Ask the Car People.SM


Brand Name Equity - READ ONLY

25 messages,  Last post on Mar 26, 2008 at 8:23 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives Forum.

What is this discussion about? Car Buying

Messages Page 3 of 3

#16 of 25 Don't short change by scape2

May 24, 2007 (9:09 pm)

the Malibu yet. This looks like it may be a very nice vehicle after all. Get out on the net and read all the reviews. I have yet to read one really bad one. This is a totally new car for Chevy. My bet is image is what GM needs to overcome now for this car.

#17 of 25 Re: Brand Name Equity [msindallas] by rockylee

Oct 07, 2007 (9:20 pm)

Replying to: msindallas (May 10, 2007 1:17 pm)
Hi Rocky:
May be GM has the highest % of repeat buyers, but thats not the point. In today's free economy (in the US) if they depend on nationalism and buyer loyalty (is it loyalty if you need to pay the customer $500?) rather than quality and technology/reliability, it is difficult for their market share to go up. Sure, a honda owner will buy a toyota and toyota owner will buy a hyundai, everyone is free to find the best value for him/herself - for the automaker, it is the overall market share that counts.
 
As a customer I am not even trying to define/debate what quality is or should be. It looks like GM/Ford/DCX keep announcing - "Our cars are so bad we are ashamed of the labels we put on them, and we have built cars like that repeatedly". This mindset needs to change.
 
Hi msindallas,
 
5 month later and it appears Toyota, must be ashamed of their vehicles as well. Look at all the incentives they have been quietly offering lately.
 
-Rocky

#18 of 25 It's that sales quota vs. by iluvmysephia1

Oct 07, 2007 (9:34 pm)

equity battle all makers are facing. Even Big-Boy Toyota, huh? I love it!

#19 of 25 Re: Brand Name Equity [msindallas] by volvomax

Oct 08, 2007 (10:23 am)

Replying to: msindallas (May 09, 2007 2:20 pm)
I think the main reason is that these cars,Cavailer and Beretta for example, didn't really have any brand equity to begin with.
Toyota for example,spent years building equity into the Corolla and Camry. So, they survive.
Sometime,you build a car that isn't quite right,like the Toyota Previa,so you want to start over and give a better car a new name. Like the Toyota Sienna.
Some names are discontinued,esp in the domestics,because the eauity associated with those names isn't what the companies want.
The Buick Century for example is considered a fuddy duddy's car.
Not the image that Buick wants for its product today.

#20 of 25 Core DNA by Stever@Edmunds HOST

Mar 19, 2008 (3:50 pm)

How valuable and important are core DNA features to a brand's image and to their success?
 
This came up in the Subaru's fortunes sinking - can they turn it around? discussion today.
 
In Subaru's case, the argument is that the Boxer engine and AWD are core to Subaru's brand and Subaru should do more to exploit those virtues. Others say the market has changed and Subaru should change its marketing strategy since AWD is now widely available, and typical shoppers don't know an inline 6 from a V6, much less a Boxer.
 
What core DNA features do you associate with your favorite (or hated) car brand?

#21 of 25 Re: Core DNA [steve_] by andys120

Mar 19, 2008 (4:31 pm)

Replying to: Stever@Edmunds (Mar 19, 2008 3:50 pm)
What core DNA features do you associate with your favorite (or hated) car brand?
 
Excellent question Steve. Some brands have readily identifiable core qualities others have none. Herewith a list of some that do and some comments on whether they are living up to them:
 
Porsche excellent handling and racing technology in a small package with the motor behind the driver. Only the Cayenne has departed (and how!) from this formula and produced satisfactory sales.
 
Ferrari cutting edge performance married with racing technology and gorgeous Italianate styling.
 
Aston-Martin strong but not avant garde style with Olde English interoirs and good pewrformance and speed, limited production numbers.
 
Bentley high performance combined with Olde English Style in a practical package.
 
Rolls-Royce if you have to ask the price you can't afford it, meant to be chauffeur driven, convertibles, coupes excepted.
 
Audi high-style and good performance married to all-weather handling and the best interiors in the business.
 
Jaguarhigh style and affordable performance combined. Struggling to make the style higher and ignoring the affordable part.
 
BMW performance and Teutonic style in practical cars.
 
Mercedes-Benzprestige and over engineering with solid build for those who keep cars a long time. Daimler seems to have decided that there's no point in making a really solid luxury car in an era of fickle tastes and leased cars.
 
Subaru boxer engines and AWD, so-so detailing and gas mileage.
 
Cadillac the American Mercedes.
 
Toyota superb practical engineering and good ergonomics combined with indifferent styling.
 
Nissan, like Toyota only a little less well-built but cheaper to buy.
 
Honda like Toyota only more ergonomic, better looking and more efficient.
 
Volvo why waste money on styling when you can have the safest car on the road.
 
I could go on but I'm getting tired.

#22 of 25 Re: Core DNA [andys120] by Stever@Edmunds HOST

Mar 19, 2008 (5:38 pm)

Replying to: andys120 (Mar 19, 2008 4:31 pm)
Excellent question
 
Thanks - I forgot to give Rsholland credit for coming up with the idea and the catchy Core DNA language.
 
Great "starter" list!

#23 of 25 Re: Core DNA [andys120] by nippononly

Mar 25, 2008 (11:12 am)

Replying to: andys120 (Mar 19, 2008 4:31 pm)
I must heartily echo your thoughts on the three big Japanese brands. I have always felt there was a stronger emphasis on engineering excellence at Honda than the other two, at the expense of marketing. I applaud that, even though I think it may contribute to Hondas being more expensive than most comparable cars. When I think Toyota, I think user-friendly appliance that will probably last a long time with just a little care.
 
I used to think that the Japanese cars, especially T and H, overengineered their vehicles which was one contributor to their longevity, but I think those days have ended. Nowadays, I think most of the volume carmakers do "just enough"-engineering instead, and that today's models may not have the durability of the cars from 10 or 15 years ago. I think the only Japanese company still overengineering their cars is Subaru, and of course they are not a volume seller in the States.

#24 of 25 Re: Core DNA [steve_] by explorerx4

Mar 26, 2008 (6:35 pm)

Replying to: Stever@Edmunds (Mar 19, 2008 5:38 pm)
like that was original? 'core dna' was not dreamed up by anyone posting here.

#25 of 25 Re: Core DNA [explorerx4] by Stever@Edmunds HOST

Mar 26, 2008 (8:23 pm)

Replying to: explorerx4 (Mar 26, 2008 6:35 pm)
Guess you had to have been at the other Subaru thread to get the gist.
 
Ok, maybe you'd like to talk about how HUMMER H2 cologne helps the brand instead?

Messages Page 3 of 3

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement