Yes, that is generally how a commercial works. Whether or not it is effective (the ka-ching part) is a whole other story.
No. My impression is that the people are not seeing the Buick because the car is so bland-looking and invisible that it fades into the shrubbery. It’s like the person in the commercial is going “Buick? I don’t see no Buick. There’s just a bunch of vanilla, white bread, generic-looking cars in this lot. Nothing stands out!”.
This ad must be coming from the same genius’ that brought us “It’s not your father’s Oldsmobile” - which translates to “Previous Oldsmobiles that we made and marketed and sold to you suckers are not as good as the current cars we are trying to foist on you suckers”.
As Dewey Finn stated, I heard as well that the Buick name was saved due to demand in the Asian market. I think if you asked stateside, 10 out of 10 people would have chosen Pontiac to save and ditch the stodgy old Buick name.
The ads are idiotic.
I thought the point of the commercial was
“Our cars used to be shit, but at least they were distinctive. Now they’re shit and look like a Camry knock off or some sort of KIA”
Make a Regal GS with 300+ hp or a new Grand National and I might even consider one. As it stands the Regal is the only one I even would look at as the rest are butt ugly. The commercials are asinine, but still marginally better than the Acura commercials. Not by much, though.
IF I had to drive a GM… It’d have to be such a top-end one. Cadillac/Corvette/Hummer.
I’d need to know that the transmission wouldn’t buckle like twizzler a 1/2 hour into the first drive.
So you’re ranting against a commercial for a product that exaggerates the product and tries to describe it in a new and different way?
Have you MET advertising before?
What do you want it to say? “This is a Buick. It is a car.”
If someone is pointing out problems like these in commercials, it isn’t the commercial that has the problem ifyaknowhatimean
I also agree that these are stupid commercials. With a few exceptions most of the new cars look alike. Plain and vanilla describe them to a T. If it were not for the Buick badge, I could not pick them out from the crowd.
My question is; Do folks today want a vanilla, white bread, generic-looking car? Do they want to blend into the crowd? I do not, but I look at life differently then most folk, so, as I have been told, my opinion does not count.
I am not your average car buyer. I would indeed choose Buick over Pontiac every time. I have owned both brands and IMHO, Buick is the more comfortable of the two and it has the better quality as well.
I loved the Buick Reatta. Owned two of them.
Moving over to Cafe Society.
I am a, er, gentleman of substance and I love how much space I have in my '93 Roadmonster wagon. I also love merging because its LT-1 can even make it haul its portly ass.
Hilarious. Buick introduces no new models, yet has a record sales year in the US. Experts are attributing it to their new marketing campaign, specifically their new ads. Yet, according to folks in this thread, they are “idiotic”.
It’s the kind of marketing insight that I’ve come to expect from the SDMB.
They aren’t trying to entertain the general public, they’re trying to sell cars. It’s working.
Exactly the type of car I can’t stand, the low-end luxury car/overpriced mid-level car, aka the cheapest thing they’ll put leather seats in.
Me, too. I’ve come to expect insight and understanding of how the consumer products industry bitch-slaps buyers around, using marketing to control what we buy to their maximum advantage. I’m kinda proud of how few Dopers fall for the boardroom bullshit of “all sales is good sales, long as they’s ours.” I have to admire how the collective mind here rejects pointless advertising in favor of some consumer sense. It’s everything I’ve come to expect of the teeming thousands.
And the above is everything I’ve come to expect of you: catchy marketing ups the sales of the same old dull, second-rate shit, and you applaud.
Knee-jerk much? If the goal of the ad is to spread the word and appeal to their target demographic, then these are anything but idiotic.
I notice you declined to offer anything of substance about these particular ads, choosing instead to attack me personally for something else. That’s pretty pathetic.
If you have a problem with another poster, take it to the Pit – such comments are inappropriate in all other forums.
No warning issued.
twickster, Cafe Society moderator
My 6’7 ex BF [we dated in the early 1980s] loved when we borrowed my Dad’s Chrysler New Yorker for road trips … got to love land yachts for their leg and head room!
I don’t think it’s an attack to point out that when there is a discussion of sleazy, underhanded, stupid or especially manipulative corporate marketing practices, you rush to their defense with the argument of “Well, it works, doesn’t it?” and the open or veiled implication that everyone else is stupid because they don’t get that.
Putting a .44 to someone’s forehead and pulling the trigger “works,” too - and if you’re an arms maker or a wild law-n-order type, you can smugly point that out. Both cases brush aside any larger-scale implications about the ethics and costs of such actions.
What’s truly pathetic is treating the consumer population like stupid sheep, whether it’s GM doing the fleecing with idiotic manipulation on TV or you defending it in here on the basis that anyone who objects is too dumb to see that it “works.” We know it “works,” and if we were stockholders, management or board members of GM, or took our paycheck from a food conglomerate’s marketing department, we’d cheer along with you.
Because you came into a thread that is about the effectiveness of an ad, and went on a rant about the ethics of marketing, with no other purpose than to take a Quixotic swipe at me.
There is nothing unethical, I’ll advised, manipulative, or sleazy about the Buick campaign. The OP and every single response made so far talk about how they aren’t swayed by the ad, which makes it idiotic. Pointing out that it isn’t idiotic because lots of other people find the cars attractive isn’t “treating the consumer population like sheep”.
Twice now, you’ve failed to mention how this specific campaign addresses any of the subjects you raised.
You’re tilting at windmills, yet again.
What?
Maybe you should *slowly *read the order of comments above. I made several comments, with the “substantial” content you apparently missed, and THEN, thirty posts on, you dropped in to tell us we’re all idiots for failing to note the ads’ efficacy - despite Buick having nothing actually new or desirable to sell, which is pretty much the gist of the discussion before you hopped in your Buick Quixotica for a drive-by dismissal.
Lifetime profession, and proud of it. I’ve knocked a few down, too, much to the dismay of those on the 14th floor of them.
The only comments you made were about how boring you think they are. That’s it. Nothing about the evils of marketing. I never said they have nothing desirable to sell, so please stop lying.
:rolleyes: