When GM filed its history-making Chapter 11 bankruptcy back in June, a new plan was immediately announced that would eliminate four of the company’s eight brands, restructure with a ton of government assistance, and so on and so forth. At the time, I wrote that while the new GM was definitely a step in the right direction, the new company didn’t shed enough brands, and should have ditched GMC and Buick as well.
Not everyone agreed, and my friend and colleague Rich Truesdell at Automotive Traveler noted a conversation he had with AutoPacific’s Stephanie Brinley, who thinks the new GM is just the right size, with the right number of brands.
On the other hand, last week Advertising Age threw down on my side of the argument. According to consultant Maryann Keller, Susan Jacobs of Jacobs & Associates and AutoPacific president George Peterson, the article reaches the same basic conclusion that I did, that there are too many brands, even now, and that GM’s limited resources would be better spent on making Cadillac and Chevrolet great, rather than trying to keep GMC and Buick around for dubious reasons.
Peterson in particular points out GM’s marketing foibles, especially with regards to the Chevy Malibu and the Chevy Camaro. The Malibu hasn’t gotten much advertising love since its 2007 debut, and the Camaro has relied mostly on good press in buff books. The basic question is that if the Malibu is an anchor for the Chevy brand, why not advertise it? And with a traffic-driver like the Camaro on the floor, why not lift the whole brand with an aggressive ad campaign?
I guess it’s true: The more things change, the more they stay the same.
2 Users Responded to " AdAge Agrees, Says New GM Should Be Smaller "
Wow, you’re soooo right on Keith! What purpose does GMC serve? Why does GM need two truck brands? I know the Chevy trucks aren’t “professional grade” and all, but yeesh! And the three Buick models? Really nothing but gussied-up Chevys. Anybody venture a guess what they’re thinking keeping all four brands? I have my ideas but wanna hear what others have to say…
GM flat refuses to deal with reality. They’ve been building what they wanted, how they wanted for decades and they’re not about to stop now. Sure, they might talk a new game, but it’s just lip service.
Hanlon’s Razor suggests the reason why they would not offer a Chevy Silverado as well-equipped as a GMC Sierra or refuse to make the Malibu as luxurious as the Lacrosse is because of ignorance, not malice, but I suspect there is definitely plenty of the same old way of thinking in the halls of GM. They haven’t learned a thing and they aren’t as interested in actual change as they are in trying to tell us they’ve changed.
GM might be tired of hearing people say that they don’t build cars people want to buy, but maybe they should stop investing resources into building models which directly compete with each other! They should be focused on making better vehicles than other manufacturers. So long as they continue to compete against themselves, they’re all losers in my book.
(And until they pay back the American people, they’re all crooks, too.)
Leave A Reply Here