Whitacre May Be Old School, but He Out-Hyundais Hyundai

GM Chairman Delivers Straightforward Pitch to Consumers

Posted by Bob Garfield on 09.14.09

This just in: General Motors has some issues.

Bankruptcy; a federal bailout; recession; a history of corporate arrogance and cynicism; backlash from the shortsighted play on gas-guzzling SUVs; distant but persistent memories of crappy products; the negation of design improvement by mindless cost-cutting; the '70s and '80s undoing of divisional distinctiveness; obstinate and corrupt resistance to safety, fuel efficiency and quality-control; ruinously expensive sweetheart deals with the UAW and, lest we forget, mainly terrible advertising and marketing for decades and decades.

Title: May the Best Car Win
Marketer: General Motors
stars

Agency: McCann Erickson, Birmingham, Mich.

Whitacre, out of grand vision or simply abject desperation, has out-Hyundai-ed Hyundai.

Among the four remaining divisions, only Cadillac has had anything to boast about in recent ad memory. The most memorable campaign GM has run in the past 25 years was 25 years ago.

Remember "The Heartbeat of America"? Catchy jingle. Huge media tonnage. And it might have worked, too, if it hadn't been so obviously, pitifully untrue. By 1980, Chevrolet had long since established itself as the vestigial organ of America. GM had taken one of the three most resonant, relevant brands in the history of American commerce (along with Coca-Cola and Marlboro), and reduced it to an also-ran -- if not actual laughingstock. Three words: Chevette. Citation. Lumina.

So, as we were saying, issues.

Luckily, here comes the new chairman, Edward Whitacre Jr., with a boast -- and an offer -- designed to turn it all around.

Related Story:

Ten Things to Think Hard About Before Featuring the Chairman in Advertising
GM's Whitacre Fronts Its 'May the Best Car Win' Spots, but Is That Wise?

"I'm Ed Whitacre, the chairman of General Motors," he says in his east Texas twang as he strides purposefully through GM's Jetsonian design studio (or facsimile thereof), a place bustling with handsome young people of many ethnicities inexplicably moving around and fondling various sections of pretend automobiles.

It's possible you recognize Whitacre as the man plucked out of AT&T retirement to be steward of the taxpayers' huge investment in America's worst-managed corporate leviathan. But for most viewers, he's just the latest white-haired rich guy trying to sell you a bill of goods. Yeah, they're thinking, this should be good.

But, you know, it kind of is.

"Before I started this job, I admit I had some doubts. Probably a lot like you. But I like what I found. I think you will too. Car for car, when compared to the competition, we win. Simple as that.

"I just know if you get into one of our cars you're going to like what you see. So we're putting our money where our mouth is."

This is where Whitacre, out of grand vision or simply abject desperation, out-Hyundai-ed Hyundai:

"Buy a new Chevy, Buick GMC or Cadillac and if you're not 100% happy, return it. We'll take it back. That's our new, 60-day satisfaction guarantee. And as always you'll get our 100,000-mile, five-year power-train warranty on every vehicle. That's how strongly we feel about our cars and how committed we are to you. So put us to the test. Put us up against anyone. And may the best car win."

Whoa. We don't know what Whitacre has to support the "car-for-car" superiority claim. We're pretty sure McCann Erickson just made it up. But we do know that there's nothing wrong with GM cars, and we certainly know how Hyundai changed the playing field twice: First by offering a 10-year, 100,000-mile warranty, then by offering to let new-car buyers off the hook if they get laid off. GM's offer ups that ante by at least one order of magnitude.

That there is a conversation starter, one that subsequent brand ads will surely continue. It also bespeaks a confidence in the product line that itself can change perceptions.

Or, because this is GM after all, maybe it's just another heartbreak for America: an insane risk attached to an outrageous lie.

17 Comments

By PATRICK | ATLANTA, GA September 14, 2009 08:28:53 am:

Yes, it's a Hail Mary play, but that's about all GM has left to try and get some attention. Desperate times, desperate measures. If only GM hadn't fallen asleep at the wheel for decades. It's a strong wake up call, "May the best car win." Let's ride and see where it goes. http://www.thelintscreen.com

Permalink

By ntruroman | Greenville, SC September 14, 2009 08:51:14 am:

It'll be interesting to see what happens when people start returning their cars - and yes, Mr. Whitacre, some people will return their cars if only to see what happens. That's when GM will really be put to the test. If they don't make those refunds happen quickly, easily and with a smile... it'll make an even greater debacle out of the painful demise of a once great company.
To be honest, I hope it works. I hope people turn out in droves to test drive and buy GM vehicles. I hope people find quality under every hood and excitement behind every steering wheel. I wish I had... before my wife and I bought our third Honda.

Permalink

By adlulz | Kansas City, KS September 14, 2009 09:38:30 am:

Add this to the fail roll of CEO-centric marketing. Will a domestic auto buyer listen to a transplant CEO from AT&T? Iacocca excelled as a pitchman because of his success at Ford and his turnaround of Chrysler. Dave from Wendy's worked cause he was a fat guy who knew his way around a burger.
http://adlulz.wordpress.com/

Permalink

By craigcooper | craigcooper.com, NY September 14, 2009 11:59:01 am:

Pitching cars using tactics from late-night mattress ads.

Why not just prop up the refuses-to-die Billy Mays and have him scream about GM at us?

Permalink

By HarryWebber.com | LOS ANGELES, CA September 14, 2009 01:44:04 pm:

The 71 Billion Dollar Question.

Here's a thought. What if a bunch of guys and gals in the fly-over world outside of Bloomfield Hills or Grosse Point Woods decided that the marketing of the GM brand (Yes it is a brand, not just another nameplate)decided that the future of General Motors was too important to leave up to the myopic mishandling of GM management? What if this band of "outsiders" was convinced that the mission to save GM from itself was more important than the war in Iraq, Health Care reform or Swine Flu to the American taxpayer?

What if these renegades believed that the only way to beat the Japanese mantra of "Kaizen" (make it better and better) was to make cars smarter and smarter? Could they employ a user-generated, open-source creative, grass-roots inspired counter-campaign to make-up for "mainly terrible advertising and marketing for decades and decades?"

That is exactly what happened at Ford Motor Company when Mary Wells Lawrence, Charlie Moss, Bob Cox, Bob Wilvers, Paul Marguiles (Juliana's dad), Bob Kaplan and I adopted "Quality Is Job 1" from a word-of-mouth campaign started at Ford's Cleveland Engine Plant. Not only did the campaign (based on Dr. Deming's introduction of "Zero Defects", the statistical quality control effort at Ford)turn Ford around, it revitalized the entire big three.

Well if you can hook 'em once, you can hook 'em twice. This time the user-generated, open-source creative, grass-roots inspired counter-campaign is "Genius Matters." The objective of this counter-campaign is to convince all 185 million GM citizen stakeholders (including Messrs. Whitacre, Henderson and Lutz) that
the only hope for GM is to out smart, not out spend or out bluff the competition. http://GeniusMatters.com has been viewed by thousands and thousands of people so far.

The campaign, born right here in the comments section of AdAge as a part of each of the magazine's articles on GM has inspired an amazing amount of email support and innovative ideas, all focused on making "America's Car Company" a viable enterprise once again.

Is it possible that a rag-tag bunch of "outsiders" can actually change the culture of the nation's largest enterprise with a two word redefinition of what they need to stand for to survive? Can those words not only inspire the employees of GM, but the faith of the auto buying public as well?

Ford did not use Phillip Caldwell to make their pitch. They used hundreds and hundreds of assembly line workers. They used each worker's personal commitment to quality to communicate a turnaround in attitude at Ford.

We don't need millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to get this campaign out to its intended audience. We will steal minds and eyeballs with tactics like this post. We know GM management reads every one of these AdAge features and their resultant comments. We know because many of them have told us and Google Analytics shows the bedroom enclaves in Detroit where the site is being viewed. Will we prevail? Stay tuned.

http://GeniusMatters.com
http://WeOwnGM.com

Permalink

By david | atlanta, GA September 14, 2009 02:54:07 pm:

I haven't looked it up yet, but, I have worked directly with GM/Cadillac. There is no chance that this return policy has been fully considered.

Okay, Ihave now looked it up. The return policy does not apply to leased vehicles and it does not refund ad velorem or state registration fees - only sales tax.

So in other works, it's customer unfriendly, hot air.

Permalink

By rpruitt | Port St Lucie, FL September 14, 2009 04:09:33 pm:

Personally, as a retired creative director, I think it is a powerful message, and if the company is committed, as we must assume it is, deliverable.

The tragedy is: GM chose such a weak, anemic way to announce it. An old man lumping all the cars together in one of those walk and talk commercials? What a terrible waste of a admirable marketing/manufacturing strategy.

Permalink

By WILLIAM | NORTH HILLS, CA September 14, 2009 05:53:36 pm:

THERE ARE 6.6 BILLION PEOPLE IN THE WORLD, INSIDE THE 6.6 BILLION PEOPLE THERE ARE 4.2 BILLION CONSUMERS, WHICH IS THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY'S MARKET.

INSIDE THE 4.2 BILLION PEOPLE THERE IS ONLY,"ONE" PERSON WHO COULD MAKE ME PURCHASE A GM CAR.

IF MICHAEL MOORE SAID IT IS NOW TIME TO BUY A GM CAR, I WOULD BUY ONE. WHY, BECAUSE MICHAEL MOORE IS THE ONLY PERSON I WOULD TRUST TO SAY SUCH A THING.

I AM NOT A MICHAEL MOORE FAN, BUT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY TRUST IN HIM, IN PARTICULAR AS IT PERTAINS TO GM.

WILLIAM MORRIS
BILLOFKSPN@AOL.COM

Permalink

By jaco13 | new York, NY September 15, 2009 10:50:01 am:

This is exactly what's wrong with US auto makers.

Focusing on a marketing gimmick rather than a compelling innovation to sell cars.

Permalink

By copyboy1 | San Francisco, CA September 15, 2009 12:43:34 pm:

If you think a 60-day return policy is going to save GM, you're as deluded as Mr. Whitacre.

Permalink

By jimbojones | Lafayette, IN September 16, 2009 11:01:26 am:

Once again, they have completely overlooked branding and positioning strategy. Are they selling GM cars or are they selling Buick, Cadillac, Chevy and GMC? Why not eliminate all of the nameplates if they can't differentiate between them? It makes no difference if they have better cars or not, they have a worse brand.

Permalink

By ealmendral | North Hollywood, CA September 16, 2009 11:01:33 am:

The bar for US automaker ads is pretty low these days. Instead of going big and bold with a powerful and assertive message, they come across as humiliated, as if they've been disgraced and are somehow apologizing for the past 20 years or so. It doesn't instill faith or inspire excitement about their products.

Look at what GM has to compete with ad-wise: "Why Ford. Why now."
http://ericonmedia.com/?p=74

These aren't the kinds of campaigns that are going to help save an industry.

Permalink

By STEVEN | BABYLON, NY September 16, 2009 11:29:21 am:

Not a big fan of the approach, using Whitacre and the guarantee, but I very much like the new line: "May the best car win." There's an idea! www.whatstheidea.com

Permalink

By mattwjones | rochester, NY September 17, 2009 08:59:08 am:

Bob misses the point. The visual with Whitacre, old and slightly limping, dominates. He may be a breath of fresh air for all I know. But from a figure head pov, he's the wrong guy to front the "new GM".

Permalink

By davidshortt | Edmonton, AB September 17, 2009 12:35:53 pm:

If I were GM, I'd concentrate my entire marketing budget on building cars that consumers might actually want to buy. Make them beautiful, ergonomic, fuel-efficient. Make them desirable! In other words, make them the opposite of everything they've built before. THAT'S a marketing strategy that a creative firm would love to have something to do with.

Permalink

By AnaMaria | Oakland Park, FL September 17, 2009 01:35:00 pm:

My first reaction to the ad was "new GM" same old gimmicky branding approach. How many times are we going to see corporate types sauntering around introducing themselves and the "new" old company they're pushing. All the while pitching some gimmick to get you to purchase their product. "Car for Car"..."you'll like what you see". Really? I want branding that will get me excited about the product, it's quality - style - affordability - backed by a strong reliable company. Not the same old same old corporate ad.

American car makers are still having to fight the stigma of not producing reliable, quality products. Ford is the only one that went to the "streets" with their Quality Drive Campaign introducing the public to its new and re-modeled product line. These real people testimonial spots are more apt to connect with viewers & their pocket books. Armed with that feed back - "Why Ford. Why Now." I say why not?

Spokesperson ads will always be around but please people, lets move away from corporate figure heads. Specially during these turbulent economic times.

Permalink

By wikimurph | Minneapolis, MN September 18, 2009 11:03:53 am:

GM out Hyundais Hyundai? Really?

Hyundai has been on a journey to recast its image for a decade. It's strategy? Bold, bet-the-ranch marketing initiatives:

(1) The most comprehensive warranty in the business.
(2) A direct appeal to rethink Hyundai, based on fact and accomplishment, not bravado.
(3) A buy-back program that showed deft insight into the underlying issue sapping demand during the recession (consumers who had good jobs but feared not having one later in the year).
(4) A risky move into the near luxury sedan market with Genesis.

The result? Year-to-date Hyundai has picked up over a point of market share (source: Automotive News). A Herculean task to be sure. Every GM brand has lost share so far in 2009. The proper domestic comparison to Hyundai is Ford, which, like Hyundai, has kept its head down and worked hard to get its quality and design right. Like Hyundai, Ford has also picked up market share this year.

So this begs the question -- where are the facts to support that corporate bravado ("car for car, we win") is fresh or effective?

I have no connection to Hyundai and no axe to grind. I'm simply a fan of smart and brave marketing.

http://www.bdm.net/
http://www.wikibranding.net/

Permalink