Why GM must win the urban war

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Win the cities or lose the war

Why GM must take back market share in America's urban centers

Dateline: Europe

Ceding Urban Areas

The domestic automakers - GM in particular - have ceded urban areas focusing their efforts on the suburban and rural marketplace. America's large cities such as Boston, New York, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles are largely responsible for establishing and setting societal trends, what's "hip and cool" in the culture. A demonstrated inability to generate product for and market that product to America's major cities portends significant problems for GM, especially in the medium and long term. An inability to reach these areas prevents GM from reaching the trend setters and policy makers of today and tomorrow. Because of its inability or refusal to market to these communities, GM has assured itself of eventual cultural irrelevance.

Remember in the Congressional testimony when Congress-critters were running around saying that Detroit needed to reform itself and build cars that people actually wanted? That was indicative of THIS problem. When Warren Brown researched new car registrations in the District of Columbia, a whopping 23% were domestics. German automakers routinely sell as many cars as the Big Three do in DC. The domestics just aren't relevant in DC and that's where the policy is made. Part of that irrelevancy is a lack of product that is attractive to urbanites (class leading smaller cars) and the other part is a total lack of marketing in these areas. Both of these combine to create the yawning gap between perception and reality about the domestic auto industry.

Just to give you an idea of how terribly GM's marketing has been focused: GM recently ran ads in Vanity Fair (the one with Tina Fey on the cover). Between ads of Mercedes, Jaguar, Bentley, Louis Vitton, Chanel, Barney's, Vera Wang and Jimmi Choo was an ad for a Chevy(?!) talking about a deal with a coupon giving you $15 off at a shoe warehouse (???!!!) for test driving a Traverse. Epic Fail. There are maybe two or three brands GM has which fit the profile of a Vanity Fair reader and Chevrolet isn't one of them.

Reaching Urban Areas

When was the last time you saw a Proctor and Gamble ad and when was the last time you saw a Crest toothpaste ad? Yet, GM insists on cutting ads advertising itself as the brand completely ignoring it's greatest asset - It's actual brands. Reaching urban areas will require GM to refocus its branding emphasis from GM back to its brands and target those brands at specific niches of American society. (This doesn't change the fact I think GM is still over branded and until someone can explain the difference between Pontiac, Saturn, Buick, GMC with regard to the audiences they are supposed to reach I'll continue to think that).

1)Targeted Advertising: The shotgun approach to marketing in urban areas will ensure lots of money is spent and that whatever GM does, its effort will be lost in the surrounding media clutter. Breaking through the media clutter and creating an effective ad campaign which reaches urban consumers will require GM to abandon to abandon its normal marketing approach.

Major cities are made up off blocks of consumers which normally break down along specific demographic lines. Advertising targeted towards the GLBT community (which there is none of) would probably not be effective when targeted towards the black community (again where there is little to no specific advertising). The solution is demographic specific advertising.

Micro targeting ad campaigns towards specific communities allows for GM to launch national ad campaigns (giving them some efficiency of scale) but allows them to access urban communities where a "message for everyone" would be lost in the clutter. Specific appeals between from a company to a specific group of consumers also helps to create a relationship between a demographic and company, building brand loyalty. Such intangibles, such as brand "likability" are important towards expanding the number of people who are willing to consider purchasing a car from brand "X."

For instance - the GLBT community in this country has more disposable income than any other demographic group in the country. Combined with their status as trendsetters (see metrosexual, see yuppie, see hipster, see Madonna) it makes them one of the groups most sought after by advertisers. Furthermore, they are a significant portion of the population in most urban centers - a market GM needs to access. GM spends very little money and zero effort targeting them with advertising. Why? Conservative corporate culture? Run by old men who haven't left Detroit since Carter was president? I don't know and I don't care, but I do know this; GM's refusal to do so, and this is just one instance of such stupidity, is killing the company. It makes GM look backwards, out of step, and about as culturally relevant as Duran Duran (or Pontiac).

What makes this all so disappointing is GM has a good story to tell the community about it's efforts to stop corporate discrimination and to become an inclusive company. Did you know GM has one of the largest GLBT employee groups in the world? Did you know that GM has received a perfect score from HRC for its hiring and non-discrimination policies and that GM is held as a model example for how to deal with issues arising from such a diverse workforce? No?! Neither was I until I looked it up. In a completely unscientific survey (conversations I've had) not a person has known and would have given whatever GM product was in consideration greater preference had they known that.

Let's take Cadillac's current "Life, LIberty and the Pursuit of" mantra. How much money would it take to adapt that into a passible campaign targeting the GLBT community? How about... "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Equality" with an ad talking about the points I mentioned above? It would take half a day with a copy of Photoshop, InDesign and some stock photography to put it together.

For Instance - Branding must be improved to target specific demographics. Each brand needs to come up with a demographic of customers that it plans to attract, how it plans to attract it, and with which product it will do this. Saturn, Pontiac, Buick, SAAB and in some cases Cadillac all seem to be chasing after the same consumers. The insanity needs to end now. If the brands can't clearly delineate who they plan to attract with various marketing campaigns and products then the brands should be shuttered in the North American market.

I won't get into hypothetical what brand goes where exercises because such discussion will distract from the points I'm trying to make about how GM has failed to successfully create products for and market products to America's major cities.

2) Relevant Product:

Marketing will only work when coupled with products that are relevant to the marketplace. This only underlines the importance of several GM product launches including the Cruze, Volt, ATS, 2012 Astra, and 9-1/9-3. GM has to demonstrate it has the capacity to build, not just competent, but class leading small cars. GM compacts are automatically dismissed as rental specials and no amount of marketing will be able to change that until the product shows a demonstrable change in GM's focus from large SUV's and trucks to segments it has long neglected. In turn, GM must realize that a continued focus on SUV's and trucks will condemn the automaker to bit player status in urban markets - and it's continued slide towards culturally irrelevancy.

The Cruze, Volt, 2012 Astra, 9-3/9-1 and the Cadillac ATS will be instrumental in demonstrating GM's new found commitment to smaller cars. All of these models will need to be offered with a variety of body styles including sedans, wagons and or hatchbacks, coupes and maybe even convertibles. They will all need multiple variants including luxury and sporting models, hybrids, diesels and even optional electrical drive (beyond the Volt). Realizing the importance of the environment to many living in urban areas, GM should go as far as to take a page out of Ford's book and offer an optional interior with a recyclable interior (Fusion Hybrid). Furthermore each of these cars must have a full slate of options available including Bluetooth, iPod integration, navigation, blind side warning systems etc.

3)Conclusion

Failure to make these cars class leading will ensure failure in the marketplace and GM's eventual failure. Failure to market these cars correctly will ensure their failure and GM's eventual failure. This is General Motors last chance to get it right or they will again lose a generation of consumers. Unlike last time it won't be because of crappy product, this time because of irrelevant product.

Put your questions and comments below. I'll be slow getting back to them because it's 22:30 in Florence, I'm still jetlagged and I'm going to bed.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

This is where GM's numerous brands could become a HUGE asset. Think of how well Saturn could do with a competitive line of small cars (like I outlined in my plan) Think of how well Saab would connect with some of these people.

The answers are so obvious, yet GM is so clueless.

[mustang84]

It's absolutely essential that GM establish itself in the urban market; the rural-to-urban shift has been underway for 60 years now, and will continue to accelerate due to the fact that urban centers are where the new jobs are being created. Sadly, rural America is dying and I only see it getting worse because rural areas have nothing to offer Gen Y .

If GM can't break the negative perception they have in urban markets, there is no hope.

[pow]

At least Ford has the benefit of being a global brand, one that's fairly popular around the world.

When I think of urban areas, I think of city cars... and Ford has a great lineup of them. The Fiesta is arguably Ford's most important upcoming car.

Edited December 29, 2008 by empowah

[black02]

Win the cities or lose the war

Why GM must take back market share in America's urban centers

I think you're on to something here. The problems in the urban areas date way back. I remember even back in 1970, I read somewhere about the ratio of fullsize Chevys to VW Bugs in the U.S., and I noted that the ratio was far different in the greater SF Bay Area from what I'd read. You can see it in the attitude of Cadillac, where the smallest Caddy available weighs over 4000 pounds, once you load it up with options. Alpha will fix that particular problem, if it makes it to market. It's too bad it's taking so long, because once a small Caddy is available, it will be years before that fact penetrates to the consciousness of a majority of car buyers.

[ocnblu]

"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit" has been appearing, tailored to that market with same-sex couples shown in the ads, in GLBT-targeted magazines for as long as it's been in the mainstream media. So that point of the article is not entirely true. GM just has to keep it up. Edited December 29, 2008 by ocnblu

[CARBIZ]

Still, the GLBT community is one of the most fractious, 'trendy' communities out there. Nobody knows lables like we do, and that is the trouble. Imported wine, imported designer labels, trips to Greece - these are the 'entitled' bragging rights of the affluent gay people I know. If given a choice between a Sky or M-5, most will default to the Mazda, not knowing a damned thing about it. Besides, most gays live in urban areas and don't own cars. I would challenge this with a big 'why bother?"

It's going to take more than cute advertising to correct that. I personally ran ads in a local gay newspaper for 6 months, about 8 years ago, and did not get one single contact from it.

In fact, truth be told, a few years ago there were many car ads, even from the likes of BMW, Acura and others in the local gay press: it's all gone now, which leads me to believe they couldn't produce results either.

[hyperv6]

Unless GM can find away to to sell cars in California, Florida and New York they will have a harder time gaining ground or retaining ground in all other parts of the country.

GM made a mistake of not tayloring cars for California as often most trends start there.

Toyota, Nissan and Honda started there.

They will not retake the California market in one car or even in one year. They need to earn it back and that starts with a good product and some very good marketing

Now they have good product it is on exclellent marketing and the cost of marketing to sell the product.

[A Horse With No Name]

At least Ford has the benefit of being a global brand, one that's fairly popular around the world.

When I think of urban areas, I think of city cars... and Ford has a great lineup of them. The Fiesta is arguably Ford's most important upcoming car.

Agreed on the Fiesta.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Still, the GLBT community is one of the most fractious, 'trendy' communities out there. Nobody knows lables like we do, and that is the trouble. Imported wine, imported designer labels, trips to Greece - these are the 'entitled' bragging rights of the affluent gay people I know. If given a choice between a Sky or M-5, most will default to the Mazda, not knowing a damned thing about it. Besides, most gays live in urban areas and don't own cars. I would challenge this with a big 'why bother?"

It's going to take more than cute advertising to correct that. I personally ran ads in a local gay newspaper for 6 months, about 8 years ago, and did not get one single contact from it.

In fact, truth be told, a few years ago there were many car ads, even from the likes of BMW, Acura and others in the local gay press: it's all gone now, which leads me to believe they couldn't produce results either.

Oddly enough after having been involved in the Miata community for over ten years, I only know of one guy (local SCCA/Miata club guy) who is "gay" and owns a Miata.

Most of the gay people here in Columbus, Ohio are VERY domestic oriented. The partner of the woman who runs an antiques store I frequent drives a second gen Scion xB, but she is the only openly gay person I know (other than Blackviper with his VW and Oldsmoboi's BF with his Honda) who drives an import.

Actually, I think the Sky/Solstice twins have about the broadest market penetration of any of the roadsters. Not sure why you think they wouldn't get good penetration in the gay community.

Chris

[Drew Dowdell]

Most of the gay friends who aren't just e-friends drive imports.

Of the domestics, Ford has been better with courting GLBT dollars than GM with Jaguar and Volvo spending a lot of money in related advertisements.

The Volvo ad that always sticks out in my head is one where they show a silhouette of a driver seat and the hand brake is pulled. The caption said "We know. We're excited about pride too!"

My BF bought the CRV because he wanted to be able to "haul stuff". He doesn't know what he wanted to haul, but he just defaulted to a silver Japanese CUV appliance. I'll give him credit though, ever since he saw the Astra, he's wanted one. I told him we could get one in Germany.

[Drew Dowdell]

Actually, I think the Sky/Solstice twins have about the broadest market penetration of any of the roadsters. Not sure why you think they wouldn't get good penetration in the gay community.

Chris

my head spins.

[A Horse With No Name]

I'll give him credit though, ever since he saw the Astra, he's wanted one. I told him we could get one in Germany.

It's too bad the Astra never took off here at all. I have seen exactly, um...1 in the last 6 weeks on the road.

They have some really cool varients in Europe. Wish they sold those here.

Chris

[Z-06]

It's too bad the Astra never took off here at all. I have seen exactly, um...1 in the last 6 weeks on the road.

They have some really cool varients in Europe. Wish they sold those here.

Chris

I have seen one in past one year and that too two weeks ago.

[hyperv6]

Not sure why you think they wouldn't get good penetration in the gay community.Chris

That is one way to put it.

Seriously, My wife works in a library system and there are many Alturnative live style and higher eductaion people there. I mean more than just gays as we have goths, feminist, witches collage students old hippies, needless to say a very diverse urban group.

Most drive imports and most are faily expensive imports since they have a faily good income.

Most of the ones I have met buy vehicles based on what they read, few are car people. They tend to believe what they read and they have had good enough service from the vehicles to not regret what they bought.

I was able to talk one into buying a Saturn Vue [Cat Person]. She has been very happy with it and is now glad she did not buy a Honda.

Another thinks she is saving the world in her Prius [note they are not getting great mileage and have visited the dealer about it] and Highlander Hybrid [old hippie].

Many have affordable cars including Cobalts and Hyundias.

Now the city officals here tend to drive Cadillacs [CTS] and Benz. Sure glad they raised my taxes.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Unless GM can find away to to sell cars in California, Florida and New York they will have a harder time gaining ground or retaining ground in all other parts of the country.

GM made a mistake of not tayloring cars for California as often most trends start there.

Toyota, Nissan and Honda started there.

They will not retake the California market in one car or even in one year. They need to earn it back and that starts with a good product and some very good marketing

Now they have good product it is on exclellent marketing and the cost of marketing to sell the product.

I agree...

I don't think it's so much about selling cars in urban areas as it is about conquering the negative image in the eyes of the urbanites that set the trends. (My education supports this in a big way, it is blatantly obvious to me. maybe not so much to GM)

[hyperv6]

I agree...

I don't think it's so much about selling cars in urban areas as it is about conquering the negative image in the eyes of the urbanites that set the trends. (My education supports this in a big way, it is blatantly obvious to me. maybe not so much to GM)

It is easy for someone to get a bad reputation but it is so much harder to regain the respect.

GM is like a ex convict. He may have served his time and may be a really good guy now with a freshly earned PHD. But the neighbors still wisper he is the guy that held up the bank 20 years ago.

Toyota is like Martha Stewart. Yes she may have been convicted of a feloney but to many in the public they feel it was not a real crime because there was no Gun. Toyota makes a mistake or have a problem they get a pass because they are not precived as evil.

GM is like the old Bank robber and has to go out and show and prove how they is no longer the thug and is prepared to give back. GM took a lot of money form people with poor quality cars over the years and robbed a lot of bank accounts when the owners need to repair them. That is trust that is going to be hard to earned.

GM did the right thing and admitted they made crap but they need to follow through with this and market the hell out of what they are doing right today.

Since GM is on Goverment welfare. they should show just what and where the money is going. This will show it is not wasted and should start to earn some trust. Also it will keep GM honest. The big catch phrase today seems to be Transparent. I know it was a bunch of election crap but for GM to become transparent to the public is a way to shead that old stoggy evil corperate image.

Apple makes themselves look as if they are your partner. The truth is Steve Jobs is just as hard nose as any CEO. But he makes sure they protect their name and image. GM forgot to protect their image and they have to earn it back.

GM needs to offer Quality, Value and Image in their vehicles then market the hell out of each model. If you can't afford to maket all your models properly then you have too many models.

As well as the Accord sells Honda still markets it heavily. They take nothing for granted.

Edited December 30, 2008 by hyperv6

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

It is easy for someone to get a bad reputation but it is so much harder to regain the respect.

GM is like a ex convict. He may have served his time and may be a really good guy now with a freshly earned PHD. But the neighbors still wisper he is the guy that held up the bank 20 years ago.

Toyota is like Martha Stewart. Yes she may have been convicted of a feloney but to many in the public they feel it was not a real crime because there was no Gun. Toyota makes a mistake or have a problem they get a pass because they are not precived as evil.

GM is like the old Bank robber and has to go out and show and prove how they is no longer the thug and is prepared to give back. GM took a lot of money form people with poor quality cars over the years and robbed a lot of bank accounts when the owners need to repair them. That is trust that is going to be hard to earned.

GM did the right thing and admitted they made crap but they need to follow through with this and market the hell out of what they are doing right today.

Since GM is on Goverment welfare. they should show just what and where the money is going. This will show it is not wasted and should start to earn some trust. Also it will keep GM honest. The big catch phrase today seems to be Transparent. I know it was a bunch of election crap but for GM to become transparent to the public is a way to shead that old stoggy evil corperate image.

Apple makes themselves look as if they are your partner. The truth is Steve Jobs is just as hard nose as any CEO. But he makes sure they protect their name and image. GM forgot to protect their image and they have to earn it back.

GM needs to offer Quality, Value and Image in their vehicles then market the hell out of each model. If you can't aford to maket all your models properly then you have too many models.

As well as the Accord sells Honda still markets it heavily. They take nothing for granted.

Excellent Post!

[turbo200]

with regards to cleaning up a reputation.....GM must learn that thier culture seeped into thier cars and thier lackadaisical attitude- towards consumers and quality achievements and advanced design- all caught the attention of drivers. it won't be after renewing one good product in one sector that GM will suddenly see a turnaround with half the buying public [those that buy cars]. GM's marketing team for many years viewed consumers as unsophisticated dolts--dolts clueless as to thier needs and wants, unwavering in thier 'don't fix something that ain't broke' buying habits, and unnoticing of huge strides being made in vehicle design around the corner.

much of the credit for GM's renewed understanding and focus on product design, I beleive, can be given to blogs like this. people who've come on and proven to GM they are capable of independent thought, that they aren't just going to fall into line with the old GM distribution system. that just because GM are huge and and have a huge legacy does not mean they are infallible. what a long and winding road it's been for the talking heads within GM to let this sink through. they are not too big, and most of the country does not care anymore. we've [i've] been pointing out to them for soooo long what thier problems were, and now they have the gall to come to us when the root of thier problem exposes itself. quick question, had GM managed a product turnaround fifteen years ago, with cars consistently placing on the 10 best list, winning critical acclaim, like the malibu of today, cars that ranked near the highest in comparison tests, and design that was being heralded and in demand, do you think we'd be sitting where we are today with GM using the government's help to get by?

in urban centers, due to mass penetration and population, imports have had a stand up chance. word of mouth. it's as simple as that. the rolling advertisement. but most importantly, word of mouth, legacy spreading. 'this is a great car, great handling, great steering, gas efficient engine, and it's roomy on the inside and nice looking.' 'plus on top of all this it's given me not half of the problems the last [insert American car] did.' imports released cars that consistently and thoroughly topped themselves. GM re-released versions of the same platform with less advanced tech [intrigue to Impala/Gran Prix/Lacrosse anyone????? aurora to Lucerne 3800 still in production!!!!]. GM focused on internal competition and renewing cars with what it viewed was enough improvement, then spent billions on advertising, where it felt it would always win. 'distribution and the company line, those zombies will pick up on it.' they spend billions on advertising. literally, how much capital are they still burning through trying to convince us the Cobalt XFE is truly as desirable or moreso to own than the competition [no offense to any cobalt owners as i still think they are decent little cars].

i'm sorry that this is coming across all a bit negative.....but the sad part is this is nothing but the truth. like much of corporate America, in thier quest for domination, they dumb everything down for the dumb consumer. they underestimated us. and now that's come to bite them in the butt. we've grown too sophisticated for thier common design.

Edited December 30, 2008 by turbo200

[Drew Dowdell]

It is easy for someone to get a bad reputation but it is so much harder to regain the respect.

GM is like a ex convict. He may have served his time and may be a really good guy now with a freshly earned PHD. But the neighbors still wisper he is the guy that held up the bank 20 years ago.

Toyota is like Martha Stewart. Yes she may have been convicted of a feloney but to many in the public they feel it was not a real crime because there was no Gun. Toyota makes a mistake or have a problem they get a pass because they are not precived as evil.

GM is like the old Bank robber and has to go out and show and prove how they is no longer the thug and is prepared to give back. GM took a lot of money form people with poor quality cars over the years and robbed a lot of bank accounts when the owners need to repair them. That is trust that is going to be hard to earned.

GM did the right thing and admitted they made crap but they need to follow through with this and market the hell out of what they are doing right today.

Since GM is on Goverment welfare. they should show just what and where the money is going. This will show it is not wasted and should start to earn some trust. Also it will keep GM honest. The big catch phrase today seems to be Transparent. I know it was a bunch of election crap but for GM to become transparent to the public is a way to shead that old stoggy evil corperate image.

Apple makes themselves look as if they are your partner. The truth is Steve Jobs is just as hard nose as any CEO. But he makes sure they protect their name and image. GM forgot to protect their image and they have to earn it back.

GM needs to offer Quality, Value and Image in their vehicles then market the hell out of each model. If you can't afford to maket all your models properly then you have too many models.

As well as the Accord sells Honda still markets it heavily. They take nothing for granted.

Audi

Nissan

VW

Hyundai

Even Kia

All back from the dead and all except Audi make unremarkable and certainly not the most reliable cars.

[A Horse With No Name]

The thing that amazes me is that of the list Oldsmoboi gave (Nissan, VW, Audi, Hyundai, Kia) that VW continues despite poor ad/promo work.

Hyundai does a very good job promoting their product, and Nissan seems to have a really good feel for what people want.

Honestly, I wonder if Ford and Nissan aren't the best positioned for growth right now. Ford seems to "get it" the most of the domestics, and Nissan is building more exciting stuff/more interesting stuff than the other Asian carmakers.

Sixty-Six

[frogger]

I think Hyundai has rebounded relatively well from their 80's and 90's issues because back then they weren't selling nearly as many cars. Less people were affected personally by owning a bad one.

Edited December 31, 2008 by frogger

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

The thing that amazes me is that of the list Oldsmoboi gave (Nissan, VW, Audi, Hyundai, Kia) that VW continues despite poor ad/promo work.

Hyundai does a very good job promoting their product, and Nissan seems to have a really good feel for what people want.

Honestly, I wonder if Ford and Nissan aren't the best positioned for growth right now. Ford seems to "get it" the most of the domestics, and Nissan is building more exciting stuff/more interesting stuff than the other Asian carmakers.

Sixty-Six

Ya know...

I had a very scary experience a couple of weeks ago. When we totaled the Cavalier, we (finally) got a rental. The rental was a 2008 Nissan Sentra.

Now, I've never been a "small car enthusiast" even though I drive one everyday. I love my Focus (daily driver) and that's about it on the small car front aside from the occasional performance entry (Cobalt SS, MazdaSPEED 3, etc.)

However, I could definitely see myself (In a parallel life where I wasn't a domestic communist) buying and really enjoying a Nissan Sentra. I was very impressed by the comfort level and usability of that little car. For people that want something with some pep a little style and functionality, it's hard to go wrong with that car.

That just made me more bitter about the automakers. I want SO badly for GM & Co. to succeed, but c'mon man! Where is our 'Nissan Sentra'?!?! Is it really that hard to design a GREAT class leading product?

Edited December 31, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[Robert Hall]

Ya know...

That just made me more bitter about the automakers. I want SO badly for GM & Co. to succeed, but c'mon man! Where is our 'Nissan Sentra'?!?! Is it really that hard to design a GREAT class leading product?

Maybe the Cruze will be GM's world class FWD compact. Their Last Great Hope.

[Z-06]

Maybe the Cruze will be GM's world class FWD compact. Their Last Great Hope.

Well DII Astra is not too far behind, it will be a good KO 1-2 punch globally.

[hyperv6]

Audi

Nissan

VW

Hyundai

Even Kia

All back from the dead and all except Audi make unremarkable and certainly not the most reliable cars.

A couple of details here.

#1 they are not the dreaded Evil Corperation GM. Yes they made bad cars but their coperations in this country were never labled as evil in the press like GM has been.

#2 They are not American companies. People in this country tend to trust 4n companies more for some reason and are more forgiving of them.

#3 Finally they all have done some great marketing..

Audi has built a good image.

Nissan was coming back but has stagnated of late.

VW is still having problems but they are making good looking cars and have great advertising [i do hate the talking Beetle as much as the Gecko]

Hyundia has stepped up quality and priced the cars to were even Honda and Toyota fear. All with the help form a past leader from Buick.

Kia its been Price Price Price. They are not that grat of a car but better than they were. The bottom line is they are cheap and now some what relaiable.

They all have done what GM needs to do but GM needs to do it on a much larger scale.

[gmcbob]

A couple of details here.

#1 they are not the dreaded Evil Corperation GM. Yes they made bad cars but their coperations in this country were never labled as evil in the press like GM has been.

#2 They are not American companies. People in this country tend to trust 4n companies more for some reason and are more forgiving of them.

#3 Finally they all have done some great marketing..

Audi has built a good image.

Nissan was coming back but has stagnated of late.

VW is still having problems but they are making good looking cars and have great advertising [i do hate the talking Beetle as much as the Gecko]

Hyundia has stepped up quality and priced the cars to were even Honda and Toyota fear. All with the help form a past leader from Buick.

Kia its been Price Price Price. They are not that grat of a car but better than they were. The bottom line is they are cheap and now some what relaiable.

They all have done what GM needs to do but GM needs to do it on a much larger scale.

I think you're right on this - the one thing that all of those companies and brands have that GM doesn't is the fact they aren't GM. GM has a really bad reputation to the 80% of the car buying public that doesn't buy their cars. Toyota buyers generally like Nissans and Hondas, and vice versa. They may even like Fords and Mazdas (in some cases) too. But people who choose to not drive GM do it because they instantly think "junk", or "gas guzzler" or "not innovative" or just fill in the blank with the most negative image possible - GM has a real negative image outside of us die hard weirdos. It's really kind of interesting, but that's the impression I get - and I think I'm right on the money. I still think it's going to be quite challenging for GM to win back customers as fast as they lost them.

GM had yearly (car) market share loss because of their growing negative reputation. GM management should have started asking themselves why back in the late 90s - when they started totally losing their ass in the car market while pumping out Tahoes like Keebler cookies.

Edited December 31, 2008 by gmcbob

[regfootball]

Ya know...

I had a very scary experience a couple of weeks ago. When we totaled the Cavalier, we (finally) got a rental. The rental was a 2008 Nissan Sentra.

Now, I've never been a "small car enthusiast" even though I drive one everyday. I love my Focus (daily driver) and that's about it on the small car front aside from the occasional performance entry (Cobalt SS, MazdaSPEED 3, etc.)

However, I could definitely see myself (In a parallel life where I wasn't a domestic communist) buying and really enjoying a Nissan Sentra. I was very impressed by the comfort level and usability of that little car. For people that want something with some pep a little style and functionality, it's hard to go wrong with that car.

That just made me more bitter about the automakers. I want SO badly for GM & Co. to succeed, but c'mon man! Where is our 'Nissan Sentra'?!?! Is it really that hard to design a GREAT class leading product?

the current sentra really is cheap inside. i can't vouch for how it drives but i sure hope its not like the versa, which is a tin can. have you tried an astra xr yet????

Edited December 31, 2008 by regfootball

[MyerShift]

Of course! GM dominating the urban market really is the best way to be successful in the long run! High quality, stylish and fun small cars that are beyond what any other can offer. Oh! I hope that day comes soon!

It makes so much sense, it's one of those things hiding in front of you all along.

the current sentra really is cheap inside. i can't vouch for how it drives but i sure hope its not like the versa, which is a tin can. have you tried an astra xr yet????

I personally felt that the Sentra SE-R Spec V I sat in (minus those goddawful red seat belts) felt nice and of high quality overall. It seems solid and comfortable. It's better than the NA Focus, Cobalt, and of course the Caliber.

The Astra has, in my opinion, the best, the most solid and high quality interior of the small cars. It felt and looked better in many ways even opposed the the interior in my MK V Golf although the next Golf's interior promises to be better because VW cheaped out a bit on the V's.

For the Golf VI, I've heard they made it more profitable to build by simplifying production over the V. Also, I do believe I read somewhere that the way the doors on the Golf V's were made added something like four hours to building the car. I'm not for sure, so bear with me.

Darn Phaeton project starving their mainlines of development money I suppose, and not making the overall interior quality to be less special than the previous MK IV interior's styling and quality was the best way to get some extra money for that daft but gorgeous German luxury sedan that I am personally a fan of.

Edited December 31, 2008 by MyerShift

[daves87rs]

I think you're right on this - the one thing that all of those companies and brands have that GM doesn't is the fact they aren't GM. GM has a really bad reputation to the 80% of the car buying public that doesn't buy their cars. Toyota buyers generally like Nissans and Hondas, and vice versa. They may even like Fords and Mazdas (in some cases) too. But people who choose to not drive GM do it because they instantly think "junk", or "gas guzzler" or "not innovative" or just fill in the blank with the most negative image possible - GM has a real negative image outside of us die hard weirdos. It's really kind of interesting, but that's the impression I get - and I think I'm right on the money. I still think it's going to be quite challenging for GM to win back customers as fast as they lost them.

GM had yearly (car) market share loss because of their growing negative reputation. GM management should have started asking themselves why back in the late 90s - when they started totally losing their ass in the car market while pumping out Tahoes like Keebler cookies.

[regfootball]

Of course! GM dominating the urban market really is the best way to be successful in the long run! High quality, stylish and fun small cars that are beyond what any other can offer. Oh! I hope that day comes soon!

It makes so much sense, it's one of those things hiding in front of you all along.

I personally felt that the Sentra SE-R Spec V I sat in (minus those goddawful red seat belts) felt nice and of high quality overall. It seems solid and comfortable. It's better than the NA Focus, Cobalt, and of course the Caliber.

The Astra has, in my opinion, the best, the most solid and high quality interior of the small cars. It felt and looked better in many ways even opposed the the interior in my MK V Golf although the next Golf's interior promises to be better because VW cheaped out a bit on the V's.

For the Golf VI, I've heard they made it more profitable to build by simplifying production over the V. Also, I do believe I read somewhere that the way the doors on the Golf V's were made added something like four hours to building the car. I'm not for sure, so bear with me.

Darn Phaeton project starving their mainlines of development money I suppose, and not making the overall interior quality to be less special than the previous MK IV interior's styling and quality was the best way to get some extra money for that daft but gorgeous German luxury sedan that I am personally a fan of.

honestly i never once had any interest in the Astra, however, in the showroom looking at outlooks and auras and vues, i was drawn to the astra as a compact, as i had recently rented a focus and had some interest in the current Jetta and Rabbit.

in fact on the same day i drove my first jetta and astra side by side. i ended up liking them both, but for very different reasons. i recall thinking the jetta was very taut inside, but stark and cold. The jetta had more power and better shifter, however, i much preferred the lightness of the astra's steering and overall feel and the ride was not as choppy to me. what started to endear me was the interior. Just the subtlety of it, and the scale and design themes. It was teutonic but not cold. the SMELL of the interior (only German bred cars can smell like this) and the quality of the plastics and leather and the look of the gauges compared to the asian cars. the feel of the seat, i ENJOYED driving it, even though it is no speed demon. the steering felt like an extension of your arms on the sweet steering wheel and the brakes were very good for a basic car. everything was very tactile and such. passing power at higer mph is actually pretty good because of the gearing.

i can't really bust on the sentra, not having driven it, but i have sat in it and it sort of has that nissan weirdness to it. i figure if its at all like the versa, i won't like it.

honestly i think the cobalt is a pretty ok car and i would love to try an SS. the impreza i did not like. the sx4 is a good car. i won't set foot in a civic. the mazda3 like all mazdas underwhelms me, mazdas are really overhyped. who even needs to try a corolla. the recent focus of course i drove an 08 focus for two weeks in 2008 and its a good commuter car with nice convenience and that but you can tell really how i think the astra is way beyond the focus, and that's hard to say from a ford fan and someone who would love to have another car with the convenience of sync.

i can't wait to see when GM brings the version of the next astra here and what badge it has. i bet that car will be pretty close to the holy grail of small cars. I hope it meshes the German qualities of the VW's and current Opel products, and the powertrains of the better ecotecs and such.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I agree that the Sentra was cheap feeling on the interior front; that is one downfall. But the interior is still more intertesting to look at than the Astra.

[CARBIZ]

A couple of details here.

#1 they are not the dreaded Evil Corperation GM. Yes they made bad cars but their coperations in this country were never labled as evil in the press like GM has been.

#2 They are not American companies. People in this country tend to trust 4n companies more for some reason and are more forgiving of them.

#3 Finally they all have done some great marketing..

Audi has built a good image.

Nissan was coming back but has stagnated of late.

VW is still having problems but they are making good looking cars and have great advertising [i do hate the talking Beetle as much as the Gecko]

Hyundia has stepped up quality and priced the cars to were even Honda and Toyota fear. All with the help form a past leader from Buick.

Kia its been Price Price Price. They are not that grat of a car but better than they were. The bottom line is they are cheap and now some what relaiable.

They all have done what GM needs to do but GM needs to do it on a much larger scale.

Good points, but putting comparing Audi to GM is not realistic: Audi doesn't make $15k cars. Nobody denies the Cavalier was cheap in the negative sense. Reliable? Yes. Rugged? Yes. Good looking? Subjective. Exuded quality? Flat out no. Audi has done a very good job on the last two points.

Kia builds junk and crap, but they never pretended otherwise. You takes your chances with their products, but they advertise them cheap - and who reads the fine print on the warranties anyway?

Ditto for Hyundai, although at least with them (and let's not forget they are one and the same company as Kia now) their vehicles look nicer than Kia's.

VW, I cannot explain. Perhaps the hippies that bought them 30 years ago are still high, I don't know. Charitably, they've built quirky cars in the past, their reliability has been spotty for decades - about the only thing I can say they've done well is that 'appearance' of quality. That seems to be what the car mags live and die for: if a writer can fit his tiny weener in the seems of the door he goes ballistic. VW has always understood that.

My experience with the, ahem, girls I know is that they wouldn't know a piston from a dildo, so they will buy whatever they think is 'cool:' the Mini, the M5, Subaru (for the men), etc. They don't give a damn if the car starts, as long as it looks cool on their way to the wine bar.

[CARBIZ]

I think Hyundai has rebounded relatively well from their 80's and 90's issues because back then they weren't selling nearly as many cars. Less people were affected personally by owning a bad one.

I've been saying that for years. The same can be applied to Honda and Toyota as well. GM had the potential to piss off 5 million people a year in the '80s, while Honda only 900k or so. Compound those perceived injustices over a decade and you have an avalanche of frustrated consumers, deserved or not.

[Drew Dowdell]

I've been saying that for years. The same can be applied to Honda and Toyota as well. GM had the potential to piss off 5 million people a year in the '80s, while Honda only 900k or so. Compound those perceived injustices over a decade and you have an avalanche of frustrated consumers, deserved or not.

It seems though that people can forgive VW, Hyundai, and Kia. You don't see the venom directed at them that you see directed at VW. A VW breaks down and aw shucks it's just that quirky German engineering..... you see a Hyundai break down and well that's why I bought a Hyundai for the warranty.... you see a Toyota break down and well owner must not have followed the recommended service interval....but you see a Chevy break down and ZOMG!!@! GM IS TEH SUXORS!!! NEVER BUY ANY GM EVARER.!!@!!! ELvieBINTY!!

[turbo200]

you guys all sound just a bit exaggerative. both your bias and inaccurate stats/facts are showing up in your analysis of hwo the companies are perceived. stop trying to figure out something that's a bit over your heads and when we can only defer to anecdotal evidence. thier negative perception is an issue, but if they were building cars with desirable design adn quality like the malibu or astra in each of thier models it wouldn't be as big of a problem.

Edited December 31, 2008 by turbo200

[CARBIZ]

you guys all sound just a bit exaggerative. both your bias and inaccurate stats/facts are showing up in your analysis of hwo the companies are perceived. stop trying to figure out something that's a bit over your heads and when we can only defer to anecdotal evidence. thier negative perception is an issue, but if they were building cars with desirable design adn quality like the malibu or astra in each of thier models it wouldn't be as big of a problem.

Not sure what you're getting at here. The list of companies made were of companies that routinely fall in the bottom tier of quality rankings. VW and Kia are perennially at the bottom of JD Powers ratings. How is that anecdotal? You're not new here and you've seen the arguments back and forth.

How is the last generation Malibu automatically inferior to a Jetta, for example? By whose estimation? Because it wasn't available with a stick? Because it had electric steering? Because GM didn't send the writer of C&D to Milan to drive it?

How do you explain that VW and Kia have built crap for decades but still sell? More importantly, why do the mags gush over every VW built and forgive everything from Hyundai, but nitpick GM/Ford offerings to death?

I would agree that one of GM 's biggest failings has been its marketing. I've seen the horrible TV ads, foolish 'giveaways', etc., but the perception GM has in the public's eye is greatly exaggerated.

[Robert Hall]

How is the last generation Malibu automatically inferior to a Jetta, for example? By whose estimation? Because it wasn't available with a stick? Because it had electric steering? Because GM didn't send the writer of C&D to Milan to drive it?

Ugly gray plastic interior and lack of a manual availability puts the last Malibu down pretty low on any list..

[Drew Dowdell]

How is the view from up there Turbo? What do you see that we mere mortals down below cannot?

None of the companies mentioned produces desirable design and quality across the board. Does anyone?

Nissan has the goods in the Altima and Maxima. Sentra is a mixed bag. Quest, Titan, Armada, QX56, M, and Q are all flops

Toyota has the perennial Camry, Highlander, and RX. Corolla is old and sells on reputation alone. Sienna has never been great. Avalon is outsold by the Lucerne.

VW has the Rabbit. The Jetta and Passat have lost their luster, I'm not sure why they're still bothering with Touregg. Beatle is soooo 1998.

Hyundai has the Sonata and Elantra but only the Oddssey thunder stealing minivan is noteworthy.

[Drew Dowdell]

Ugly gray plastic interior and lack of a manual availability puts the last Malibu down pretty low on any list..

you can get ugly gray plastic in a jetta also.

[Robert Hall]

you can get ugly gray plastic in a jetta also.

True...though the Jetta's plastics look better...the previous gen Jetta's interior was much nicer than the previous gen Malibu, IMHO...

[Drew Dowdell]

True...though the Jetta's plastics look better...the previous gen Jetta's interior was much nicer than the previous gen Malibu, IMHO...

till the interior bits started falling off.

[CARBIZ]

Ugly gray plastic interior and lack of a manual availability puts the last Malibu down pretty low on any list..

My sister loves her '04 Maxx. Been a very reliable trooper. Lots of beige plastic bits, I suppose. I can't say that the previous Malibu was a looker on the interior, but everything worked great and was logically laid out. I had many as demos and absolutely loved the gas mileage, too!

And gosh, I suppose the few hundred Camry 4 doors actually sold as a standard in North America would make the Malibu equally desireable? We're really talking about a small percentage of enthusiasts versus the millions in tooling to make an engine/drivetrain compatible with a stick shift. I would hope that in the future as GM merges their international platforms more, they could accomodate people who want standard shift by spreading the costs over 5 continents.

Electrics are going to make the stick shift go the way of the dinosaur, my friends. Computer governance/green requirements/fuel mileage won't tolerate sloppy human shifting. Perhaps GM was a decade ahead of the curve - again.

[hyperv6]

Not sure what you're getting at here. The list of companies made were of companies that routinely fall in the bottom tier of quality rankings. VW and Kia are perennially at the bottom of JD Powers ratings. How is that anecdotal? You're not new here and you've seen the arguments back and forth.

How is the last generation Malibu automatically inferior to a Jetta, for example? By whose estimation? Because it wasn't available with a stick? Because it had electric steering? Because GM didn't send the writer of C&D to Milan to drive it?

How do you explain that VW and Kia have built crap for decades but still sell? More importantly, why do the mags gush over every VW built and forgive everything from Hyundai, but nitpick GM/Ford offerings to death?

I would agree that one of GM 's biggest failings has been its marketing. I've seen the horrible TV ads, foolish 'giveaways', etc., but the perception GM has in the public's eye is greatly exaggerated.

I am a life long GM owner and fan. In the past it was never an issue but today people even where I work shake their head and ask why I am still loyalto GM.

Most drive Imports and if I ask them to be specific in why I should not buy GM they can only give me the general crap that is in the publc domain. I also ask have you driven a new Malibu or Turbo Ecotech or any of the other new offrings like a CTS and not can even tell me they have even sat in one.

There is a uniformed general bias against GM now and it has been growing as time goes on.

Who in 1970 would think you would get persicuted for buying GM from a Mazda or VW owner?

Even my 72 year old mother has been questioned by a few [not as many] friends for buying a new Malibu she loves.

Though anyone who has been in it loves it and tells how they never know the new car was this nice.

I think it is funny when a guy at work shakes his head that I bought an HHR but he stops when I tell him it is 250 HP and has a Turbo. He is a road racer do I gave him the lap time at the Green Helll and he would not believe me till I showed him the Video of Heinrency's lap.

I then told him and showed him the stories of the Cobalt vs his prised Mazda 3 and again he could only ask when did they put a Tubo in. Then all he could do is say it will never hold up.

It is sad the lack of open minds today to GM even if they do get something right.

Oh I do work at a firm that deals with the performance after market and we make 90% of our income based on American cars. Go figure we would have some narrow minds.

Edited December 31, 2008 by hyperv6

[CARBIZ]

Here's your daily laugh: I spoke with a 70 year old retired school teacher today. She has a '98 Cavalier that is running perfectly. She was a service customer. She started yakking about all the bad news about GM/Ford and then made the declaration that her next car will be an import because she doesn't think the UAW guys deserve the pay they are getting. She said her nephew works at the St. Thomas Ford plant and his cheque was bigger than hers ( I guess this was 10 or 15 years ago) and she has a degree while he only turns a wrench.

I was simply aghast. Firstly, because here is one over-paid, pensioned out union employee slinging mud against other 'over-paid' union employees, but secondly because she feels it is perfectly reasonable to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak.

I carefully chose my words as I asked her if it were reasonable for GM to rip up their contracts with the UAW and throw the million or so pensioners out on the street. Well, at least this old bag said she wouldn't go 'that far,' but they should get a 'comeupance.' Really, I pressed, what if the government came to you and said 'we are broke (which they f'ing well are!) and, therefore, we are going to slash your gold-plated pension? Oh, they can't do that, she cried, because we are fully funded. Yeah, but how did those funds get their 20, 30 years ago? I should point out that teachers in Ontario make $65k and up - and let's not get into the 12+ weeks holidays a year they get. And don't get me started on the value of the degrees that many of the teachers hold. Full disclosure: I know far too many teachers as it is, and I despair at our future.

I would be loathe to defend the UAW, but I find it really outrageous when a supposedly educated woman starts mouthing off about something she clearly knows nothing about.

If she is any indication, then as a nation(s) and as a people, we are doomed.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Like it or not, the stigma/hatred is greater for domestics.

That's why Nissan (makers of horrible cars in the 90's -- and still A LOT of questionable cars. i.e. the Altima is basically all that saved their asses and it isn't even a great car) was able to recover so quickly. It was japanese, so it fell right into "the new big 3" that the press was so desperately trying to build and promote. therefore the sheeple were sold on the idea without a second thought.

Oh, and turbo, my education pertains DIRECTLY to this, so it isn't over my head at all.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Oh I do work at a firm that deals with the performance after market and we make 90% of our income based on American cars. Go figure we would have some narrow minds.

Yep... It's amazing ho ignorant people like that really are.

My NASCAR buddies here in Charlotte are VW and Honda fans. We had about an hour long debate at the bar about how I thought the Detroit companies should get a "bail out" and how they didn't think so.

Finally I said; "Well, you'd better hope for the sake of your job that they do get a bail out."

To which I was met with silence.

And RE: the VW's being "too complicated to be reliable" bull$h!. I agree 100%. Last week GMI posted an article by a California wack-o (Hope Croc is reading this) that stated she would never buy a domestic and that she owns a new Beetle that has quality problems because it is "over engineered in a manner to which only the Germans could take it."

Oh, and then she admitted to being impressed with the Enclave, but wouldn't buy it because it was a Buick and then admitted to owning a Jag. (Guess the dumb b***h didn't realize that until about 6 months ago, a Jaguar WAS an american car.)

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Here's your daily laugh: I spoke with a 70 year old retired school teacher today. She has a '98 Cavalier that is running perfectly. She was a service customer. She started yakking about all the bad news about GM/Ford and then made the declaration that her next car will be an import because she doesn't think the UAW guys deserve the pay they are getting. She said her nephew works at the St. Thomas Ford plant and his cheque was bigger than hers ( I guess this was 10 or 15 years ago) and she has a degree while he only turns a wrench.

Yeah...

At first, I was excited that the UAW was taking the brunt of the hatred for the big 3. But, ya know, this is american and it is the american media. So, just like the SUV boom, they'll trun it around on GM, Ford and Chrysler to somehow screw them over.

I would be loathe to defend the UAW, but I find it really outrageous when a supposedly educated woman starts mouthing off about something she clearly knows nothing about.

Welcome to the 'new west'. People seem to think they know the best for everything and they also seem to think that your business is always their problem as well.

Edited December 31, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[Robert Hall]

Yep... It's amazing ho ignorant people like that really are.

My NASCAR buddies here in Charlotte are VW and Honda fans. We had about an hour long debate at the bar about how I thought the Detroit companies should get a "bail out" and how they didn't think so.

A couple gigs back I had a manager that was a huge NASCAR fan, and her husband works for NASCAR in marketing. They drive an Accord and a Tacoma.

[turbo200]

Like it or not, the stigma/hatred is greater for domestics.

That's why Nissan (makers of horrible cars in the 90's -- and still A LOT of questionable cars. i.e. the Altima is basically all that saved their asses and it isn't even a great car) was able to recover so quickly. It was japanese, so it fell right into "the new big 3" that the press was so desperately trying to build and promote. therefore the sheeple were sold on the idea without a second thought.

Oh, and turbo, my education pertains DIRECTLY to this, so it isn't over my head at all.

this is the kind of exaggeration that I'm referring to that clouds the judgement of people who are reading this. Is it common knowledge that Nissan made 'horrible' cars in the '90's, and how definable is 'horrible'? People here have certainly implied that GM models have been 'terrible', and loosely left the word and implication without definition understanding that people knew what it meant. But the explanation for why GM has been a failure time and time again in the design of cars has been literally soaked dry from the wet towel of C&G discourse. in short, we've gone over all the reasons why GM has been bad at designing good upto date and modern cars so much that we've beaten the dead horse to a pulp. it's only a few people here who still stick by this line of always giving GM the upper hand. My God, I think GMI was less progressive than us when 'the awakening' began years ago, and now it seems like every member there has gotten the wisdom even as I don't frequent there very much.

How horrible were Nissan cars if they were still living up to the perception that Japanese cars had huge longevity advantages over American cars. That was something accepted as common wisdom, something I heard from multiple encounters with normal people, something written over the pages of editorial items in papers and magazines..........The idea that Nissan made horrible cars comes from a few lines you've read throughout the years written in editorial pieces about Nissan's lackluster exterior design, but it in no way was referring to components, powertrains, or durability of Nissan. This idea that Nissan was horrible was not generally a concept that had become accepted by the American public. they were just an also-ran, running to derivative, and not offering the right sized model or right quality model in the two most important market segments, compact and midsize, Sentra and Altima, relative to the competition, H and T. The perception you have that Nissan was horrible, also is fed by your reviewing the status of the company, the fact that many articles were written about Nissan's almost-demise in the 90's, again due to lackluster designs, not cars that suffered in quality relative to the competition.

so this is over your head, because you and some others have a propensity for twisting facts and dis-acknowledging history in order to better serve your points.