Posts tagged ‘naming’


Autocade hits 1,500-model milestone

08.05.2011

Thanks most recently to the work of Keith Adams, who added numerous important models into Autocade, we now have reached 1,500 models. The 1,500th is a bit mainstream, but after all the odd cars we’ve put in over the last three years, it’s nice to have something almost everyone knows.

Image:Audi_TTS.jpgAudi TT (8J). 2006 to date (prod. unknown). 3-door coupĂ©, 2-door convertible. F/F, F/A, 1798, 1984 cmÂł petrol, 1968 cmÂł diesel (4 cyl. DOHC), 2480 cmÂł (5 cyl. DOHC), 3189 cmÂł (V6 DOHC). More muscular, grown-up TT, longer and wider than predecessor, and on PQ35 platform. Aluminium in front bodypanels, and steel in rear, to help weight distribution. Excellent handling and roadholding. Diesel from 2008. V6 to 2010; TTS’s turbocharged four had more power and replaced the V6 in some markets earlier. TT RS from 2009, with 340 PS.

   But I couldn’t let this post go without mentioning a few oddities. And since this blog started as a branding one, maybe these are good examples of what not to do if you want to build your model lines.
   Each of the following cars, added this year into Autocade, had the listed nameplate for one year, or an even shorter period. There are many more at the site, but these four came to mind first.
   If you want to confuse your customers, and flush marketing dollars down the toilet, then renaming after a year is the way to go.

Image:1975_Buick_Apollo.jpgBuick Apollo (X-car). 1975 (prod. unknown). 4-door sedan. F/R, 231 in³ (V6 OHV), 250 in³ (6 cyl. OHV), 260, 350 in³ (V8 OHV). Last use of short-lived Apollo name for Buick’s Chevrolet Nova (1975–9) twin. Same platform as before, but restyled; two-doors now called Skylark, which four-door would be called after this model year. Better outward vision; Chevrolet Camaro (1970–81) suspension helped handling and ride. Buick V6 used instead of Chevy unit, which meant the Apollo was more durable, but average reliability only.

Image:Pontiac_J2000.jpgPontiac J2000 (J-car). 1982 (prod. unknown). 4-door sedan, 5-door wagon, 2- and 3-door coupĂ©. F/F, 1835, 1999 cmÂł (4 cyl. OHV). Pontiac version of GM’s world J-car project, most closely related to Chevrolet Cavalier (1982–94). Similar body styles and comments, but with more dramatic front end. Labelled J2000 only for one year, when it was replaced by the 2000, an identical car with engine changes.

Image:2006_Lincoln_Zephyr.jpgLincoln Zephyr (CD378). 2006 (prod. unknown). 4-door sedan. F/F, 2967 cmÂł (V6 DOHC). Single-year entry for revived Lincoln Zephyr name, before car renamed to MKZ for 2007 (even the renaming was botched, with Lincoln staff calling it ‘Mark Z’ before saying the letters). Basically a gloriïŹed Mazda Atenza, on that car’s platform, and too similar to Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan duo. Good equipment levels but best thought of as a Mercury with all the trimmings and the 3·0-litre Duratec V6.

   Finally, so it’s not all US-market cars, though this company was owned by Chrysler when this model emerged for a short period in 1970:

Image:1970_Sunbeam_Vogue.jpgSunbeam Vogue (Arrow). 1970 (prod. unknown). 4-door saloon, 5-door estate. F/R, 1725 cmÂł (4 cyl. OHV). Very short-lived Arrow variant as the last Singer model transferred to Sunbeam from April 1970. The situation lasted half a year, and Sunbeam resorted to selling the Imp, Stiletto, Rapier and Alpine instead. In some countries, Sunbeam Vogue was the export name for the Singer Vogue.

   Other cars of note added to the database that anoraks will enjoy include the Peugeot Roa, a 405 lookalike with Hillman Hunter running-gear, the Bizzarrini GT Strada 5300 (thanks to Keith), and one which might get BMW upset over the name, the Chang’an Benben Mini. Hop on over and if you think of a model you’d like to see, please give me a shout in the comments.

Autocade progress
March 2008: launch
July 2008: 500 (four months for first 500)
June 2009: 800
December 2009: 1,000 (17 months for second 500)
January 2011: 1,250
May 2011: 1,500 (17 months for third 500)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in branding, business, cars, interests, marketing, publishing, UK, USA | No Comments »


Chevrolet doesn’t understand branding

11.06.2010

After the chaps at Autocar began following me on Twitter yesterday—after all, I had been reading the magazine since it was part of the Ministry of Magazines, in the post-Iliffe days—I noticed a Tweet about Chevrolet asking its dealers to not refer to the brand as Chevy.
   What?
   According to Autocar:

A leaked GM memo revealed: “We’d ask that whether you’re talking to a dealer, reviewing dealer advertising, or speaking with friends and family, that you communicate our brand as Chevrolet moving forward.
   â€œWhen you look at the most recognised brands throughout the world, such as Coke or Apple for instance, one of the things they all focus on is the consistency of their branding. Why is this consistency so important? The more consistent a brand becomes, the more prominent and recognizable it is with the consumer.”
   The document was signed by Alan Batey, vice president for Chevrolet sales and service, and Jim Campbell, the GM division’s vice president for marketing.

Bad example there, Alan and Jim.
   Coke is to Chevy as Coca-Cola is to Chevrolet.
   And no one ever complains of Coke being inconsistent.
   This is the sort of daft thinking that makes any of us brand professional shudder: total amateurs talking about branding—out of their rear ends.
   It’s this lack of awareness of what branding is, inter alia, that started GM down its slippery path—with only a brief reprieve when Bob Lutz, aware of what GM’s brands stood for, was around.
   By demanding that Chevrolet people not refer to the brand as Chevy does the exact opposite to what brand experts and marketers recommend today: to be one with the consumer.
   I can understand if Chevy was a very negative word, but it isn’t. It’s an endearing word and it does not create inconsistency with the full Chevrolet word. It complements it, connects the brand to the audience, and, perhaps most importantly for GM, builds on the brand’s heritage.
   After all, Chevrolet itself has encouraged the use of the Chevy name for decades in its own advertising—including during its heyday. Omitting the use of Chevy instantly cuts many Chevrolet connections to its stronger past. And that’s a past that can be used for internal brand-building and loyalty.
   There was even, formally, a Chevy model in the 1960s—the line that later became the Nova. The Chevy II nameplate even continued in GM in Argentina in the 1970s.
   The Chevy diminutive is used in many countries where the brand is sold, including South Africa, where it was once as local as braaivleis, rugby and sunny skies.
   Maybe GM can’t afford the same branding advice it used to—in which case it might be better to shut up than issue memoranda that can be ridiculed so easily.
   Or get Bob Lutz back again. One month after retirement, and the natives have lost direction again, Bob.

PS.: From Robin Capper on Twitter, who sums this blog post up in 140 characters or fewer: ‘Poor Don McLean: “Drove my Chevrolet to the levee, but the levee was dry” just doesn’t work’.—JY

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in branding, business, cars, culture, marketing, USA | 1 Comment »