Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
NewsFeeder

AutoBlog: VIDEO: Four new GM commercials airing this weekend, check 'em out early

42 posts in this topic

Filed under: Marketing/Advertising, Videos, Crossover, Buick, GM, GMC

745.jpg
Click above or follow the jump to view more videos

By now we've all seen the commercial for General Motors that features the company's new chairman, Ed Whitacre, introducing its "Satisfaction Guaranteed" 60-day return program. Good stuff, but that commercial was just an opening salvo in the company's upcoming marketing assault. We've got the next four commercials for you right here, set to air late Sunday evening during The Emmys and NFL games. We particularly like the one above that compares the new GMC Terrain to the Mini Cooper S with an automatic transmission since both get 32 mpg highway (NOTE: a Cooper S with a manual achieves 34 mpg highway). Sure, it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but the stark contrast in size makes a big point. What's even more interesting than their matching highway mpg numbers is that the Mini's 23 mpg city is just 1 mpg better than the Terrain. Follow the jump to the other three new GM commercials that will air this weekend, one of which directly compares the 2010 Buick LaCrosse to a Lexus ES350.

[source: GM]

Continue reading VIDEO: Four new GM commercials airing this weekend, check 'em out early

VIDEO: Four new GM commercials airing this weekend, check 'em out early originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:56:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

di
di

autoblog?i=pYnMSXN0tGw:Doa48XaziXw:wF9xT autoblog?i=pYnMSXN0tGw:Doa48XaziXw:V_sGL
pYnMSXN0tGw

View the full article
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GMC Terrain vs. Mini is ballsy, and I really like it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll preface by saying I don't like car ads that show a parked car, so none of these I find great. The Terrain gets the same mileage as a Cooper S, which is designed for performance, I think it is better to compare to something in your own segment. They could run an ad that says the Terrain gets better mileage than a Camaro, so what, who cares.

The Buick ad shows how much they tried to copy the ES350. So if you want that kind of car, why buy a knockoff when you can buy the original.

The Chevy ad was good, showing how overrated Toyota's fuel economy is. Although the Prius gets 50 mpg city, and they left that car out.

The last GMC ad was dreadfully boring.

Memo to GM, put the cars in motion, like this:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the best GM spots in years.

Now they need to put a Honda next to some of the GM cars and ask may the best looking car win.

I could see a whole line here by using

May The Best Car Win

May The Best Looking Car Win

May The Best Performing Win

ETC.

When GM has the best what ever even dealer service rating as they have had with Buick and Cadillac call the others out on it.

The key here is it is not Bragging if you can Back It Up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The GMC Terrain vs. Mini is ballsy, and I really like it.

I like the oomparo here but on Autoblog I already see people not getting it.

GMC us not saying so much the Terrain is in the same class as the Mini as in sporty fun car to drive. They are pointing out a roomy larger crossover get as good or better mileage. The sad folks over there in some cases thing GM is trying to get people to cross shop when they are only trying to make a point.

I think they needed to explain this spot a little bit more for the stupid.

The Buick spot kills the Lexus just showing the interiors.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll preface by saying I don't like car ads that show a parked car, so none of these I find great. The Terrain gets the same mileage as a Cooper S, which is designed for performance, I think it is better to compare to something in your own segment. They could run an ad that says the Terrain gets better mileage than a Camaro, so what, who cares.

The Buick ad shows how much they tried to copy the ES350. So if you want that kind of car, why buy a knockoff when you can buy the original.

The Chevy ad was good, showing how overrated Toyota's fuel economy is. Although the Prius gets 50 mpg city, and they left that car out.

The last GMC ad was dreadfully boring.

Memo to GM, put the cars in motion, like this:

You could complain about anything, couldn't you? The POINT of the mini one was that they're not in the same segment. The *perception* is that tiny cars get the best fuel economy. This was pointing out that the Terrain has fuel economy comparable to some small cars, yet provides plenty of space. Who might this appeal to? Maybe a ton of people who are feeling pressured to downsize from their SUV to a small car for better fuel economy, but feel conflicted about losing the usability of a larger vehicle. Maybe someone who wants the best of both worlds. Maybe someone who has tried a small car but doesn't like it. The contrast is the entire point of the commercial.

The Buick ad, let's see... Buick has been around longer, so would that make it the original? The Buick looks better inside & out, so is it a knockoff? Comparing to a Lexus is trying to get it in peoples' minds that a Buick can be compared to a Lexus, and change the perception.

And the Chevy ad, you just finished complaining about comparing cars that aren't in the same segment, then you complain that they don't include the Prius? Maybe you're right, maybe they should've included the Volt & bragged about 230 again, but then you'd complain about that number and how different the cars are.

The last one was pretty boring, though. lol It was fine, but not at the same level as the other ads.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the oomparo here but on Autoblog I already see people not getting it.

GMC us not saying so much the Terrain is in the same class as the Mini as in sporty fun car to drive. They are pointing out a roomy larger crossover get as good or better mileage. The sad folks over there in some cases thing GM is trying to get people to cross shop when they are only trying to make a point.

I think they needed to explain this spot a little bit more for the stupid.

I disagree. Normal people will instantly get it, because the Mini is synonymous with fuel economy and is a recognizable nameplate. I didn't even think of 'performance' until I read the comments, and I doubt most viewers (non-enthusiasts) won't, either.

The people that don't get it are the ones that think they're so smart that they're dumb, those who will nitpick at anything, or anyone with an axe to grind.

Edited by Captainbooyah
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree. Normal people will instantly get it, because the Mini is synonymous with fuel economy and is a recognizable nameplate. I didn't even think of 'performance' until I read the comments, and I doubt most viewers (non-enthusiasts) won't, either.

The people that don't get it are the ones that think they're so smart that they're dumb, those who will nitpick at anything, or anyone with an axe to grind.

There was an Escalade Hybrid ad right before GM's bankruptcy that compared its city mpg to the previous-gen MINI Cooper S Convertible automatic (could they have been more specific?) I don't think it really worked...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There was an Escalade Hybrid ad right before GM's bankruptcy that compared its city mpg to the previous-gen MINI Cooper S Convertible automatic (could they have been more specific?) I don't think it really worked...

That's likely because the Escalade Hybrid is: a) an Escalade, and is therefore predisposed to being viewed as the poster child of Gas-Guzzlerdom for all eternity. It also had a huge V8 in it anyways which just added to the irony.

and

b) cost a ton of money.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's likely because the Escalade Hybrid is: a) an Escalade, and is therefore predisposed to being viewed as the poster child of Gas-Guzzlerdom for all eternity. It also had a huge V8 in it anyways which just added to the irony.

and

b) cost a ton of money.

Still, those comparison-type ads never work, IMO, because they're frequently manipulative. Even if they were true, most consumers won't take them seriously from the seller's mouth. We've been exposed to too many of them.

Just two seconds ago, I was on a site with a banner ad that proclaimed "SX4, mightier than MINI!" and went on about how its horsepower, warranty, and safety ratings were better. Yet the SX4 isn't catching on. Successful advertising and marketing requires the vehicle to look desirable, not just competitive with so-and-so.

Edited by pow
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the ad with the Terrain and Mini was fine. All it said was that you can get the same impressive mileage in an SUV as a Mini. It didn't try to say the Terrain was better than the Mini.

If nothing else, it should be impressive to the average Joe that a midsize crossover car attain the same MPGs as a tiny car like the Mini. They don't know that the Mini is the sport version and the Terrain is probably quite slow.

Perhaps a comparison to the RAV4 or CR-V, etc., would have been a good thing to throw in there as well, but the ad was pretty short and should get the main point across: the Terrain gets damn good fuel economy for its size.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree. Normal people will instantly get it, because the Mini is synonymous with fuel economy and is a recognizable nameplate. I didn't even think of 'performance' until I read the comments, and I doubt most viewers (non-enthusiasts) won't, either.

The people that don't get it are the ones that think they're so smart that they're dumb, those who will nitpick at anything, or anyone with an axe to grind.

I think the issue is few people have ever seen or heard of the Terrain. They see it in the spot and see it compared to a sporty coupe and have little Idea how much bigger it is.

The reason I know many are not getting it are the comments I read on an enthusiast site. If they are missing the point the non car people will also miss the point.

Most people buy a mini for performance and sporty not MPG. The good MPG is just a added extra. Just as people do not buy Miata's just for the economy.

I really wished they did the CRV, Rav 4/Escape Hybrid angle and show how much bigger this is and how much better mileage it gets. They use this in print for the Nox. Show this on the air for the Terrain.

I like the spot I just think it is over the heads of some. You have to understand many people are at a 3rd grade mentality...yes even the people with degrees.

Edited by hyperv6
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still, those comparison-type ads never work, IMO, because they're frequently manipulative. Even if they were true, most consumers won't take them seriously from the seller's mouth. We've been exposed to too many of them.

Well, the Apple vs. Microsoft ones seem to have worked pretty favorably. I think it's down to how clever the commercial is, and how well it sticks in a person's mind. Thanks to those ads, MS is being perceived as an inferior good. But I'm not in marketing anyways, so this is all I can really go on.

Just two seconds ago, I was on a site with a banner ad that proclaimed "SX4, mightier than MINI!" and went on about how its horsepower, warranty, and safety ratings were better. Yet the SX4 isn't catching on. Successful advertising and marketing requires the vehicle to look desirable, not just competitive with so-and-so.

I think the SX4 is biting out more than it can chew with an ad like that. Way too many claims in too short of a space. Plus, like you said, the vehicle doesn't necessarily look desirable or make much of an impression. The smart thing about the Terrain vs. Mini ad is that it compares two totally different vehicles, which creates more of a 'wow' impression, which hopefully will stick in people's minds.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the ad with the Terrain and Mini was fine. All it said was that you can get the same impressive mileage in an SUV as a Mini. It didn't try to say the Terrain was better than the Mini.

If nothing else, it should be impressive to the average Joe that a midsize crossover car attain the same MPGs as a tiny car like the Mini. They don't know that the Mini is the sport version and the Terrain is probably quite slow.

Perhaps a comparison to the RAV4 or CR-V, etc., would have been a good thing to throw in there as well, but the ad was pretty short and should get the main point across: the Terrain gets damn good fuel economy for its size.

That's fair and MINI opened that line by boasting of their efficiency. What's the point of the Terrain? Like all cars a people mover and you know what, if you have a family and need to haul them and God knows what else at least you won't be paying the rent at the local Citgo.

You can say any time a commercial makes a claim that it digs its own grave because there are those like Smk that are mildly retarded enough to want the pretty colors or moving objects to help get the message. That's, and I sincerely hope with all grace and glory, is not the point. it's been said "You can't please all the people something something I don't remember ....and if the few feverishly hacking away on message boards are the majority, (and I think they are) then so goes it.

Good job all around. And by the way, how is it that Toyota gets to say all those things.. It's about f@#king time they were called out.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll preface by saying I don't like car ads that show a parked car, so none of these I find great. The Terrain gets the same mileage as a Cooper S, which is designed for performance, I think it is better to compare to something in your own segment. They could run an ad that says the Terrain gets better mileage than a Camaro, so what, who cares.

The Buick ad shows how much they tried to copy the ES350. So if you want that kind of car, why buy a knockoff when you can buy the original.

The Chevy ad was good, showing how overrated Toyota's fuel economy is. Although the Prius gets 50 mpg city, and they left that car out.

The last GMC ad was dreadfully boring.

Memo to GM, put the cars in motion, like this:

WAIT A SECOND!!!!!!!!!!

WAIT

A

SECOND!!!!!!!

SMK read this. . .

"M5 is naturally aspirated and 1.2 liters smaller engine. Compare the CTS-V to the X6M turbo engine. The X6 M does 0-60 in 4.3 seconds (same as a CTS-V manual) and it is 5000+ lb SUV." - SMK

You cant have it both ways bro.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like all the ads except for one thing. The guy's voice is annoying. They need James Earl Jones or Morgan Freeman types.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Buick ad shows how much they tried to copy the ES350. So if you want that kind of car, why buy a knockoff when you can buy the original.

Because according to reviews, the knockoff does it better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not make ads that showcase the features and benefits of the vehicles. The Terrain is new, most people don't know what it is, and may think it is like that Jeep Patriot that failed miserably. GM lately has been stressing MPG's and almost nothing else in their ads, yet it isn't really working. Sales keep going down. Most people buy Toyota or Honda because they figure it will be reliable, last a long time and won't break down all the time. A lot of people had bad experiences with domestic products in the 80s and 90s, to get them back GM has to convince them that the cars they are building will last as long as a Honda or Toyota. Most people stay clear of domestics because they think the imports are better built and hold their value better, that is what they have to work to change.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tons of people also believe Domestic's are gas guzzlers, so why not work to change that perception? Gas prices are what are on the minds of families, which are the target market for the Terrain.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SMK read this. . .

"M5 is naturally aspirated and 1.2 liters smaller engine. Compare the CTS-V to the X6M turbo engine. The X6 M does 0-60 in 4.3 seconds (same as a CTS-V manual) and it is 5000+ lb SUV." - SMK

You cant have it both ways bro.

I am not comparing the X6 M to the CTS, I was comparing the engines. The X6's engine is likely what the new M5 will have. If it can pull a 5,000 lbs SUV and get 0-60 in 4.3, how fast will it be in a 4,000 lb M5? But the M5 might get a twin turbo V10 also.

The Terrain gets better mileage than a Camaro too. Does that make the Terrain a better SUV buy than an Edge or Rav4? I watched that ad and have no idea what the Terrain even costs or what features it may or may not have. Why spend 30% of your ad talking about a Mini Cooper when you are trying to sell SUVs. It it stupid, spend 100% of the time on your own products.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, remember you have to dumb it down for SMK.

Can someone whip up a version of the ad that says, "Now you can buy a well equipped mid-size SUV that gets better mileage than a Mini-Cooper without the expense of hybrid technology"?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not make ads that showcase the features and benefits of the vehicles. The Terrain is new, most people don't know what it is, and may think it is like that Jeep Patriot that failed miserably. GM lately has been stressing MPG's and almost nothing else in their ads, yet it isn't really working. Sales keep going down. Most people buy Toyota or Honda because they figure it will be reliable, last a long time and won't break down all the time. A lot of people had bad experiences with domestic products in the 80s and 90s, to get them back GM has to convince them that the cars they are building will last as long as a Honda or Toyota. Most people stay clear of domestics because they think the imports are better built and hold their value better, that is what they have to work to change.

I don't care about the automaker or the product with my observation. I'm merely looking at the marketing and the advertising concept with these commercials, and:

...sir, you really have a time grasping the obvious? Anyway, my point is that a major benefit to many people right now is having a vehicle offer the same impressive fuel economy rating on the highway as a Mini, but without the compromise of space. If that isn't a benefit, what the hell is? Your comment about whom is stressing fuel economy for no gain is a complete and utter contradiction since Toyota has been bombarding us with the same show-room setting commercial touting nothing but fuel economy again and again. You're talking straight out of your kool-aid belching arse. Your reply here jumps to conclusions and doesn't fit together. On one hand you say GM should showcase features and benefits, while on the other hand you say GM has to convince people that the cars they build will last as long as a Honda or Toyota? What does one have to do with the other?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have Ed Whitaker introducing the new cars. His GM ad seems to have gone over very well, why not have him get up there and let him say his piece.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0