The naysayers (me included) were wrong. The Cayenne has gone on to be the brand’s biggest seller and I think it’s fair to say that the 911 just keeps cruising along as one of the world’s premier sports cars. One of the reasons that the Cayenne did not damage the Porsche brand was that Stuttgart was incredibly clear that the Cayenne would be the “Porsche of SUVs,” in other words, a high performance SUV. Jeff Zwart (a Porsche factory driver as well as commercial director) directed, participated in and produced this Cayenne introductory video for Porsche:

Road to Cayenne

Obviously, the sole purpose of this video was to establish the Cayenne’s performance credentials and lineage.  Porsche successfully expanded volume by introducing a product true to the brand’s core values and marketed it successfully based on those values.  In fact you could argue that Porsche is doing exactly the same thing with the Panamera (introducing the “Porsche of four door sedans”).  We could debate whether the world needs another high performance sedan given Audi’s S models, BMW’s M series and Mercedes-Benz AMG models, but so far Porsche Panamera sales indicate that from a product point of view, Porsche judged the market well.

Porsche has successfully proven that it can expand volume by carefully developing line extensions that reflect the brand’s core value of performance.

So why, would they allow their latest marketing campaign to go so far afield?  What would possess them to feature the iconic 911 and the very successful  Cayman in communications designed to demonstrate that they are not “just” high performance sports cars, rather they are excellent everyday drivers:

[youtube]O-Lq3mHgNOI[/youtube]

Do the marketing folks at Porsche really think that a perception of a lack of everyday utility is holding back sales of 911s? Really?

Sounds like research run amok.

I hate to clue the marketing guys in, but the 911 and Cayman are not good everyday drivers. They’re not great in the snow, they don’t offer much room for luggage or bags of cement, nor do I envy that child that had to get in the back seat of the “school bus.” I will give them “getaway car,” after a long day at the office driving home in a Porsche would be sweet.

Seems to me that the designers and the engineers have done a very good job of defining the 911 and the Cayman. To quote an old BMW headline, the 911 and the Cayman are “The epitome of truth in packaging.”  They are not particuallry utile but they are great looking and big fun to drive.

The essence of clear positioning is knowing not only what you “are” but knowing what you “are not.”  The 911 and the Cayman “are not” good everyday drivers and they are not particularly utile.  They “are” however, high performance machines that offer a very special driving experience.

I do recognize that a lack of utility prevents people from buying 911s and Caymans, but that’s the way it should be and marketing shouldn’t be trying to change it.

In the never-ending quest for volume, they may squeeze a few more units out of the 911 and the Cayman.  The real question is, will it be worth it?

Fair enough, but let’s face it, the promise to the consumer is an interesting story about an entrepreneur and secondarily a bit of information about Cadillac.

The two available videos (at cnnmoney.com) illustrate the difficulty of finding the balance between providing the content that the consumer is promised versus the commercial message.

The first video is about a company called Wagic and I think does a pretty good job. The entrepreneurs, their business and products are interesting.  I felt as if I actually learned something about their business idea and how they succeeded.  There is only one moment where I felt the commercial interests intrude.  Toward the end, Hardwick asks shamelessly “how do you go from something like this (pointing to a Kiddalac riding toy) to something like this (pointing to a Cadillac CTS).”  That then leads one of the entrepreneurs to say, “they (Cadillac) started from scratch, that’s what we would do if we were going to make a revolutionary car.” I don’t mind the opening and closing visuals of the car that Hardwick is driving, but forcing the brand strategy into the conversation was a bit over the top and left me a little frustrated.

Unfortunately, the commercial nature is even more overt in the second episode… which is about a company called Crushpad.  Again an interesting company and business model that I enjoyed learning about.  The entrepreneur was not as comfortable on camera as the fellows from Wagic, but that’s OK.  Where things got bad was when they got in the Cadillac to ostensibly go on a tour of the Napa Valley. First we have to shamelessly consult the navigation system (so the viewer can see it) and then while driving Hardwick says, even more shamelessly, “because I don’t live in Napa, could I start a vineyard in this car?” to which our entrepreneur replies “it’s big enough, big sunroof as well.”

At that point I felt violated.  It wasn’t clever or funny. It was the product’s strategy showing in a place that I had been led to believe would be about “Daring stories from the road to success.”  Oh I get it, nudge, nudge, the road to success.

It demonstrates what a fine line it is between providing content that’s interesting and shameless efforts to insert the brand’s commercial message.  I certainly don’t mind Hardwick driving a Cadillac or using the technology available in it, if it makes sense. I wouldn’t even mind the video bookended by commercial messages.  But to thrust stupid dialogue in the middle of the video to make a product point, i.e.: ”could I start a vineyard in this car?…it’s big enough, big sunroof as well” destroys the integrity of video from a consumer’s point of view.

This is not a new issue, for years magazine publishers have talked about the importance of “church and state.”  What they mean is that the commercial interests of the magazine are separate from the editorial, otherwise there is the possibility that advertisers might influence the editorial content, compromise the integrity of the edit staff and the relationship with their readers who are ostensibly looking for objective reporting.  Even when special advertiser supported sections that look like edit are included in a magazine they are identified as “Advertising Supplements” to make sure readers are not confused and the implicit “promise” of objective edit is not broken.

I recognize that there are all sorts of grey areas in this discussion and that serving the commercial interests of an enterprise while not breaking the trust of the consumer is particularly hard as marketers are increasingly content providers.  As if that’s not difficult enough, social media is blurring the distinctions even further.

I think a good rule of thumb is to err on the side of separating the commercial message from the content.  If you are concerned that a piece of content is becoming too commercial, then it probably is, and you should back off.

Consumers understand that marketers need to sell products and accept it, but if you are a content provider “poseur” then you are implicitly breaking a promise to your audience and that’s the kiss of death.

Mercedes-Benz has been in the process of re-building their brand’s core values (see earlier post) and recently has been focusing on safety. Mercedes-Benz’ use of real people to make their case for safety results in a very compelling campaign. Here’s a recent television commercial:

[youtube]-Ts7Xlv5ZNE[/youtube]

” The accidents changed their lives, the films could change yours.” While the television commercial is nice, the real power comes if you visit the website.  There you can select from a whole range of films and hear each person’s or family’s story. Here are a couple of examples:

[youtube]jMu5digl0Xw[/youtube]

[youtube]K7EmG9egxpg[/youtube]

What joins these stories and people together is that each experienced a horrific automobile accident and believe that they would have died or been terribly injured if they had been in anything other than a Mercedes-Benz. Frankly, that’s no real surprise, as a viewer you know where the films are going, but what’s engaging are the details and the people themselves telling their story.  Ordinary people whom are sharing an experience that could happen to any of us.  The emotion is real and the stories are often riveting.

What’s artful is the way that Mercedes-Benz lets the videos tell the story of the people and they use the post video “learn more about this story” link to provide more information about the accident, the car, the technology and the engineering that enabled the happy outcome, without “selling” anything.

All in all, beautifully done. Makes both the emotional and rational case for Mercedes-Benz as the safest and best engineered vehicles without ever claiming it.

Professionally, I know there are other equally safe vehicles available, but I must admit that the stories of these real people have me thinking that perhaps my family has an edge, if the unthinkable happens, and they happen to be in a Mercedes-Benz.

Well done.

More at:  http://www.mbusa.com/impact

In USA Today’s Ad Meter, this commercial finished in the top third at 19th.  Of automotive commercials in the Super Bowl it was ranked 4th of 18.  Not a bad showing for the brand but it certainly isn’t getting talked about the way Chrysler’s “Imported from Detroit” spot or VW’s “The Force” commercial is.

I must admit, I felt a little let down.  The Super Bowl is such a huge platform and it demands that you have something important to say and that you do it in a different way. Chrysler understood this and is reaping the benefits.  Mercedes-Benz basically said that they have been building cars for 125 years and the newest ones are now available. Really?  Puff Daddy was enough to get noticed and for the car wonks among us there were lots of wonderful old MBs in the ad but that’s the best they good do with $6MM in airtime on the Super Bowl?

I’m sure the Super Bowl commercial reflects the push and pull of all the various constituents.  The agency folks want the message to be simple and easily understood, the company marketing people want it to be differentiating (125 years) and the dealers want to see product.  Check, check and check.

On balance, the commercial was solid, certainly nothing wrong with it, but it could have been so much more powerful.  Last year I came across some terrific videos from Mercedes-Benz that I think give a glimmer of what could have been:

Admittedly these are long form videos and it would be prohibitively expensive to run them on the Super Bowl as is, but with judicious editing you could easily make a :90 or a :60 that would have been much more impactful. Let’s see…125 years of company heritage and Puff Daddy… or the incredibly emotional true stories of people who believe that a Mercedes-Benz saved their lives.

The resulting commercial would not have met everyone’s requirements; you’d see only damaged product, and there are certainly other safe cars out there but the message would have been simple…Mercedes-Benzes save the lives of people like me.

Pretty powerful stuff.

See more of these “Impact” videos at Mercedes-Benz’ website.

VW followed that up with a second commercial that took the 12th spot (#2 for autos). A pretty good showing for the VW guys and their agency, Deutsch LA.

After that things began to slip pretty badly for the auto industry according to USA TODAY.  The chart below details each of the eighteen automotive spots and shows how they ranked in the automotive category and among all the ads in the Super Bowl:

So again, despite having 18 commercials in the big game this year, the auto manufacturers were mostly average at best.  Mini even tried puerile humor, which in the Super Bowl is usually a guarantee of good results, but even “Cram it in the boot” didn’t get it done.

Another year, another set of mostly average commercials, another disappointing showing in USA TODAY.

Except that one auto manufacturer demonstrated that the Super Bowl ad beauty contest truly is just that, a thin veneer that looks great but has little substance.

Chrysler demonstrated in one fell swoop why having something important to say and saying it an unconventional way trumps winning the ad contest any day:

Despite being big, emotional, engaging, and important, not to mention beautifully produced and edited, as well as the first time Eminem’s “Lose Yourself” was used in a commercial, this Chrysler commercial ranked 44th of all ads and 12th of auto ads in the Super Bowl according to USA TODAY.

A beauty contest loser, but in the real world where people buy cars, this commercial made people sit up, pay attention, think and then they started talking.  If you doubt the veracity of this statement check out the change in consideration level reported on Edmunds Auto Observer, a week after the game:

A week later, Chrysler’s consideration is still up 87%, no one else is even close.  We all knew this intuitively; chances are if you were speaking to anyone about the Super Bowl advertising, you ended up talking about Chrysler’s ad.

In some circles, concerns were raised.  Will it work? Will it sell cars? Did it show enough car?  Does “Imported from Detroit” make sense? Will only people in Detroit care?  What about Eminem?  Is he good for Chrysler’s image?

All the reasons “why not.”

Fortunately the people at Chrysler and their agency, Wieden & Kennedy had the courage to ignore all the reasons “why not.”

Their reward; 6,966,893 YouTube views (as of this moment), unimaginable news coverage, countless consumer conversations, and 87% higher consideration.

Not bad for an ad.  Exactly what you need to do if you want to take advantage  of the Super Bowl and relaunch your brand.

Audi’s terrific A3 TDI commercial led the automotive pack, ranked 6th of 65 by USAToday but all the others were also-rans. Here’s how the automotive participants ranked in last year’s advertising beauty contest:

A dismal showing by the auto industry.  Despite being one of the highest interest product categories with some often fantastic products, we seem to be unable to captivate the Super Bowl audience.

To be clear, getting highly ranked in USAToday’s poll has nothing to do with judging a TV commercial’s effectiveness, it simply is a measure of a panel of consumers’ reactions and “how much they liked each ad.”  But it is without question, ‘the game within the game.’  As a Super Bowl advertiser you spend $3MM or so for 30 seconds and the chance to get noticed and liked. It’s an opportunity to get tongues around the world wagging about your ad, your brand and maybe even your products.

But to make that happen, you have to do something amazing. Something funny, something out of the ordinary, something really worth watching and paying attention to.  Historically the automotive advertisers have been unwilling to step up to the Super Bowl plate and swing for the fences creatively (to shamelessly incorporate a baseball metaphor into a piece about a football game).

Last year Audi and its agency did a nice job using the “Green Police” to start a conversation about clean diesel technology.  Funny, interesting, different and informative got Audi into the top 10.

This year automotive participation is at it highest level in recent memory and perhaps for all time.  Audi, BMW, Chevrolet, Dodge, Jeep, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen are all participating. Some of the most creative agencies in the business are creating work for the big game: Wieden (Chrysler), Venables Bell and Partners (Audi), Goodby (Chevrolet), David & Goliath (Kia), Deutsch LA (VW).

Great brands, great products, great agencies and lots of consumer interest. Maybe this will be the year that automotive dominates the game within the game with ideas that get people talking.

If not, it won’t be a complete loss; the football game should be great.

If you happened to be watching the Rose Bowl on New Year’s Day, you may have seen Cadillac’s new campaign, its first from new agency Fallon.  The new campaign is the first for Cadillac under the aegis of Joel Ewanick who gave the business to Fallon shortly after his arrival last year.  The campaign seeks to clearly position the brand by “taking hold of red blooded luxury” according to Don Butler, VP Marketing, Cadillac.  Mr. Butler went on to define red blooded luxury as “dramatic, passionate, glamorous, daring, a whole new approach to the luxury category.”

Here’s the introductory commercial:

Strategically, I think this work is smart.  I like the idea of setting up the other Tier 1 luxury marques as “blue-blooded” (cold, aloof, distant, rational) and juxtaposing Cadillac’s “red blooded luxury” (passionate, glamorous, dramatic, daring).  What this very effectively does is take the traditional Tier 1 luxury marques’ reputation for prestige and turns it against them.  Who wants to drive the same car as that couple “celebrating” their anniversary!

I also think the execution hits on a “truth.”  The Tier 1 luxury segment competitors have lost their personality and charisma.  BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Lexus seem less exclusive, more ordinary and alike than ever before.  The luxury segment buyer is ready for something new and different.  To an extent, Audi is capitalizing on this opportunity, but they are walking a fine line because they desperately want to be a blue blood too.

Cadillac seems to be willing to thumb its nose at the traditional notion of Tier 1 luxury and not worry if it ever passes the “country club test” (What will they say at the club when I drive up in a Cadillac?).  Good for Cadillac.   There’s a whole new generation of luxury car buyers coming into the segment, who look at the current Tier 1 brands and don’t want any part of them.  That’s Cadillac’s opportunity (see my earlier post on this topic).

Here are a couple of the introductory print executions:

All in all, I like the “red blooded luxury” positioning and the campaign.  The product photography is beautiful and takes full advantage of one of the most dramatic designs in the business.  This all bodes well for the Cadillac brand.

The only risk that I see is that it will be easy to allow the “red blooded” positioning to turn into a performance story.  If it becomes only about performance then I think Cadillac will have missed the opportunity to separate itself from its Tier 1 competition.  For example, this commercial is also part of Cadillac’s new campaign:

What happened to the “passionate, glamorous, daring” part of the red blooded luxury positioning?  What I see is a nicely executed performance spot. Without the “passionate, glamorous, daring” part of the positioning, “red blooded” could easily become a performance focused idea that makes Cadillac just another high performance luxury segment entrant.

The campaign has only just launched so it will be fascinating to see where Cadillac and Fallon go from here.  I hope they succeed in telling the whole “red blooded” story because with the “passionate, glamorous, daring” piece, Cadillac could become “The New Standard of the World.”   Without it, Cadillac will be just another performance footnote in the history of a segment that has repeatedly raised the performance bar.

When General Motors was going through bankruptcy many industry observers were surprised that Buick would be one of the four brands that would be part of the new company (along with Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC). The explanation was that the Buick brand was very successful and respected in China. What was left in the “un-said” was that Buick was a basket case in the United States.

Since coming out of bankruptcy there has been lots of discussion and coverage regarding Chevrolet and Cadillac but relatively little about Buick.  Chevy represents 70% of the company’s business and certainly warrants attention.  No one was really surprised that shortly after arriving, Joel Ewanick hired Goodby, Silverstein & Partners to help re-build the Chevy brand.  Cadillac, the company’s luxury brand also seems to garner a lot of attention.  With bold designs, terrific new products, another new agency (Fallon), the folks at Cadillac believe that they are in a position to finally break into the Tier 1 portion of the luxury segment.  Marketing for Chevy and Cadillac has been stepped up and through November sales are up 18% for Chevrolet and 38% for Cadillac.  All good.  There’s also quite a bit of anticipation for the Superbowl as one or both of these brands will launch new campaigns in the big game.

While Chevrolet and Cadillac seem to grab the headlines, Buick has been quietly going about its business and making unexpected progress in the US market.  In fact, Buick is the fastest growing GM brand; it is also the fastest growing automotive brand in the United States with sales +54% year to date.

It would be easy to attribute Buick’s success entirely to product, after all the new Lacrosse and Regal are pretty darned impressive (see my earlier blog post) but that would be unfair to the marketers.  The folks responsible for marketing at Buick continue to find interesting ways to let us know our expectations of Buick are misplaced and that we should think of the brand differently.

This starts with the television advertising that clearly establishes an unexpected competitive set for Buick:

A Buick that looks like that and is competitive with the Tier 1 luxury brands is certainly unexpected, even if the executions are pretty standard fare for the industry. I also find the tag line  ”Its the new class of world class” a bit ham-fisted, but it’s on-point.  That may be the best part of this TV it’s on-point.

On the “more interesting” side of the ledger is Buick’s Moment of Truth website for the Regal.  In the spirit of creating a conversation around the Regal, Buick has created a website that sources consumers, enthusiasts, critics and anyone else who comments on the Regal and publishes what they say both good and bad.  The result is a website that is full of good information and leaves you with the sense that Buick is operating in a very transparent fashion.  I give the folks at Buick high marks (see earlier blog post) for being willing to accept the “risk” that they might be criticized in favor of presenting an objective view.

Most recently, Buick has embarked on another interesting marketing approach. Yesterday the New York Times reported that Buick has partnered with MSN to underwrite “a new Web-only travel series on MSN that promises to give an insider perspective on American cities” called “Re: Discover.”  It would be easy to dismiss this as just another product placement effort, but that would sell it short.

Re: Discover is all about really good and interesting content, not Buick.  Local people from a number of cities (LA, Chicago, New York , Miami so far and more to come) talk about their city, their favorite places to go, things to do and why they love living there.  The videos are interesting, fun to watch and I’m sure that a number of local businesses are going to find their customer base growing. Obviously, Buick is hoping that target consumers will enjoy the content and appreciate that Buick made it possible.

Who would ever have expected Buick to compare itself to the best manufacturers in the business, or create a website where critical comments are published or form a partnership with a media outlet where the car is not the star?

Of course, no one expected Buick to be the fastest growing automotive brand in the United States either.

As we watched Laura Soave, Fiat’s head of marketing, introduce the Fiat 500, I couldn’t help but lean over to a colleague and say “Fiat is taking Volkswagen’s US positioning.”  The presentation was full of “Italian passion” which might have been code for a youthful, fun, engaged approach to driving.  Here’s a video/ad:

“Fiat. Life is best when driven.”  Wow, that sounds an awful lot like “On the road of life, there are passengers and there are drivers. Drivers wanted:”

I recognize that there are differences between the two, for example VW hung its hat on German engineering to support “Drivers wanted.” We don’t know what Fiat will do from here, but it is clear that they are positioning the 500 as fun, young at heart and for those engaged in life and driving, the core elements of VW’s past positioning.

Good for Fiat.  It’s a good positioning and it’s available!

VW has forsaken a strong brand positioning in favor of “mainstreaming” their brand so they can chase volume in their quest to become the largest global manufacturer. Read my earlier post on this topic.

VW’s loss may prove to be Fiat’s gain.

Here’s the first commercial:

Already the pundits are criticizing the campaign.  Advertising Age has an article headlined “Criticism of the new Chevy theme runs deep” which does a very nice job of  chronicling the pundits’ negative opinions and I’m sure by tomorrow morning there will be more.

Much of the criticism stems from the idea that Chevy is trying to capitalize on “patriotism” or “American heritage.”  Other folks are implying that there is nothing new here, that in fact Campbell Ewald did this sort of work for Chevy for years and reference “Like a Rock” and “Heartbeat of America” as proof points.

Got it.  It’s true, the advertising is referencing the fact that the Chevy brand has long been a part of the fabric of America.  Indeed, many new babies came home in Chevrolets, many folks’ first cars were Chevys and yes, here in North Carolina I still see dogs riding in the back of Chevy pick-up trucks almost every day.  Is this “new,” no, but neither is Chevrolet.  Why is it that people, supposed experts, seem to think that Chevy needs to be re-invented, that it must be all new?

Chevrolet is an iconic American brand and what I see in this advertising is the brand trying to replace it’s stake in the ground.  It’s trying to remind us why it’s important and why so many of us care about it and feel connected to it.  It’s an effort to jump start the brand and it’s starting where it left off.

The real issue will be where they go from here with Chevrolet, because you can’t rest on your laurels or live in the past.

In the meantime, I think this campaign is a good start to re-establishing a great American brand.

Here’s the rest of the ads, I’d love to know you think.

Here’s the issue.  Tier 1 is funded by the manufacturer and is often referred to as the “brand” communications.  Tier 3 is the communications funded and executed at the local level by individual dealers.  Tier 2 is caught betwixt and between.

Funded in part by the manufacturer and in part by the local market dealer groups.  Tier 2 must serve two masters.  The manufacturer wants to be sure that the work reflects the brand and makes the doors swing whereas the dealers are understandably concerned with just making the doors swing.  Just to make it more difficult, the manufacturer’s marketing team and the dealers often have a different points-of-view about what will make the doors swing.

Tier 2 is where the brand versus retail discussion often gets very heated.   It is very tough to find a balance between the brand and retail messages.  More often than not, you end up erring toward the retail.  We all know what this formula looks like.  The TV commercials are visuals of the vehicle on the road, held together by a litany of product features in the copy and you tie it up with a bow…the deal.  The newsprint is a visual of the car, a couple of sentences covering key features, the deal and some legal disclaimers.

This leads to a sea of sameness when it comes to Tier 2 communications.

But it doesn’t have to be that way.  Tier 2 communications can represent the brand and the retail message successfully and powerfully.

That’s exactly what Ford and its agency Retail First (part of Team Detroit) have done with their campaign using Mike Rowe of “Dirtiest Jobs” fame.  Here’s one of their early commercials:

This is a solid piece of work and I think Mike Rowe does a good job, but what’s really interesting is how Ford and their agency, over-time, improved the advertising.  According to Matt Van Dyke and Dave Rivers of Ford who are responsible for this work, the early work with Mike Rowe was tightly scripted and used actors.  No surprise here, that’s what most companies and agencies, would do.

But look what happens when Retail First and Ford decide to loose the reigns on Rowe by giving him “talking points” and real consumers to interact with:

Here’s another:

Obviously, what makes this work really strong is the use of Mike Rowe, but what a difference when they let him go and just talk to people.  He’s even more genuine, likable, friendly, warm, trustworthy and credible.  Every time he makes someone smile or laugh, you like him even more.  Mike Rowe makes this work stand out and work that much harder (if you doubt Mike’s effectiveness, compare these ads to Chevy’s with Howie Long).

I think this work leaves the consumer feeling positively toward the Ford brand but it also does not shrink from the retail message.  That’s one of the terrific things about Mike Rowe; he can deliver a pretty hard-edged message about product and price without sounding like a shill.

I’m not privy to Ford’s corporate strategy but it is a big brand that covers lots of segments and customers so it needs to be a lot of things to a lot of people.  I would suspect that Ford would be very pleased if “genuine, likable, friendly, warm, trustworthy and credible” washed over their brand from Mike Rowe.  But importantly, based on recent sales, this Tier 2 advertising is also “making the doors swing.”

Finally, here’s my favorite Ford/Mike Rowe ad:

“There’s Max sittin’ in a Mustang, there’s Max sittin’ in an Accord.  What’s cooler?”

Got it.

Please let me know what you think.

This is a wonderful commercial, it’s big, emotional and engaging. Before seeing it, I was certain that I didn’t want an EV, now I’m less certain, and I know for sure that I want to help that polar bear.  I admit that this commercial makes me think about Nissan a little differently; I’m not yet convinced that the company stands for “Innovation for all” but it’s a start.

Nissan has struggled over the years to establish a brand identity for itself. Automotive marketing history buffs can probably trace the issue back to the decision to change Datsun to Nissan in 1981.  In 1986, after a transition period, the brand was officially Nissan.

Since that time Nissan has struggled in the shadow of Toyota.  While Toyota steadily built a reputation for quality and reliability and smashed sales records, Nissan labored as the number two Japanese brand.  Nissan’s brand identity has never been clear and I suspect for many people it’s an simply an alternative to the better established Toyota.

The manufacturers in the vast middle of the market struggle with brand identity partially because they offer vehicles in so many different segments for so many different target customers.  The brands in the vast middle (Toyota, Nissan, Ford, Chevrolet) find it difficult to define themselves because they must appeal so broadly. It’s tough to have a strong focused differentiating brand identity when you must appeal to everyone.

This lack of brand identity didn’t seem like a huge issue when the automobile business was selling 17 million units a year and Detroit was consistently on its heels with lousy products (relative to the Japanese) and uncompetitive pricing.  Even if Nissan didn’t get as many customers as Toyota, they got enough.

But the “new normal” sales level is in 11-13MM unit range.  Ford and Chevrolet are offering terrific products at competitive prices.  Hyundai and Kia have come out of the recession on tear, offering more terrific products, excellent pricing and growing reputations.  The fact is, it’s hard to buy a bad car in today’s market at any price point. So, if quality isn’t much of a differentiator anymore, what is?  Pricing? Potentially, but no one wants to put the incentive needle in again.

Design and styling will always be a one of the differentiators, although many would argue that in the “vast middle of the market” designs are pretty conservative because they have to appeal broadly (there’s that broad appeal problem again).  If not design and styling, what?

In the “new normal” market for vehicles; brand identity and marketing are the essential differentiators.  Creating leverage for your brand is critical in this hyper competitive marketplace.  Nissan clearly recognizes the importance of creating brand leverage, Jon Brancheau, VP Marketing,  said in Automotive News that they were:

“trying to figure out an intelligent way to consistently express the brand.  We have focused on individual models…But it hasn’t laddered up to help halo the Nissan brand. So strategically, we’re headed down a path to come up with a way to express ourselves and the Nissan brand in a consitent method.  The idea revolves around innovation…Innovation has always been what the Nissan brand is about.”

So Nissan is putting a stake in the ground, they’re going to stand for “innovation.” Here is the first commercial in the campaign, as well as a few others:

I admire Nissan for having the courage to stand for something.  If the Nissan brand can stand for “innovation” then they will have a leg up on their competition.  After all, Toyota has taken a hit from allegations of unintended acceleration and no other player in the vast middle of the market has a very well defined brand.

I’m not sure that consumers will give them credit for innovation at first, it seems like a bit of a leap. But over time, if they are consistent in their communications and show us why they are an innovative company our opinions will change.  I know that my opinion of Nissan has already shifted a bit based on that polar bear.

Nissan recognizes the potential of a strong differentiated brand and has obviously invested heavily in its new campaign, but more than anything, brand building requires time and commitment.  It will be interesting to see if they see it though.

Nothing earth shaking here, nicely produced  and very product focussed, the commercials clearly make the point that the Cruze is a car that is surprising people. “Get used to more” is a nice line and a huge improvement over “Excellence for all.”   More than anything else the tone and manner sets these executions apart from recent Chevrolet work:

These commercials certainly make the point that the Chevrolet Cruze offers a lot versus the competition and is worthy of a look but they do not offer a big “ah ha” regarding the positioning of the Chevrolet brand.

It will be interesting to see where they go from here.

We couldn’t think of any and we began to talk about what a mistake that was.  We were able to rattle off a number of instances, where great automotive brands walked away from positioning or taglines that perfectly encapsulated their brands.  Mercedes-Benz left behind “Engineered like no other car in the world.”  Volkswagen threw away “Drivers wanted.”  Chevrolet moved away from “Heartbeat of America.”  A few months ago, BMW, one of the most consistent marketers in the industry, looked as if they were moving away from “The Ultimate Driving Machine” in favor of  “Joy.”  In the case of BMW, this has been hotly denied and “TUDM” still appears at the end of the ads but it has certainly been demoted.

Why does this happen?  Why does it seem so difficult for marketers to realize that they have a real asset that needs to be protected and nourished?  A lot has to do with the constant pressure to increase volume and the find something new to “take the brand to the next level.”  The other factor is the constant churn of marketing management and agencies.  New marketing leadership needs to demonstrate that it is moving the business forward and that means doing something new.  Every agency is genetically coded to do something “new and unexpected” to burnish their reputation.  Bringing back an old idea can also be seen as a copout.

So it struck me this morning when I read an article in Advertising Age where Joel Ewanick was interviewed and he said that Fallon (Cadillac’s new agency) had developed the brand’s soon to be introduced tag-line: “The new standard of the world.”

Here’s what’s fascinating, that slogan was developed in 1908, shortly after Cadillac won the prestigious Dewar Trophy for excellence in manufacturing.  The original line was simply “Standard of the world.”  The line may never have been a “tag-line” in advertising but it was certainly part of the company’s logo and therefore used from a marketing perspective:

This makes it different from Mercedes-Benz new global campaign, which uses an idea from the company’s archives,  “The best or nothing” (Das beste oder nichts). This statement was first written by Gottlieb Daimler but until now was not used for marketing, so they haven’t brought back an old idea.

I think “The new standard of the world,” admittedly with a slight modification, may be one time where an agency and its client has had the courage to look back and rather than reinventing the wheel (pun intended), acknowledge that something done before perfectly captures the essence of their brand and be willing to re-introduce it.

Good for them.  “The new standard of the world” already positions Cadillac more clearly than it has been in decades.  It will be interesting to see where they go from here.

Please comment if you can think of any other instances where an idea has been resurrected.

Brilliant work by Scali, McCabe, Sloves took Volvo from the choice of professors in tweed jackets to the boomer choice for family hauling. The Volvo wagon was a staple in the suburbs on both coasts.  Volvo was even featured in the movie “Crazy People” where Dudley Moore played an ad man who decided that being honest was a good idea and suggested that Volvos were “Boxy but good:

While the brand became part of popular culture and owned safety, it has struggled with that one-dimensional view for years. Volvo has its loyalists who love the brand and it’s products but it also has more than its share of detractors for whom the truth of “boxy but good” was a real barrier to purchase.  The challenge has always been how do you retain and nurture the safety reputation while also convincing a broader swath of the car buying population that the brand is cool and emotionally appealing.

This challenge is not exclusive to Volvo.  Mercedes-Benz and BMW have also worked hard to get “beyond” their reputations for engineering and performance respectively.  The fact is that all these brands represent safety, engineering, performance, quality and luxury at very high levels.  That said, when you’re lucky enough to “own” a reputation for one of the category’s real drivers, then it’s an asset you need to protect.

But it’s difficult.  In Volvo’s case they have wanted to be respected for more than safety and conservative styling because they needed to appeal more broadly to sell more cars.  Over the years they have improved the styling, offered a number of performance variants, expanded beyond sedans and wagons to include crossovers and convertibles.  Yet, consumers, their perception of the brand and sales have not responded in kind.  Part of the problem is that its safety position is so strong and so rational.  Safety is critical and incredibly important to consumers but it is also not cool or sexy.

I believe that when you “own” a positioning, particularly a primary driver, you must “speak” through that lens about other topics or you risk creating dissonance with consumers.  I think this is why Volvo’s efforts to convince us that they have performance credentials have seemed to fall on deaf ears.  Performance conflicts with our expectation of safety.

Recently, Volvo has been running a campaign that I think has found an appropriate “voice” that allows the safety brand to get into more emotional areas without confusing us. The idea that there is something called a “Naughty Volvo” allows the brand to go a little beyond safety without asking us to re-jigger our entire perception of the brand.  I think we all like and accept that people can be a little “naughty” from time to time without losing their essential character.  I think the same holds true for Volvo:

While I like the “naughty” commercials, particularly the ascending levels of naughtiness, I must admit that Volvo’s recent effort to isolate Europe’s “naughtiest” city really got me thinking about the brand a bit differently:

What a nice way to communicate that there’s something unexpected about Volvo. Throw a party in multiple cities with the car at the heart of it, invite all the right people, give them an opportunity to be a little naughty and see what happens.  A good combination of young, cool, contemporary, fun, a few good natured national stereotypes, and just a bit of naughty results in Paris being crowned the “Naughtiest City” in Europe.

What’s the point?  Everybody has a naughty side.  Including Volvo.

Got it.

Chrysler’s new ad for the Jeep Grand Cherokee first appeared about a month ago and seeks to stir Americans’ pride in our heritage as builders and innovators:

Chevrolet’s new ad for Corvette appeared last week on the All-Star game and draws a parallel between our country’s space program and the 2011 Corvette:

Some critics have gone as far as saying that Chevrolet should not have aired the Corvette commercial because it was too similar to the Jeep spot.  There are certainly similarities between the executions.

Both commercials try to connect contemporary products to historically relevant American values.  Jeep draws a connection between our heritage as a “nation of builders, craftsmen, men and women for whom straight stitches and clean welds are a matter of pride” and the Jeep Grand Cherokee.  Corvette draws a parallel between the scientists, engineers and visionaries of the NASA space program and those who built the 2011 Corvette.

Beyond the connection to American values, there are a number of executional similarities; for example, the use of historical footage and a narrative voice-over using a similar tone and manner.

It really shouldn’t surprise anyone that Jeep and Corvette should happen to have developed similar commercials, after all, they are uniquely American brands.  Both iconic in their own right and products of distinctly American ingenuity.  It makes sense that these brands would try to leverage their “American-ness.” Corvette and Jeep also have well-established positionings and stand for something in Americans’ minds.  Corvette is America’s high performance sports car and Jeep is the vehicle you can go anywhere and do anything in.

What I find most interesting, isn’t that these two great American automotive brands came up with similar commercials, but that one company chose to support its long-standing brand idea, while the other walked away.

The Corvette commercial clearly articulates Corvette’s positioning: unbridled, peddle-to-the-metal, all American sports car performance. “It’s nice to know that America still builds rockets” strikes a patriotic cord, but it is in perfect lock step with Corvette’s brand essence.

On the other hand, nowhere in the Jeep commercial do we see the idea that Jeep can go anywhere or do anything.  No notion that Jeep opens up possibilities that other vehicles don’t and represents that uniquely American sense of freedom.  Jeep is now emblematic of American craftsmanship, engineering and manufacturing: “the things that make us American are the things we make.”

So while we can debate whether or not the Corvette commercial is too similar to the Jeep commercial and whether or not they should have aired it, I think a much more interesting discussion is the wisdom of sticking with or walking away from an established long-term positioning.

Time will tell, but my guess is that Chevrolet will be glad that it aired the new Corvette commercial and Jeep less so.

“The newest generation of Jeep’s iconic luxury SUV can still rock-crawl with the best of them, but it looks a whole lot nicer doing it, both inside and out.”  AutoWeek  7/5/10

The new advertising is impressive and seeks to re-invigorate some distinctly American values:

Let’s face it, as Americans we are feeling a little down.  The worst recession in generations is a big part of the problem.  Nagging unemployment, a recovery that is sputtering and concern over the looming deficit are not helping.

So I think Jeep’s strategy of appealing to values we all hold dear makes some sense. What American isn’t proud of our heritage as a “nation of builders, craftsmen, men and women for whom straight stitches and clean welds are a matter of pride.”  We built the railroads, invented the airplane, built the Empire State Building, and created the original Jeep.

The idea that “the things that make us American are the things we make” strikes an emotional cord.  A cord that makes us feel proud, and right now a little pride would help.  The Jeep Grand Cherokee is something we can all be proud of because it was “imagined, drawn, carved, stamped, hewn and forged here in America.”

Powerful stuff, beautifully executed, leaves the viewer saying “yeah, bring it on.”

Only two things bother me about this commercial.

First what happened to the Jeep brand?  Where is the go anywhere do anything in a Jeep idea?  Isn’t that an essential part of the Jeep brand? AutoWeek seems to think so, in their review of the vehicle, they reference the fact that the Grand Cherokee can “rock crawl with the best them.”  I recognize that the vast majority of SUV owners never go off-road, but knowing that you can take on anything in a Jeep seems an essential part of the brand’s promise.

The second thing that created dissonance for me was learning that the Grand Cherokee was built on the current M-Class platform from Mercedes-Benz.

“A lot of the new five-seat, two-row Grand Cherokee chassis is shared with Mercedes’ next-generation ML-Class SUV – a byproduct of development that began under the DaimlerChrysler regime.”  AOL Autos 7/11/10

It turns out that the 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee was “imagined” and “drawn” when Daimler owned Chrysler.  While I’m sure the Grand Cherokee was conceived and ultimately built in America, they chose to use a platform originally engineered in Germany.

Let’s not debate whether the advertising is factually accurate; I’m sure it follows the letter of the law.

The problem is that when you wave the flag in advertising and ask us to emotionally rally round it because this Jeep is American made, it feels a little smarmy when you learn that it’s not exactly the case.

Now that SAAB has shed the shackles of General Motors they are getting on with the business of re-building the brand.

Two weeks ago they announced (NYT’s 6/22/10) that they have hired a new head designer who has said that: “We want to return to the Saab DNA.” Just last week they announced (Media Post 6/29/10) that they were ramping up marketing investment, going back on TV and in print with a new campaign.

After years of being part of GM where the SAAB brand was neither appreciated nor nourished it appears to be getting it’s footing back. The SAAB brand has always stood for independence and a willingness to break convention.  SAAB has always had a devoted group of loyalists, some of whom played a vocal role in the brand’s most recent resurrection, PGM (Post General Motors).  Historically, SAAB has had all the foundation stones of a great automotive brand; a point-of-view, good interesting product, a genuine enthusiast group willing to proselytize, a group of loyal owners and marketing that conveyed its essential character.

As part of the GM stable of brands, SAAB’s essential character became a barrier to increased sales volumes.  ”Different” didn’t mean special or unique, it became “quirky” or “weird.”  As we all know, very few people buy “quirky” or “weird.”  So SAAB product became less distinct, not necessarily bad, just less unique.  SAAB’s marketing also became more expected, more traditional.  Consumers were subjected to campaign after campaign that hung its hat on the idea that SAAB also makes jets…as if that was ever what the car company was about.

Last week this all changed.  SAAB started marketing in earnest again asking us to “Change Perspective.”   Here’s the European version of the television commercial (the US version is not yet on YouTube):

This commercial is like a breath of fresh air,  SAAB is returning to its roots but in a cool contemporary way.  Well produced, interesting to watch, the music is great (“The time is now” by Asha Ali) and it’s on strategy: “When you have a different perspectives on things, you don’t end up with just another car, you end up with a SAAB.”  Got it.

The website is equally as engaging as you learn more about SAAB’s perspective on driving, safety, power and fuel.  All seamlessly connected and speaking from the same position:  SAAB has a different perspective, uniquely Swedish, but relevant to the world.  I can’t wait to see the print.

Whenever you do something this fresh and different in the automobile business it will be subjected to the naysayers who scream for something more conventional. Can’t you hear the cries for more sheet metal?

SAAB should ignore them.

Well done SAAB, McCann Erickson Detroit and Lowe Brindfors.

I immediately thought to myself “Good for them.”

Infiniti from the very beginning has had a difficult time establishing a brand identity and finding a way to execute it in communications. Introduced in 1989, Infiniti was Nissan’s response to the introductions of the other Japanese luxury marques, Acura and Lexus.  The original Q45 was a sporty performance alternative to the Lexus. Unfortunately, Infiniti got off to a rough start when it introduced the car and brand with the infamous “rocks and trees” campaign created by its agency Hill, Holliday, Connors, Cosmopulos.

The “rocks and trees” campaign sought to present Infiniti as the result of the unique Japanese culture and sensibility.  The campaign attempted to make its Japanese origin an asset, similar to the way that the German brands have used their ‘German-ness.’  The Infiniti ads were very different than any automotive company had ever done (they didn’t even show the car initially).  I still think the campaign deserved high marks for breaking new ground and attempting to make the fact that it was a brand from Japan important. Unfortunately, the campaign was panned by the automotive marketing community, blamed for anemic sales, resulted in the agency getting fired and ultimately resulted in a much more traditional approach to communications.

In the years that followed, Infiniti communications bounced from expected campaign to expected campaign without ever establishing a clear identity for the brand.  Infiniti was relegated to Tier II status in the US luxury market.  Tier I luxury brands like Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Lexus are considered more prestigious, have higher levels of customer loyalty, higher resale/residual values and not surprisingly have better established brand identities.

It’s been unfortunate for Infiniti because they have consistently offered well-engineered products with some very distinct designs. The product has delivered on Tier I expectations but the brand’s reputation or image did not.

I was glad to see Infiniti stand behind its current “Brush-Stroke” campaign because for the first time since “rocks and trees” I think they are beginning to make the brand something special.  Here are some recent commercials:

And a couple of print ads:

The use of the Japanese sumi-e painting style is a nice way of connecting the brand to Japanese culture and sensibilities while adding a distinctive executional element.  I don’t find the tag-line “Inspired Performance” particularly, forgive me….inspired.  But it is clear and I get the message.  The brand’s Facebook Fan page and the Twitter posts are also consistent strategically as was their NCAA basketball sponsorship of “Inspired Performances.”   Put it all together and Infiniti is a uniquely Japanese performance luxury car with the full measure of technology and features that you would expect.

With this campaign, Infiniti is re-establishing its roots in Japanese performance.  I don’t think that this campaign is going to win any advertising awards (if that happens to be how you measure success) but I do think it is on strategy for this brand, and is well executed.

More importantly, if the manufacturer and the dealers are serious and really do commit to this campaign for five years I think they have a real chance of establishing a clear Infiniti brand identity and perhaps even making it into Tier I.

That conclusion has always bothered me.  I’ve always thought that Mercedes-Benz had a its own brand of engineering, it wasn’t always “better” than anyone else’s (although often it is), but I always felt it was “different” and therefore uniquely Mercedes-Benz.  It always seemed crazy to walk away from one of the four or five true category drivers.  But in an effort to “broaden” the appeal of Mercedes-Benz, they gave themselves credit for engineering and assumed that all their customers and prospects understood the core of the brand.

After years of neglect, it seems to me that the marketers at Mercedes-Benz are returning to the brand’s authentic roots and regaining their focus on engineering. Here are two commercials that have been on-air recently:

I’m not for an instant suggesting that these are the most innovative executions in the world, but it does seem to me that they are strategically spot-on for Mercedes-Benz. These commercials speak from the position of engineering.  The E-Class commercial references that it is the “9th generation,” the product of “50,000 crash tests,” holds the “world record for longevity” and is “technologically advanced.”  While you’re watching the C-Class roll over in a crash test you hear copy asking “When you buy a car, what are you buying?” a few factoids later you hear “the deeper you look the more you see the real difference and the more you understand what it means to own a Mercedes-Benz…the engineering of Mercedes-Benz.

Keen observers may have noticed that Mercedes-Benz has been running print ads with relatively long copy full of facts and rationale that supports their engineering positioning.

I can hear some ad wonks saying that they have seen these commercials before and that there is nothing new about a long copy ad.  I would argue that these commercials do a very nice job of establishing Mercedes-Benz as a very special car company with quality engineering at its core.  It may not be new, but neither is the brand and it will work, particularly with the new generation of luxury car purchasers who don’t know Mercedes-Benz as well as their parents.

While Mercedes-Benz is getting back to their core values, they are not living in the past.  Their efforts to reach this new generation of luxury buyers through social media with the “Gen-Benz” online community and another program called “M-B Advisors” demonstrates that the Company is listening and learning.  The traditional advertising may be well, traditional, but the folks at Mercedes-Benz recognise that to truly build their brand for this new generation they need to create a dialogue and a community around the brand in a whole different way (MediaPost.com).

Mercedes-Benz is doing a very nice job re-establishing its brand’s core values and teaching a new generation of customers what their brand represents.  If they keep this up, and perhaps restore “Engineered like no other car in the world” maybe we can take this great brand off the endangered list.