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.
