setting -- really make hip happen?

Marketing efforts to finesse an image of hipness, including a few from GM, have failed -- sometimes badly. Think New Coke.

Strike the right chord, though, and the risk is well worth the payoff. Especially in a world where word-of-mouth spreads so fast and wide that buzz has become a multimillion dollar commodity.

"Everybody wants to be young and hip," said Dino Bernacchi, GM manager of branding and entertainment. "Everybody wants to be youthful and feel good and live vicariously through these celebrities. Sure, everybody criticizes it, but then we can't get our eyes off of it."

GM managed an image turnaround before, when once-stodgy Cadillac became Hollywood's hip-hop brand of choice with the Escalade SUV. Even the most astute marketing maven couldn't have predicted that. Now GM hopes to duplicate that success with other products.

For all the eye-rolling criticism of corporate branding and marketing tactics, there's no doubt the efforts pay off when it comes to drawing attention to products.

Take GM's star-studded celebrity car and fashion show earlier this month. The event garnered reams of media attention and landed GM models in national publications such as US Weekly magazine.

"There was a day where you could manage or limit the word of mouth about what was said about your brand, but that's over," said Timothy Blett, president of the Doner advertising agency in Southfield, which created the Mazda "zoom, zoom, zoom" campaign. "If your product is considered youthful, there is going to be more press, more buzz on the Internet. Being considered hip by the youth culture creates additional PR in some of the most powerful forms of communication."

Stars lead image change

GM knows that changing public perception is one of the biggest battles in its North American turnaround. While much of that work is focused on vehicle quality, design and resale values, the image of GM's eight brands also is key.

The task faced by the world's biggest automaker is especially tough because GM isn't a newcomer. Few Americans have not heard of GM -- and the image they have is often less than flattering.

To turn that around, GM is employing tactics both conventional and unconventional.

Cultivating star power has been the most noticeable approach. From having Tiger Woods unveil the new Buick Enclave crossover last year in Los Angeles to last month's fashion show to kick off the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, GM has made a concerted effort to get some Hollywood-style glitz behind its brands.

In the midst of rocker Stefani's video for "The Sweet Escape," the camera cuts away to the clearly recognizable grill of a taxi-yellow Chevrolet Tahoe. Meanwhile, GM's global color studio worked with Jay-Z to create a special blue color for the Denali SUV. And rapper 50-Cent made a showing at the GM exhibit at the show to check out performance models of the Pontiac G6.

It's all about the air time

Companies love to have the famous pitch their wares. Many pay to have their products show up in the movies or on TV, or they give stars the items for free. Celebrities often will seek out a particular vehicle to use or customize.

Almost every automaker has a fleet of cars specifically for use in films and on TV, and most big productions have a team whose sole job is to find the right products.

"There's just something that has people connected to celebrities and has everybody wanting more," Bernacchi said. "But there has to be a balance. They can't look like they're shilling the product."

Transparent efforts tend to be shunned by the folks companies are trying to woo.

Some critics joked about the omnipresence of Ford Motor Co. models in the latest James Bond flick, "Casino Royale." The Dr. Z ads featuring Dieter Zetsche, CEO of Chrysler Group parent DaimlerChrysler AG and former Chrysler CEO, fell flat.

GM's has had its own missteps. The 1996 Super Bowl commercial featuring a leather-clad Cindy Crawford bombed.

And the automaker generated a good amount of not-so-nice Internet commentary over a video clip that surfaced last fall on video-sharing phenomenon YouTube that showed Tiger Woods filming a TV ad for Buick. GM produced the 60-second clip, but tried to pass it off as a bootlegged video leaked onto the Web, complete with grainy images, muffled audio and unsteady camera work. The video even captured Woods making a mildly off-color wisecrack when a noisy airplane buzzed overhead and interrupted filming. "Excuse me," Woods said, cracking up bystanders.

A comment from one YouTube viewer: "Very weak attempt at 'viral' marketing. It's almost as cringe-inducing as the notion of Tiger driving a Buick."

Product must back the buzz

Image is only part of the fight to win back consumers, since bad products can't be saved by good buzz.

"You got to get hipper and trendier with the cars, and we are," GM's Bernacchi said.

GM is doing its best to mount a turnaround on the product side with an aggressive new vehicle line that focuses on more dramatic designs, improved performance and quality interiors. Much of the work has garnered good reviews from analysts and critics.

"You can't do all this stuff and then come out with bland products," said auto analyst Erich Merkle of IRN Inc. in Grand Rapids. "You've got to be able to back it up."

[gm4life]

GM-can be hip. It will only take time. I am more concerned about them moving the next generation Malibu, Enclave/Outlook/Aciada, Lucerne, Impala GMT-900's and G6's off dealers lots and cosumers paying closer to sticker and selling more of every product they build. I think they can have a 25% market share again.

[ellives]

I agree GM can be hip again but I vehemently disagree with one comment in the article:

"Few Americans have not heard of GM -- and the image they have is often less than flattering."

While on the surface it's true, a serious majority of Americans have no idea what brands GM actually makes. This is really at the heart of the challenge GM has to overcome. Toyota has 3 brands but the real focus is on the Toyota brand. Every time someone buys a Toyota, it helps spread the word about the Toyota brand and the company. When someone buys a GM product, the really don't get the connection between say Chevy and GM. Hell GM doesn't even manufacture a product under it's own nameplate. There is no "GM-branded" car or truck (excludng GMC - I said "GM.") As a result GM gets no real brand recognition benefit when they sell products under all those brands.

Toyota does with their marketing what they do with their manufacturing and by that I mean they standardize more components around the product line. Consider an analogy between platforms and brand name plates except the platforms are used across the brands (Think Camry, Highlander, RX 330.) They've really covered all the necessary bases from a product standpoint. With Toyota they range from the total economy beat box all the way up to the Avalon (the Buick lookalike.) The Lexus brand is the pure luxury brand and I find it a bit odd when I see GM-ers talk about Buick being the competition for Lexus. I don't see it. Cadillac as to be the direct competitor. GM needs to really work hard to figure how the identities for all the brands they're carrying. While the Oldsmobile debacle wasn't pretty, they must have learned something about how to consolidate brands from the experience.

[AxelTheRed]

GM can make hip happen. They did it with Cadillac perfectly, like the article said. Of course its no easy task trying to make a brand appeal to a wider customer base without alienating the core customers (e.g. Oldsmobile).

I would start with Buick personally. If there's any brand in desperate need of getting its cool back, its Buick.

[ellives]

GM can make hip happen. They did it with Cadillac perfectly, like the article said. Of course its no easy task trying to make a brand appeal to a wider customer base without alienating the core customers (e.g. Oldsmobile).

I would start with Buick personally. If there's any brand in desperate need of getting its cool back, its Buick.

Oldsmobile is a perfect example of how to do everything and I mean everything wrong. Back in the '70s every middle class family in America owned an Olds Cutlass. This ubiquitous market acceptance gave way to (at the end) building a beautiful Oldsmobile called the Aurora that didn't even have the Olds nameplate.

A sad, sad legacy for a proud brand. It's astonishing that those who steered the ship at GM over the last 30 years weren't able to figure out how to right the ship when they had so much time to figure it out. It has to be a case study in colossal mis-management. And the sad part is the people who had the ability to do something about it are now sitting on their fat asses on a GM-paid pension on top of the King's ransoms the were compensated for their deeds.

The countdown to September continues - tick tock.

[Sixty8panther]

Can GM make hip happen?

What do you think???

[big blue]

I miss Oldsmobile, can't beat that old red and silver rocket emblem.

[balthazar]

A sad, sad legacy for a proud brand. It's astonishing that those who steered the ship at GM over the last 30 years weren't able to figure out how to right the ship when they had so much time to figure it out.

Check your math.

[Flybrian]

This ubiquitous market acceptance gave way to (at the end) building a beautiful Oldsmobile called the Aurora that didn't even have the Olds nameplate.

Would you really want this...

associated with this...?

These two shared lot space for almost three years and if you couldn't afford an Aurora, the next best thing was an Eighty-Eight or Cutlass Supreme. Not even in the same league. Intrigue finally arrived nearly four years later, Alero another two. By the time Oldsmobile turned the corner, it didn't even matter anymore. This sends the message that we want you to buy the xxxxx and if you don't like the other Oldsmobiles we offer along with it right this second, wait or screw off. That's why most Aurora owners bought one, bought the second one, and either still drive the car or left GM altogether. Copy/paste to a lesser extent in regards to the Intrigue.

Its all or nothing. You can't keep tepid cars languishing next to your banner automobiles for the better part of a decade and expect people to just accept it. Contrast the Olds turnaround with Cadillac, Saturn, Buick, Pontiac, Chevrolet. Even though half of those marques are still meandering through redevelopment, efforts are being made to shorten the time between old and new product, something that wasn't done with Oldsmobile.

I'm happy GM learned this lesson. I'm disappointed it had to learn it with Olds.

[big blue]

Would you really want this...

associated with this...?

Hey now, my grandfather owned an 89' Cutlass Ciera He let my father use it after we got an 86-87' Cutlass Supreme from my aunt. Then he bought a 93' 88 which was our last Olds. My grandfather now drives a 97' Lesabre.

Ok ok I admit, not the best example of Olds engineering(the Cutlass Ciera) but it did run up to 185k and then the cooling fan kept on failing and we had to trade it in for an Accord in 99'. Actually it does get a little worse, my grandfather bought a 79' Omega(!) new and we kept it till 91'. That car couldn't make it up an ice incline to save its life thanks to RWD and its weight.

*ahem* Anyways, I'm still surprised at how good looking the interior of the Aurora is. The refreshed ones are especially pleasing to the eye inside and out even compared to some of today's cars. As for GM being hip, they do have a better image than they did even 5 years ago thanks to stunts like Oprah/Pontiac, Escalade, GM fashion show etc.

[RJB]

GM can't be hip with that old bag Rosie Perez shown in the first post. What was the last movie she was in anyway, white men can't jump?!! Get YOUNGER people in the ads that more of us have interest in. I think the new Cadillac ads are a start, the Chevrolet truck ads are already getting on my nerves, I think they are going to beat that song to death just like they did with...'Like a Rock', that and 'An American Revolution', time to change. I still think that Chevrolet needs to shake the nascar stigma image that I seem to get in my opinion from them. I give Pontiac a C- for their ads.

Edited January 29, 2007 by RJB

[ellives]

Check your math.

What's wrong with my math?

[evok]

What's wrong with my math?

A sad, sad legacy for a proud brand. It's astonishing that those who steered the ship at GM over the last 30 years weren't able to figure out how to right the ship when they had so much time to figure it out.

It was only about 13 years from when Oldsmobile last sold a million units to the announcement that it was being phased out. In 2000, the year the phase out was announced Olds sold less than 250k vehicles for the year. And that included a lot of Achievas and Intrigues to fleet.

The fact is, by 1992, Oldmobile was selling well under 400k vehicles. Again, those numbers were propped up by fleet sales.

The fall of Oldsmobile did not take 30 years, the fall of Olds took just about 5 or 6 years from their peak sales of over a million vehicles per year.

That is the math I believe balthazar is refering to.

Edited January 29, 2007 by evok

[FAPTurbo]

Canada often has different ads than in the States, so it's kind of hard to relate to some complaints.

That being said, I think GM should do more to create ads that advertise the company as a whole, AND at the same time, reinforce what each brand means and build upon their 'personality'.

As for chasing, 'hip,' it could backfire. The viral videos didn't help much. You only had to read the comments of people to get their impressions. The ads stressing how the Silverado is America's (and Canada's) truck gets a little nauseating... I think the Silverado has much more going for it than 'patriotic' ads.

[The O.C.]

Can GM make hip happen?

From YouTube to Jay-Z to student stunts, the automaker works the cool factor.

Sharon Terlep / The Detroit News

Link to Original Article @ DetNews

General Motors Corp. wants a hip replacement.

So the automaker infiltrated YouTube and put pop star Gwen Stefani in an SUV.

It let rapper Jay-Z create a paint color and got a bunch of college students to live for a week inside a compact car.

It's all part of a campaign dreamed up by the marketing minds at GM to create an aura of cool around the vehicle lineup they're working to reinvent.

But can a mega-company `like GM -- built on mass appeal and known more for trend-following than trend-setting -- really make hip happen?

Marketing efforts to finesse an image of hipness, including a few from GM, have failed -- sometimes badly. Think New Coke.

Strike the right chord, though, and the risk is well worth the payoff. Especially in a world where word-of-mouth spreads so fast and wide that buzz has become a multimillion dollar commodity.

"Everybody wants to be young and hip," said Dino Bernacchi, GM manager of branding and entertainment. "Everybody wants to be youthful and feel good and live vicariously through these celebrities. Sure, everybody criticizes it, but then we can't get our eyes off of it."

GM managed an image turnaround before, when once-stodgy Cadillac became Hollywood's hip-hop brand of choice with the Escalade SUV. Even the most astute marketing maven couldn't have predicted that. Now GM hopes to duplicate that success with other products.

For all the eye-rolling criticism of corporate branding and marketing tactics, there's no doubt the efforts pay off when it comes to drawing attention to products.

Take GM's star-studded celebrity car and fashion show earlier this month. The event garnered reams of media attention and landed GM models in national publications such as US Weekly magazine.

"There was a day where you could manage or limit the word of mouth about what was said about your brand, but that's over," said Timothy Blett, president of the Doner advertising agency in Southfield, which created the Mazda "zoom, zoom, zoom" campaign. "If your product is considered youthful, there is going to be more press, more buzz on the Internet. Being considered hip by the youth culture creates additional PR in some of the most powerful forms of communication."

Stars lead image change

GM knows that changing public perception is one of the biggest battles in its North American turnaround. While much of that work is focused on vehicle quality, design and resale values, the image of GM's eight brands also is key.

The task faced by the world's biggest automaker is especially tough because GM isn't a newcomer. Few Americans have not heard of GM -- and the image they have is often less than flattering.

To turn that around, GM is employing tactics both conventional and unconventional.

Cultivating star power has been the most noticeable approach. From having Tiger Woods unveil the new Buick Enclave crossover last year in Los Angeles to last month's fashion show to kick off the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, GM has made a concerted effort to get some Hollywood-style glitz behind its brands.

In the midst of rocker Stefani's video for "The Sweet Escape," the camera cuts away to the clearly recognizable grill of a taxi-yellow Chevrolet Tahoe. Meanwhile, GM's global color studio worked with Jay-Z to create a special blue color for the Denali SUV. And rapper 50-Cent made a showing at the GM exhibit at the show to check out performance models of the Pontiac G6.

It's all about the air time

Companies love to have the famous pitch their wares. Many pay to have their products show up in the movies or on TV, or they give stars the items for free. Celebrities often will seek out a particular vehicle to use or customize.

Almost every automaker has a fleet of cars specifically for use in films and on TV, and most big productions have a team whose sole job is to find the right products.

"There's just something that has people connected to celebrities and has everybody wanting more," Bernacchi said. "But there has to be a balance. They can't look like they're shilling the product."

Transparent efforts tend to be shunned by the folks companies are trying to woo.

Some critics joked about the omnipresence of Ford Motor Co. models in the latest James Bond flick, "Casino Royale." The Dr. Z ads featuring Dieter Zetsche, CEO of Chrysler Group parent DaimlerChrysler AG and former Chrysler CEO, fell flat.

GM's has had its own missteps. The 1996 Super Bowl commercial featuring a leather-clad Cindy Crawford bombed.

And the automaker generated a good amount of not-so-nice Internet commentary over a video clip that surfaced last fall on video-sharing phenomenon YouTube that showed Tiger Woods filming a TV ad for Buick. GM produced the 60-second clip, but tried to pass it off as a bootlegged video leaked onto the Web, complete with grainy images, muffled audio and unsteady camera work. The video even captured Woods making a mildly off-color wisecrack when a noisy airplane buzzed overhead and interrupted filming. "Excuse me," Woods said, cracking up bystanders.

A comment from one YouTube viewer: "Very weak attempt at 'viral' marketing. It's almost as cringe-inducing as the notion of Tiger driving a Buick."

Product must back the buzz

Image is only part of the fight to win back consumers, since bad products can't be saved by good buzz.

"You got to get hipper and trendier with the cars, and we are," GM's Bernacchi said.

GM is doing its best to mount a turnaround on the product side with an aggressive new vehicle line that focuses on more dramatic designs, improved performance and quality interiors. Much of the work has garnered good reviews from analysts and critics.

"You can't do all this stuff and then come out with bland products," said auto analyst Erich Merkle of IRN Inc. in Grand Rapids. "You've got to be able to back it up."

Frankly, I don't think GM can be "hip" nor do I think "GM" should attempt to be hip.

I see WAY too much "GM" in the marketplace these days.......just like the stupid badges they are putting on all the GM vehicles.

More focus needs to be given to the divisions.

Pontiac could be "hip"........Cadillac in some respects is very "hip" these days.

You don't really see the parent manufacturers advertise and market their divisions like GM does.....I think the added presence of GM only bogs down the messages that the divisions are trying to get across. This all goes back 8 years ago when GM reorganized and took all the differentiation (behind the scenes) away from the individual divisions.

You don't see BMWNA adverstising on behalf of MINI......you see "MINI" 100% responsible for sending the messages they want to send and for building the image into the brand that they want to portray.

Same thing for Daimler/Chrysler and Mercedes-Benz.

Toyota/Lexus.

The parent company (GM) needs to stay out of it.

[Flybrian]

You don't see BMWNA adverstising on behalf of MINI......you see "MINI" 100% responsible for sending the messages they want to send and for building the image into the brand that they want to portray.

Same thing for Daimler/Chrysler and Mercedes-Benz.

Toyota/Lexus.

The parent company (GM) needs to stay out of it.

Little bit different. Its more confusing to use Toyota to sell Lexus as Toyota is a marque of its own. I don't entirely disagree with you, though, except that DCX is certainly doing that with its American marques.

[The O.C.]

Little bit different. Its more confusing to use Toyota to sell Lexus as Toyota is a marque of its own. I don't entirely disagree with you, though, except that DCX is certainly doing that with its American marques.

I don't know......

Look at the picture in the top of this thread......

Where does "Pontiac" get any sort of recognition for it's outstanding, and "soon-to-be-hip" Solstice GXP?

NOWHERE (that I see.) All you see is that big-ass "GM" sign in the background.

[Flybrian]

I don't know......

Look at the picture in the top of this thread......

Where does "Pontiac" get any sort of recognition for it's outstanding, and "soon-to-be-hip" Solstice GXP?

NOWHERE (that I see.) All you see is that big-ass "GM" sign in the background.

Take this image in context, that its from GM's Style Gala whatever event and consider it a Motorama of today, an opportunity for GM to model its hottest production and concept cars with celebrities. Note that Pontiac is sponsoring more and more urban youth concerts and the like as well as serious motorsports, HUMMER is participating in offroad events, and Buick's perennial golf sponsorship.

[VenSeattle]

I'm not sure either, but in my life time, GM has always been "General Motors - the manufacturer of....."

To try and pass Pontiac or Chevrolet off as separate entities would appear foolish IMO. The media would make a 'Wizard of Oz' mockery of GM "...don't look behind the curtain."

Yeah... Lexus is shielded from Toyota's recent reliability woes, while 'Toyota' benefits from Lexus' remarkable reliability... but... GM is treated differently. Even with Buick and Cadillac excelling in quality/reliability... people/media still say "(Insert other GM brand here) is below average. GM can't consistently build reliable vehicles."

In a nutshell, as Fly pointed out, there isn't a 'GM' brand. So any vehicle GM manufactures ultimately represents GM... regardless of the brand.

GM "Corporate" has a strong presence and voice in the Industry. GM should play to its strengths right now. Maybe once each brand is revitalized, GM can start individualizing and pushing Brand identity, allowing Division/General Managers more face-time with the public. But then you go back to ‘division’ of what?

[97regalGS]

GM sucks at marketing.

and GM sucks at brand management.

i think they are going to opposite extremes. the soap sellers wanted to make every car a brand(malibu, impala, cavalier etc). now laneve wants to make GM a brand (hence little invisible GM stickers on every car.)

[hyperv6]

Not sure what his hip deal is costing but I do not see it selling more cars.

It is smearing raw meat on your kid to get the dog to play with him. It only last till the flavor is gone.

If you make cool cars that people want they sell themselves. People bought PT Cruisers because they precieved them as cool not because Christen Slater went to see his parole officer in one. The Mini Copper sell itself on it design and performance not because 50 Cent did his first drive by in one.

Also you need to be careful with this crowd. Your safe with a Lebron James or Tiger Woods but what are you going to do when 50 Cent gets busted for something? Or our friend Slater goes back to rehab? That is not an image you want your company to have. Many of these people are not stable or live in the real world.

There once was a time GM dropped Tim Allen when it was found out he had been arrested for drugs. Before he was Tim the Tool Man he did a 4.3 Chevy V6 ad that was very good. GM got nervous and dropped the ad when it was pointed out he had a drug arrest in his past. Now they are courting people that are not on the way up in fixing their problems but people just waiting for then next arrest.

What's next do we get Paris Hilton to due her next DUI in a new Z06? Or Pam Anderson do a new Sex video in a Chevy Avalanche? Though it would do a good job to highlight the Vesa Cab?

If Toyota can sell a plain old Camey on interior size and reliability you would expect GM can do it with a great looking Malibu with high rated reliability at a value price.

I agree GM's marketing Sucks as a whole with some small peeks of brilliance from time to time. This Hip deal is not one of these small peeks.

[gm4life]

I like some of GM's new idea's and love the Silverado ad's but I was always a sucker for that stuff. Also the GM badge was the best thing they could do now you can associate that car with GM, and hopefully someday realize I had such good luck with your say, Buick that I will get its big cousin a Cadillac. Unifying a company that has had a recent down-turn and now in the process of a come-back is an EXCELLENT, I REPEAT EXCELLENT idea.

[The O.C.]

GM "Corporate" has a strong presence and voice in the Industry. GM should play to its strengths right now. Maybe once each brand is revitalized, GM can start individualizing and pushing Brand identity, allowing Division/General Managers more face-time with the public. But then you go back to ‘division’ of what?

But see? That's my point. Of course GM has a "strong presence" but in most parts of the country, it's not a "good" presence.

People out here (generalization) "hate" General Motors.

BUT.....they like their Cadillacs, or their Chevy/GMC SUVs, or their Silverado pickup trucks, or their Corvettes.....

[Camino LS6]

I think for the most part that "hip" happens on its own and can't be reliably created. I trhink GM's best hope for hip is creating more and more cars worthy of the description.

[Mr.Krinkle]

I don't know......

Look at the picture in the top of this thread......

Where does "Pontiac" get any sort of recognition for it's outstanding, and "soon-to-be-hip" Solstice GXP?

NOWHERE (that I see.) All you see is that big-ass "GM" sign in the background.

GM can be hip but only after its divisions and cars/truck/x/overs are first.

Think to when buick and mercury had the sack to say they want to market to urban, minority and women buyers. Thats a little too ballsy.

Cadillac became hip on its own.

TOo many peopel associate GM with crap. Just the way it is. When GM gets a hot car on its hands its only natural to want to be associated with it and they should to try and help their overall image. Everyone knows lexus/toyota/scion are the same.

Most people I think are aware BMW is behind MINI...and that association is a good thing.

The only people who really care about GM and its brand differentiation right now are GM fans. i.e. a pontiac or GMC driver who wouldnt be caught in most CHevrolets...or the whatever. Everyone else, ehh...its a GM. why do they even have so many brands anyway, they might say? These people didnt learn to say chevy or buick sucks, ...it started with GM sucks. Why not change that first.

perfect example the cts and malibu. Did you see the new cadillac? GM is finally getting it right.

maybe there will be hope for pontiac if GM gets the Holdens over here...

Trickle down theory. or is it up?>

[evok]

But see? That's my point. Of course GM has a "strong presence" but in most parts of the country, it's not a "good" presence.

People out here (generalization) "hate" General Motors.

BUT.....they like their Cadillacs, or their Chevy/GMC SUVs, or their Silverado pickup trucks, or their Corvettes.....

I agree with you for the most part. I said this at the time, the tiny GM badges they threw on the vehicles were idiotic and I pulled mine off as soon as I got my vehicle.

First off because it was tacky and reminded me of the Chrysler Pentastar prior to DCX.

And secondly because to 80+% of the retail market (based on retail market share) it sort of stands for a "kick me sign."

Even this a mistatement that you elluded to:

"GM managed an image turnaround before, when once-stodgy Cadillac became Hollywood's hip-hop brand of choice with the Escalade SUV. Even the most astute marketing maven couldn't have predicted that. Now GM hopes to duplicate that success with other products."

Cadillac did not become HIP - The Escalade and CTS became hip vehicles but not the brand. And they became hip inspite of GM's marketing efforts at the time.

In the end - GM is not a brand as much as LeNeve and company want to waste money thinking it is. GM is a company and an umbrella for many sick brands that need marketing support. Ford Motor Company is not a brand either but it has the rub off effect because of the car division.

PS - Do you ever wonder why you rarely if ever see DaimlerChrysler associated with Mercedes Benz? Something to think about!

Edited February 1, 2007 by evok

[The O.C.]

PS - Do you ever wonder why you rarely if ever see DaimlerChrysler associated with Mercedes Benz? Something to think about!

Exactly......and HOW many times have you heard people (that are not informed car people) say that the new Mercedes-Benz models "....have too much Chrysler in them....." when in fact, it's the Chryslers (LX cars) that have Mercedes-Benz in them....

[Mr.Krinkle]

PS - Do you ever wonder why you rarely if ever see DaimlerChrysler associated with Mercedes Benz? Something to think about!

Q: How do you pronounce Daimler Chrysler in German?

A: The Chrysler is silent.

I would expect in the next five years Cadillac as a brand will be hip. Buick is another story-for the majority of people out there...Plenty more people will be rolling in their caddys unashamedly.

the tiny GM badges they threw on the vehicles were idiotic and I pulled mine off as soon as I got my vehicle.

I thought the badges a bit much. I know a long time ago GM stood for something--and it was a good thing. Unless you liked Ford, but even that was a little before my time. Nonetheless they were a true piece of American culture. TV shows, sponsorships, they were innovators and trend setters and bla bla blah...

Obviously the GM name has lost much of the presence once associated with it and its glory faded somewhat and in its place negative association sprouted. I do not see the harm in trying to recapture that glory. At least get it to the point where the name is respectable and doesnt induce eye rolling...

Thats one reason those badges were so pointless to me...

Showing the solstice with big GM letters in the background isnt overstepping a boundary. If GM was never so engrained in the public conscious i could understand just letting it go but it was and so I think it needs to be refurbished to some degree...then drop it and stop confusing everyone if they want.. Just go out on a good note.

Edited February 1, 2007 by Mr.Krinkle

[evok]

If GM was never so engrained in the public conscious i could understand just letting it go but it was and so I think it needs to be refurbished to some degree...then drop it and stop confusing everyone if they want.. Just go out on a good note.

The biggest issue is, I or anyone can not walk into a GM motors dealership. I walk into a brand or multi-brand franchise to buy a vehicle that is manufactured by GM. This is not to say that GM is wrong is promoting the GM corporate umbrellla but they must avoid another layer of confusion with the public.

GM can not be hip. The brands themselves need to convey their distict appeal. It should be easier to turn around a brand than a company. It is also easier to disassociate the company from the brands as they have done an excellent job with Saturn and Saab.

Years ago it was brand management where the focus was the models, now it appears in many ways since LaNeve's tenure there is a lot of focus on GM as a brand. That is a mistake.

Since this thread is about hip, I highly doubt anyone would say Toyota, Lexus or Honda is exactly hip. I rarely see them use celebrity promos to endorse the product. What comes to mind in Ed Bagley Jr. promoting the Prius on his own time not the other way around.

Personally I would rather GM take the Green Peace of Environment Responsiblity Award (if there is such a thing) or clean house on a Consumers Report reliability study. That would go a long way toward changing the corporate image and selling cars than have a photo op with DJ Jazzy Jeff and the Fresh Prince.

Edited February 2, 2007 by evok

[97regalGS]

GM can not be hip. The brands themselves need to convey their distict appeal. It should be easier to turn around a brand than a company. It is also easier to disassociate the company from the brands as they have done an excellent job with Saturn and Saab.

Years ago it was brand management where the focus was the models, now it appears in many ways since LaNeve's tenure there is a lot of focus on GM as a brand. That is a mistake.

Since this thread is about hip, I highly doubt anyone would say Toyota, Lexus or Honda is exactly hip. I rarely see them use celebrity promos to endorse the product. What comes to mind in Ed Bagley Jr. promoting the Prius on his own time not the other way around.

GM is NOT a brand. end of story. procter and gamble is not a brand.

Buick is a brand. Cadillac is a brand. colgate is a brand. tide is a brand. Ritz crackers are a brand.

(malibu was not a brand, impala is not a brand, grand am is not a brand)

[balthazar]

>>"GM can not be hip. The brands themselves need to convey their distict appeal. It should be easier to turn around a brand than a company. It is also easier to disassociate the company from the brands as they have done an excellent job with Saturn and Saab."<<

This has always been a mistake. GM has run ads touting their myriad of divisions since the beginning (I have one from 1919), but they were always few & far between. The "GM" mark was on seat belt buckles & door edges for decades, and in the corner of print ads since the late '60s but again: that is a subtlety.

But that is what it should be. When a manufacturer has general public favor, the parent corporate logo spreads good will. When the manufacturer is dogged with negative public opinion (and I am not the least convinced that the doom is quite so foreboding as portrayed above), that corporate logo is an albatross and a catalyst for the factually-loose to damn each and every product & division unilaterally with an opinion bazooka.

With "GM" currently at a low point in public opinion, putting GM badges on vehicles (tho themselves quite subtle)... it's just not the right time. Each division needs to stand on it's own perceptionally. Media articles should never read 'GM did a good job on the Buick X....", but 'Buick did a good job on the Buick X...." The sentiment continually erodes divisional identities, as it has done since roughly the mid '80s.

At this point, it would take years to de-emphasis "GM" back to where it was circa 1965, which is the proper dosage of the message, IMO. Nevertheless, I would 'throw the lever' to start that process, were I in charge.

[4gm]

GM can not be hip. The brands themselves need to convey their distict appeal. It should be easier to turn around a brand than a company.

And the way to do that is to give each brand it's own distinct design philosphy. GM is moving in this general directon but they're not even close to being there yet. Cadillac had the best example with A&S but they now seem to be backpedaling if the new CTS is anything to go by. It doesn't appear that Lutz has a broad design sensibility. If he did the designs coming out now that he's responsible for would be much more varied. I wouldn't say he's a one-trick pony, more like a two-trick pony.

[evok]

And the way to do that is to give each brand it's own distinct design philosphy. GM is moving in this general directon but they're not even close to being there yet. Cadillac had the best example with A&S but they now seem to be backpedaling if the new CTS is anything to go by. It doesn't appear that Lutz has a broad design sensibility. If he did the designs coming out now that he's responsible for would be much more varied. I wouldn't say he's a one-trick pony, more like a two-trick pony.

Thank you - I have been saying that since his arrival at GM. It is comfort to see others beginning to see that as well. The recent and soon to be new product is great, there is no doubt about that. But did it go far enough to capture to hearts and minds of the import public and get them in the showroom to at least try them out or put them on their radar. For the most part I am on the fence.

Lutz can do Vipers and Solsti - but has trouble with the average public.

[4gm]

One thing that has stuck with me about Lutz is how he publicly stated how much he hated the CTS when it came out. Why does no one else remember this? He was so clearly off the mark with that one it's not even funny.

[evok]

One thing that has stuck with me about Lutz is how he publicly stated how much he hated the CTS when it came out. Why does no one else remember this? He was so clearly off the mark with that one it's not even funny.

Lutz could not have done the LX cars at Chrysler, or the orginal CTS or the Taurus.

Just look at Chrysler for his track record once they veil is pulled away.

He is a myth not a legend.

But he does Vipers and concept cars really well. GM has better people than Lutz.

[ehaase]

Lutz could not have done the LX cars at Chrysler, or the orginal CTS or the Taurus.

Just look at Chrysler for his track record once they veil is pulled away.

He is a myth not a legend.

But he does Vipers and concept cars really well. GM has better people than Lutz.

Didn't Lutz do the Ford Sierra, which was probably one of Ford's first aero cars in the early 1980's?

I have long felt that he was overrated. Iacocca must have had reasons not to let Lutz replace him at Chrysler.

[evok]

Didn't Lutz do the Ford Sierra, which was probably one of Ford's first aero cars in the early 1980's?

I have long felt that he was overrated. Iacocca must have had reasons not to let Lutz replace him at Chrysler.

Not sure about the Sierra.

I always thought the same thing. Why was Lutz looked over. He had about 5 years left before hitting 65.

[Flybrian]

One thing that has stuck with me about Lutz is how he publicly stated how much he hated the CTS when it came out. Why does no one else remember this? He was so clearly off the mark with that one it's not even funny.

He also disliked the Avalanche. Remember the rumors floating around saying it may not be replaced on GMT-900?

Of course, I'll most painfully remember the cost-cutting and decontenting of formerly standard equipment, like ABS, seatback map pockets, and trunk lock cylinders.

[trevormac98]

Honestly, GM is going to have a tough time being hip.

The HHR commercial was cool, and created by a college student. However, GM prices are too high for the Generation Y group, who are in college or just graduating from college. GM can be as hip as they want but with prices for some cars higher than comparable models of other companies (Honda, Kia, Hynduai and Toyota), why would you buy a GM?

Thats the question GM needs to ask themselves when marketing to the younger generation. Why do they want to buy a GM product? Some on here will say that prices are comparable to other models, which I agree to, but I am making the argument for my whole generation. A lot of us recent grads are not even considering the once dominant Big 3. Why should we? GM is not giving us any good reason. Except for Saturn, try being a 24 year old and walk into a GM or Ford dealership. You are not even taken seriously and before they even talk to you, they want to run your credit. Now that same 24 year old, go to Toyota, Hyundai,... and the experience is so much different.

I worked for GM for 5 years so I will always buy GM, but its tough to convince my Generation Y friends to consider our products. The first great step GM could take, is taking over the dealerships, no more middle man. This will never happen. Second, make the cars marketed for my generation more affordable. My best friend recently bought a Cobalt SS, which is a sweet ride and unbelievable performance for a 4 cylinder, but his payments are almost 500 a month. That is with an interest rate of 4.9%.

If GM really wants to be hip they can also ask the people they are trying to win from from Toyota, Honda..., just like they did with the HHR commercial.

[CARBIZ]

The other tough question is why is GMNA treated so differently than the Rest of the World? Especially now that GM sells more vehicles OUTSIDE North America than it does inside!

I hail from Brazil just now, and I have been all over this beautiful country (again). I see Chevrolets EVERYWHERE. No brand crisis here. No hip problems here. Chevrolet is #1 in Brazil, not GM. I´d bet nobody here even knows who GM is! Of course, nothing sold here is like anything sold in North America, except maybe the S-10 and the "Grand Blazer."

I do, however, see a few Corollas and thinly disguised Camries. So far, CHEVROLET is winning the market war here, followed by (get ready for this), Fiat.

I look at the Astra and think of the Malibu, then ask myself WHY??? Why does GMNA think we are so stupid? They can and do build great cars ELSEWHERE. They can and do market them well - ELSEWHERE.

As GM sinks to sub 4 million sales in North America, and picks up slack elsewhere, a lot of rethinking will have to be done. As a lot of anti-GM members on this site have repeatedly pointed out, Toyota is not confused about its marketing and it is RELENTLESS. GM clearly cannot afford 8 brands any more, not when one or two brands are doing better outside GMNA!

[Guest eLBo]

The techno music in the ads, Buick especially, is pretty pathetic.

Do you know why GM killed Buick vs the better selling Pontiac? Chiang-Kai-Shek (last "President" of pre-communist China) had one (a gift from the US Government, of course) and GM thinks the Chinese still revere him and Buick will sell in China.

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1089550_buick-sells-four-times-as-many-cars-in-china-as-in-u-s

[hyperv6]

This can come true with the proper message and enough money and time to build an image. These things are done over time as you can not do it in just a year or so.

Take BMW. In theLate 60's they were that odd car that the guy down the street with the tweed cap drove. It rusted out in 5 years but he still loved that odd little car.

By the mid 70's They started with a slogan the ultimate driving machine. They then backed it up with cars that drove very unlike any American sedan and started to add luxury to the mix on levels BME seldom offered in the states.

 

By the 80's the price of the cars had creped up  and if you owned one it meant you had the power and the  means to own one or you were in debt up to your arm pits. This was a the key to help make people feel the car improved their image.

It is like the movie Crazy People where a Advertising man becomes a patient in a mental hospital. He get his inmates to work with him on new auto campaigns that were brutally honest.

They had things like

.
"Volvo Boxy But good"    

"By a Jaguar for men who what hand jobs from women they hardly know"

 

While they were joking in the movie this is the kinds of messages that good marketing sends. Image, Power, Quality, Value all play a big part of the deal. People want to feel smart for their purchase and what that purchase belies on their image. If we were all just buying for transportation we all would be in a Chevy Spark.

 

GM can turn things around with continued better product but they also need the right marketing and properly fund it. They have failed miserably here and they need to continue to work on it. Each new model is like a brick and you have to use each to build the image.

If Hyundai could turn themselves around nothing is impossible,