GM = General Misery?

My GM car dealership called Saturday to point out (as if I didn't know) that my Cadillac has over 124,000 miles and 'is there anything we can say to convince you to purchase a new car today?' I don't think so, at least not a new Cadillac. Will Cadillac even be around when it reaches 124,000 miles? This sad state has been blamed mostly on lack of innovation, unions, poor production practices, and more. But only Al Ries (Mr. Positioning himself) has made a point of suggesting perhaps, poor brand strategy may have played a role. Here's an excerpt from his article in Ad Age 12.2.08:

It seems to me that the fundamental nature of Detroit's Japanese competition is its ability to build brands. Toyota stands for reliability, Scion for youth, Prius for hybrid, Lexus for luxury.

But what does Saturn stand for? Or Chevrolet? Or Pontiac? Or Buick? Or Cadillac?

It's not for lack of trying. In 2007, the U.S. automobile industry spent $4.6 billion on advertising. That's 3.3% of total U.S advertising spending and 5.9% of total U.S. network TV spending.

For all that money, you might think the U.S. automobile industry would have done a lot of brand building. Take Gillette, which over the years has marketed seven different brands:
Gillette blue blades
Trac II, the two-blade razor
Atra, the adjustable two-blade razor
Sensor, the shock-absorbent razor
Good News, the disposable razor
Mach3, the three-blade razor
Fusion, the five-blade razor
Gillette has an astounding 71% of the world's wet-shaving market, and multiple brands, in my opinion, are the primary reason.

The difference between Gillette and General Motors is that each of the seven Gillette brands stands for something specific and each of the eight General Motors brands does not.

Although I may be biased, he has a point. Better attention to differentiating the brands in its portfolio may have avoided some of the mess. Reis suggests a portfolio built around product differences, rather than, well rather than whatever it is that they did end up trying to differentiate. A four cylinder Cadillac simply doesn't make sense. Reis maintains that the brand portfolio has been so devalued, that GM should simply start over.


Do you agree?

Buttering Up the Competition

Interesting article today about Parkay, in light of the discussion yesterday about margarine brand management at Unilever. Their new campaign combines a return to an old brand element, the talking tub, with a rational ingredient reason to believe Parkay tastes better - It's the milk! (Marketing Daily, Nov 24, 2008)

The Parkay "talking tub" is back for the first time in six years, just in time to celebrate the 35th anniversary of its first appearance on TV. A new commercial featuring the loquacious container began airing Monday and is scheduled to run nationally on both daytime and cable television, as well as online.

In addition to its 1973 debut, the tub has previously been used in campaigns featuring Laurel and Hardy (1982), Deacon Jones (1983), William Daniels (1990-91), Crystal Bernard (1997) and Al Franken (1999).

The campaign promotes a new formulation of the ConAgra brand that includes nonfat milk to enhance creaminess and texture. The new product is the only one in the margarine/table spread category that currently includes milk. Nonfat milk was used "specifically to avoid any fat in the finished product," although the marketing is more focused on milk as an ingredient than the fact that it's nonfat milk, according to ConAgra spokesperson Jeff Mochal.

Parkay continues to play off of its longtime brand message: "The label says Parkay, the flavor says butter." The new 15-second commercial features a dairy farmer being startled by an unusual moo coming from the Parkay Talking Tub in one of the stalls of his barn. The tub tells the farmer that the new Parkay is "better." The farmer responds: "You mean 'butter,'" to which the tub responds: "Parkay." A voiceover explains that the new product contains milk "for a fresh and creamy taste."

ConAgra VP, general manager Karl Sears described the talking tub as "iconic" and "the perfect ambassador" to tout the enhanced Parkay.

The last talking tub campaign, in 2002, focused primarily on in-store promotions--which used technology that enabled the tub's voice to call out at shoppers as they passed the dairy case.

Do you think this could work for Parkay? Why or why not? Once you post, we'll see what Justin DeGraaf thinks....

Which Brands Are Most Vulnerable to Private Label Competition?

Private label brands have been gaining popularity for many years as customers have learned that the quality tradeoff can be minimal. Time magazine today ran an article, "Aldi: Grocer for the Recession". With consumers under pressure, which brands or categorie do you think are most vulnerable to inroads from private label?