Last post on Jan 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Jaguar XJ-Series, Lexus LS 460, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Volkswagen Phaeton, Maserati Quattroporte, Mercedes-Benz CL-Class, Sedan
Let's try to define this forum as being limited to luxury performance vehicles where the mainstream version in a typical configuration has an MSRP of at least $60k.
A luxury vehicle with a base price of $59k qualifies because it would typically be bought with some additional equipment, bringing the MSRP over $60k.
Vehicles like the E, 5, A6, M, or GS, even if available in certain versions over $60k, don't qualify because they are cars from companies that have higher end cars in their lineups.
#13938 of 24726 Re: Wild Strawberries [designman]
Feb 07, 2006 (7:05 am)
Believe me, I got the gist of your post.
Your position is that vehicles like Porsches and BMWs are bought because of their great performance and that folks who hate the styling will buy these cars anyway to get the rest.
The 911 does have Beetle influences, but I still find it breathtaking to look at.
I believe that styling plays a part in the consumer's head when a final choice must be made-who knows how much-one can't quantify human behavior.
When I saw photos of the new 5 series in 2004, I was disappointed because that car was to be my next goal.
However, when I saw it at the dealer, particularly in silver, I found it to be quite striking.
If I believed it to be ugly, I would have gone with the 330i and pocketed the difference.
#13939 of 24726 Re: from Car Design News [tagman]
Feb 07, 2006 (7:48 am)
Thank you for verifying my memory on this. I remembered something about the "dynamic seats" in the S-Class or Maybach because it caught my attention when I was reading about them. So it's the S-Class that has them!
As I understand them, they almost instantly adjust automatically in response to hard cornering to help give the driver the added lateral support that is needed under those conditions.
It's ingenious. I've never heard of them being used before, and I think that this is evidence of new technology and innovation put to good use at Mercedes Benz.
Those seats are also available in the E-class. (I drove an E500 with them.)
BMW has them in their new M5, as well.
#13940 of 24726 Re: Merc [callmedrfill]
Feb 07, 2006 (7:51 am)
Well you'll excuse me for disagreeing that Lexus is best at marketing. Mercedes gets the best marketing award easily for keeping things going through the toughest of times over the last 4+ years considering all the bad press they've had to endure. Lexus is good at marketing, but the best, not by a long shot. BMW knows a thing or two about marketing also. They're all very good at it, Lexus doesn't hold any magical advantage.
More than a few cars don't photograph well. You say its a bad pic, I say the main point of the print ad is the writing. It isn't one of those fufu pics in which the car is set to some stunning background.
Besides, its not like Lexus cars look good in any of their ads.
#13941 of 24726 Re: to ljflx - good opinions and $$$ [merc1]
Feb 07, 2006 (9:10 am)
Interesting read. I think one of the biggest mistakes they made was with the interior of the new XJ. It's so similar to the old interior, it looks like a midcycle refresh, not a total redesign. The C-class changed more on the inside for '05 than the XJ did.
#13942 of 24726 Re: Great find, Merc! [idele]
Feb 07, 2006 (10:37 am)
... An arrogant attitude towards competitors is a mistake ...
Couldn't have said it better myself. An arrogant attitude is why the U.S. manufacturers "fell from grace" to begin with. Besides, the Camry is arguably a better built car than the Accord. If Toyota subscribed to lexusguy's philosophy, why would they bother taking apart an Accord; especially when they sell more Camries than Honda sells Accords? (Ford Taurus, anyone?)
Coming from a former military man, history has proven time and time again that the most devastating mistake one can make is to underestimate his/her adversary. It doesn't matter how superior you think you are to them.
#13943 of 24726 Re: to ljflx - good opinions and $$$ [merc1]
Feb 07, 2006 (11:28 am)
Yes, very good in-depth look at Jaguar. Thanks.
BTW, I like what I see so far regarding the new Mercedes ads. I think the Mercedes marque will be perceptually elevated. I am not convinced that there is adequate motivational content, however. But, often those types of ads run seperately. We'll watch them for a while and see how they evolve.
When it gets down to it, however, the BEST thing for Mercedes, IMO, is to have improved products, and I absolutely think Mercedes is addressing that, not perfectly, but deliberately and successfully.
And . . . it would be an endless argument to decide if Lexus has done the "best" at marketing, as some Lexus fans would like to "own" and "claim".
My take on that would be that their ads have been MORE than adequate, very effective, and Lexus has clearly received their ad-dollar's worth. But "best"? Hmmm.
#13944 of 24726 Re: Great find, Merc! [tayl0rd]
Feb 07, 2006 (12:55 pm)
"If Toyota subscribed to lexusguy's philosophy, why would they bother taking apart an Accord; especially when they sell more Camries than Honda sells Accords?"
Simple, because the Accord, not the Camry, has been on the ten best list almost 20 times, and is pretty much the benchmark for the family sedan class.
Feb 07, 2006 (2:25 pm)
Even I am thinking to add an Accord hybrid to my stable.
Of course, I haven't even driven one yet. Have to see.
Should be quite a scene when I pull up to the Honda dealership in my 545.
Swarm! Swarm! Swarm!
Feb 07, 2006 (4:12 pm)
The main point of print advertising is most certainly not about the writing.
Not all the time (depends on the purpose of the advertisement; info-ad, support ad, image builder, public service/awareness... yadda yadda yadda), but in the car biz I would have to say that they are image pieces. The print is there just to back up the image. And, in an image piece, you want the ad to evoke emotion; you don't get that unless you are writing a romance novel....
Eyes on the car everyone! Oh, and what's that, it goes in 5 seconds? Wow!
Feb 07, 2006 (5:36 pm)
I like you, Merc. You make me laugh!
If Matrix were here, he'd laugh too.
Take the gloves off and start swingin'!
Alright, let's see if you'll follow this line of questioning:
1. Was that a good picture of a vehicle for a national print ad campaign?
2. I omitted BMW for three very good reasons. One, their ads are consistent to their slogan and mantra, which has NEVER changed. Advertising for a company that never changes, nor has to change, is not particularly difficult. Second, I'm hard pressed to EVER remember a BMW ad, print or otherwise. And third, most of BMW's SUCCESSFUL advertising is through word of mouth, relative to the car's dynamics, and uniqueness compared to the competition in this regard.
So how good is BMW at advertising again?
3. Lexus was NOTHING 15 years ago. I had as a better chance of taking over America (and I don't think the world's ready for me ).
They were #1 after 10 short years; unprecedented! People still talk about, reference their ORIGINAL, 1989 ads today, at the 2006 NAIAS, they tied in their legendary champaign glass ad into an entire motif encompassing the Lexus LS display, to the delight of all in attendance.
The fact that, off the top of my head, I can remember 3 ads, by Lexus, that are now 10, 15, 17 years old, and I wasn't even in the car market?!? I was a snot-nosed punk teenager! I was mackin' this sweet 23 year-old, but I had trouble getting an MTA bus (Still do!)!
Mercedes has made a great ad now and then, but Lexus has been consistently strong, and memorable:
GS and Macbeth
Original LS (champaign - ball bearing, heat lamps, railroad tracks)
1993 LS (archer's bullseye, might've been the '95, but I'm pretty sure it was a mid-gen facelift for 1993)
1997 ES (Curvy road - What was that?)
2003 RX (competing engineers driving it, changing the world, again)
Mercedes definitely loses points for this last ad. Holmgren laughs at that play call. Good text, bad execution. The photo butchers the ad.
Why do you think Brooke Burke is in every stupid ad, from Gambling to Cheeseburgers (during the Super Bowl)? Because she looks great on film! A guy might spend a minute with the ad if she's all over it.
It's getting to the point where the advertiser is a footnote, but...