Of the marketing geniuses on this board, I would like to propose a strategy for GM.
To offer one vehicle that is the best in its class at specific things.
Fastest accelerating car/truck
Fastest top speed car/truck
safest car/truck/van
pull the most truck
most payload truck
etc.

Would it work?...

 

Not really, because a lot of the above isn't true for the majority of GM models

 

I'm not convinced that would work.

I think they need to develop a common theme among all the GM brands. Kind of like Volvo has the reputation of being "Safe" , Toyota being "green" with their new Hybrids, and BMW being a driver's car. GM needs to be "something "and find some way to connect all their brands.

 

Buy why not have GM take those titles away?

"...from the company with the greenest car, the safest van, the most powerful truck..."
And then market whatever, other car, is being advertised.

 

Actually, this strategy is 180* opposite of what every car manufacturer wants to be able to market. You don't want a vehicle (car or truck) that is best at one thing but not at others.
Take trucks for example. If you have the most payload capacity, but are way down on average ride quality or safety because you have a "dump-truck-sized bed" behind the cab - you will not sell many vehicles. If you offer the best ride quality for those who want to travel a lot with horses or small campers, you will never have a vehicle that can carry the heaviest loads. Likewise, if your vehicle is made to tow 24,000 lbs (major campers, airstreams, multiple vehicles, or custom race trailers with sleeping quarters for example), then you are not going to need or want a huge, deep bed that intrudes into your trailer space and your ride quality will suffer too.

Point is, specializing only works for someone with a special need or desire, and those are few and far between when it comes to basic car buyers.

The IDEAL vehicle would be one that is "everything" you need. A vehicle that gets Aveo-style gas mileage, has Suburban-type interior space, Silverado-style towing and hauling, Monte Carlo-style interior noise and ride quality, and Corvette-style performance and handling. I have long said that people need a Pinto with an 8' dump bed, 6 doors, and rechargeable J-dam rockets on the side - it would make the perfect family car.

Personally, I despise these claim-wars that have gone on by all parties over the last few decades. I have heard "best in class" so many times it's insignificant anymore. To boot, if you look in magazines, you always see these claims and an asterisk beside them - if you read the fine print, the "class" they claim to be in is always something so miniscule, there are typically no others in it!!!
Best in class headroom*
* Class vehicle with 3.5 doors, power moonroofs, and 3 leather seats - headroom measured from drain plug behind passengers seat to outside top edge of moonroof while open 7.2" from front closure.... blah-blah-blah.

Best in class towing*
When properly equipped. Vehicles tested with 9.9L triple turbo durodiesel, Caterpillar 18 spd transmission, and towing package 171.24-D which includes electric hand brakes, hydro incabulator, flat-sided u-joints with locking differentials, and anti-gravity magnetron hitch system.

I really love it when one compares their top model to a base unit from the competition...
"Our SuperMax 2500 with the available 6.3L outpulled the competitions V8 hands-down. ** " is shown in huge bold letters 1" tall, then in print so small you can't see it without a magnifying glass reads...
"SuperMax 2500 4x4 equipeed with optional 6.3L and towing package 245A, F250 with 4.6 and automatic; GMC 2500 equipped with 5.3 and automatic transmission."

I've even seen some limit their "class" to say "...with V6 gas engines between 3.8 and 4.2 litres in size." I mean... dayum.
Making up your own little niche to rule over is OK if you can pull it off, but these ads these days are all jokes to me when it comes to "best in _____".

The only thing I pay attention to these days is crash performance.
If a company claims to be best in crash test/safety, I will read and see what's up with that, but nothing else concerns me from paper or TV ads that scream out for best in anything.

Personally, I love the ads that reach for a personal link to me. Something passionate, historical, revolutionary, or otherwise of interest to me. Patriotism. Legacy. Etc.
Ford and GM trucks should be showing 1948, 1960, 1972, 1986, and 1998 trucks in EVERY ad for a 2007 model IMO. Background shots, drive-by's, etc... something to let you know they have been around and doing this for decades - they are not new to the party. Kinda like, "Your dad drove a Chevy. His dad taught him to drive in one. You are next."
Or how about "At Ford, we developed the twin I-beam in 1964. It was cutting edge technology back then and changed the entire truck business. Today, we are still pioneering technology in safety and durability with things like the fully boxed and hydroformed frame. We are constantly striving to bring you the best truck money can buy. Always have, always will."
THOSE kind of ads moves me to action.
Claims of "best in this" or "best in that" that are followed by disclaimers, conditions, and technical limitations are marketing crap to me anymore and I blow them all off.

 

GM needs a "Shift 2.0" campaign similar to Nissan where they show sexy cars (not in silver, gold, or Pewter) doing illegal things and being driven by good looking people. Buick needs to understand that Tiger is like...so 10 years ago

And a revival of brand specific commercials would be great.

Last good one I remember was for the Monte with Nelly's "EI" for the theme
...and the Pontiac Trans Am at the stoplight
...and the young kids listening to the Camaro

I can't tell you much about GM's cars these days, but I know all about their financing offers because that seems to be 3/4 of their commercials nowadays are:

"Look at this ugly silver Buick holding up traffic on a twisty road--now fade to black screen with $0 down, $239/month, $2500 cash back --OH PLEASE GOD JUST TAKE THE DAMN CAR--we'll finance a Cheeto! ...and 1/2 screen of fine print. Visit your Northwest Buick/GMC/Cadillac/Saturn consolidated dealership because we can't sell cars--today!"

 

What GM really needs (and achieving this completely is most definitely a pipe dream) is to offer vehicles that are the best at everything compared to anything of similar price and type. Safest, greenest, most powerful, best turning radius, best fuel economy, fastest, best ride, most comfortable, roomiest, everything they can think of. If it's a pickup truck and it costs $30,000, then it should be compared on all measures against other pickup trucks and SUVs from $25,000-35,000, and GM should make their best effort to be the leader in every category for all vehicles they're measuring against.

In some cases, it's appropriate to compare against other vehicle types. As I said above, they should look at SUVs when they're working on pickups. They should look at Camry when they're working on Monte Carlo, even though one is a sporty coupe and the other is a family sedan. They should look at wagons, SUVs and minivans when they're working on crossovers.

I know GM has the know-how to be competitive in all respects related to design, performance, reliability, safety, economy, etc. Being competitive in sales is a different matter. Advertising campaigns are one way to do it, but the real, biggest thing driving sales is reputation, not advertising. When was the last time you saw an ad for Camry? Maybe I haven't been paying attention, but I don't recall ever seeing one, which at the very least says that Toyota didn't work very hard on making a good ad campaign. They built up a reputation for a solid, reliable car.

Right now, the general public has a pretty poor perception of GM reliability and quality. Introducing the new 7/100 warranty will get (and has gotten) the attention of some people, but most are going to have to see the improvements for themselves.

The future is promising, but it's going to take time. A good marketing campaign might speed it up a little, but I'm guessing it'll take 20 years before GM's poor quality/reliability reputation is forgotten.

 

 

Sounds like you liked "This is Our Country".

I'm mixed on this. They spent billions improving their truck and then just pulled heartstrings in the advertisements. Meanwhile, the other guys were saying "See our brakes are bigger".

It seems to me with a new model it would make more sense to advertise the the improvements, and leave the emotive stuff for older models. But you can't really argue with results.

 

Theoretically....

Do you respect a WWII vet because he killed 27 enemy soldiers in combat, because he downed 14 enemy aircraft, or because he cooked 1400 eggs in the mess hall every morning? Do the details of that vet's daily activity make him any less a contributor to the "effort"?

Do you respect a doctor because he knows you need a Z-pack instead of Amoxicillin, he can tell between a kidney stone and an appendicitis, or because he's the "total package" and brings it all to the table? Likely that your very own doctor is not the "best in class" at diagnosing K-stones, but I bet he could get there and get you well in his own way (and you'd bet that too or you wouldn't be going to him!). See what I mean?

Details can be great, and need to be brought out in technical arenas for sure. And I am not opposed to the technical ads - so long as they are meaningful, have some merit, and are honest and interesting. (These recent Toyota ads really **** me off bad though, because they are frought with slight of hand and intended illusions - the fact that some of their crap is being contested is why those ads are being scaled back and even removed from air.) What I meant about my personal feelings was that emotional ads that demonstrate a long-running committment capture my attention and motivate me - FAR more than a staged claim that we have the "best seating room in our class".

A line of trucks that has been around for 40 years is doing SOMETHING right, or they would not still be selling, know what I mean? That's irrefutable and sustantive fact, not press hype about some characteristic of the vehicle. Why not bank on that longevity a little?

 

OK -- forget Toyota and compare to the GMC ads that breakdown the features of the truck and actually show the interior.

I'm not saying the approach is totally wrong. Obviously brand loyalty and tradition (and even patriotism) play heavily in the pickup truck market. However, it seems odd that they put all of their eggs in the "emotive" basket, especially since it seems like GM spend most of their advertising dollars on trucks. You can't get every buyer by pulling heartstrings.

 

Quality and Value

You want these two words to echo in the consumers mind when they think of a GM vehicle. IMO, they are already heading in the right direction, and if they do it right, its something they always would have to work for, no matter how successful GM is.


For example:
When someone shops for a family sedan, it has to be reliable, comfortable, and have great value in price and mpg.

When someone shops for a truck, they want it to sustain abuse, and have great value in price and maintainence.

When someone shops of a sports car, they want it the money to goto the performance and endurance (extra coolers, big brakes, better oiling). Or at least thats where it should go, and thats what kind of vehicle GM should make.. aka Corvette.

When someone shops for a lux vehicle, they want sophistication and refinement throughout, even if it costs a bit more, as long as its "worth it"

Once you get that all nailed down, then it would be easier to boast about how fast something is, or how powerful something is.

 

While I don't think that GM's mainstream brand (Chevy) should be trying for a moonshot achievement in every category, I do think that with all of GM's other brands, the sort of thing that 77 suggested should be possible. You've Pontiac, Buick, Saab, and GMC struggling (IMO) to establish brand identify. Why not give each one a "best in class _____" to brag about?

 

Chrysler (via SRT) has the most powerful and arguable quickest vehicles in it's respective class, but it really does little for marketing. In general, they're more just vehicles for the few faithful.

The only exception is the SRT-4 which actually did attract alot of new people and created a pretty broad following.

IMHO of course.

 

Value, quality, and safety will sell more cars to Joe and Jane Q. Public than anything else IMO. That is why Toyota and Honda have slowly climbed to the top.

What "best in anything" could they boast about with their main stream sellers liek Accord and Camry? Best Legroom? Best Power? Best Mileage? Or Best Value, Best Quality, and safe vehicles...

I guess to establish a brand identity, some key goals could be helpful, but if I were simply after sales on a solid platform, I'd blow my horn about my crash worthiness, my build quality, and my overall value - citing examples for them all. You WILL get foot traffic from that.