Top Car Brands ...
03-20-09, 08:07 AM
#1
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
Top Car Brands ...
CLICK SLIDESHOW : http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/11/strongest-car-brands-lifestyle-vehicles-car-brands_slide_2.html?partner=yahooca
Source
Strongest automakers
Forbes.com - Hannah Elliott
Dieter Zetsche, the mustachioed CEO of Daimler AG, told reporters at the Geneva auto show last week that Mercedes-Benz and BMW may form an alliance. Zetsche's announcement fueled longstanding rumours that the two luxury powerhouses would consolidate in a bid for better efficiency and technological development.
Such an agreement would unite two of the most admired car brands on the planet, combining a total value of more than $48 billion, according to Interbrand, a global brand management firm.
America's Strongest Automakers
Until then, BMW and Mercedes will have to settle for being two of the top five strongest car brands in the U.S.; the brand most admired of all is Toyota. The German automakers are firmly cemented as the most admired luxury brands.
'I think in general, that's where the luxury brands have performed better than others--in distinguishing themselves,' says Wes Brown, a partner at Iceology, a Los Angeles-based consumer-research firm. 'If you want a vehicle that's the most fun to drive, you go to BMW; if you want something that is the epitome of luxury, it's the Mercedes. And then everyone else has tried to find their own little spot.'
Behind the Numbers
To compile our list of America's strongest automakers, we used brand-value data from Interbrand, a marketing firm with offices worldwide. We added scores from the 2009 Car Brands Perception Survey from Consumer Reports, green-efficiency and design ratings from J.D. Power and Associates, and domestic retail sales figures from January and February of 2009 (sales were weighted down so as not to override brand-value and consumer perception).
Each of those components hints at brand strength as a function of consumer loyalty, product quality, safety records and eco-friendliness. But the main factor that goes into building an auto brand admired by consumers is an intangible combination of them all: emotion.
'The decision process in virtually every category is 70-30 weighting for emotional versus rational decision making,' says Robert Passikoff, president of Brand Keys, a New York-based marketing firm. 'Ultimately, if you don't like the colour, you're not buying the car.'
Emotion is about more than desire. Many people admire Rolls-Royce, but most will never afford a Phantom coupe. That doesn't mean, however, that they won't buy a more affordable car based off any less a romanticized notion.
Consumers rarely admit to buying something simply because it makes them feel good, Brown says, but it happens more often than not: 'The reality is if [practicality] was really all that people cared about, then luxury sales wouldn't be strong at all, and everyone would ultimately be driving a minivan.'
Leader of the Pack
Toyota earned the No. 1 slot on our list, due in large part to its Prius hybrid, which capitalized on Toyota's well-established reputation for reliability and then redefined the brand as earth-friendly. Four products from Toyota--the Highlander, Prius, RAV4 and Sienna--all earned 'top-pick' status from Consumer Reports this year, the most of any one brand.
'Top picks' are considered the best all-around models in their category. To earn the distinction, they must score at or near the top of their segment in more than 300 road-tests and reliability and safety requirements set out by Consumer Reports. Each model must also sufficiently pass government safety tests and offer electronic stability control as standard or optional equipment.
Ninth ranked Hyundai is one brand on the rise. The Genesis sedan won Car of the Year at the 2009 Detroit Auto Show, and the company's Elantra SE was the top-rated small sedan by Consumer Reports.
'The consumer perception for Hyundai is moving very quickly right now,' says Jake Fisher, a senior automotive engineer for Consumer Reports. 'I think consumers deserve more credit. I think they're going to take a look, and they will give them a chance, and perception will change to the reality that Hyundai makes reliable cars and quite well-built cars.'
For a Brand, Image is Everything
The rough economy doesn't necessarily hurt brands, as Hyundai can attest. In fact, a strong brand actually reduce financial risk.
'In down times, you get what you call 'flight to quality' or 'flight to safety,' and people tend to buy things that they trust,' says Jez Frampton, CEO of Interbrand.
What all the automakers on our list have in common is that they differentiate their brand and remain consistent with an identity. Consumers therefore remain familiar enough with the brand to be aware of its latest offerings.
Others have not fared as well. General Motors' Saturn and Pontiac brands have suffered in the past few years--they are slated to be discontinued and reduced, respectively--because they haven't clearly defined what they stand for, Passikoff says.
'I say 'Toyota,' and you say 'reliability'. I say 'BMW,' and you say 'engineering'. I say 'General Motors,' and people go 'uh?' And that 'uh?' That's the sound of a brand dying.'
Forbes.com - Hannah Elliott
Dieter Zetsche, the mustachioed CEO of Daimler AG, told reporters at the Geneva auto show last week that Mercedes-Benz and BMW may form an alliance. Zetsche's announcement fueled longstanding rumours that the two luxury powerhouses would consolidate in a bid for better efficiency and technological development.
Such an agreement would unite two of the most admired car brands on the planet, combining a total value of more than $48 billion, according to Interbrand, a global brand management firm.
America's Strongest Automakers
Until then, BMW and Mercedes will have to settle for being two of the top five strongest car brands in the U.S.; the brand most admired of all is Toyota. The German automakers are firmly cemented as the most admired luxury brands.
'I think in general, that's where the luxury brands have performed better than others--in distinguishing themselves,' says Wes Brown, a partner at Iceology, a Los Angeles-based consumer-research firm. 'If you want a vehicle that's the most fun to drive, you go to BMW; if you want something that is the epitome of luxury, it's the Mercedes. And then everyone else has tried to find their own little spot.'
Behind the Numbers
To compile our list of America's strongest automakers, we used brand-value data from Interbrand, a marketing firm with offices worldwide. We added scores from the 2009 Car Brands Perception Survey from Consumer Reports, green-efficiency and design ratings from J.D. Power and Associates, and domestic retail sales figures from January and February of 2009 (sales were weighted down so as not to override brand-value and consumer perception).
Each of those components hints at brand strength as a function of consumer loyalty, product quality, safety records and eco-friendliness. But the main factor that goes into building an auto brand admired by consumers is an intangible combination of them all: emotion.
'The decision process in virtually every category is 70-30 weighting for emotional versus rational decision making,' says Robert Passikoff, president of Brand Keys, a New York-based marketing firm. 'Ultimately, if you don't like the colour, you're not buying the car.'
Emotion is about more than desire. Many people admire Rolls-Royce, but most will never afford a Phantom coupe. That doesn't mean, however, that they won't buy a more affordable car based off any less a romanticized notion.
Consumers rarely admit to buying something simply because it makes them feel good, Brown says, but it happens more often than not: 'The reality is if [practicality] was really all that people cared about, then luxury sales wouldn't be strong at all, and everyone would ultimately be driving a minivan.'
Leader of the Pack
Toyota earned the No. 1 slot on our list, due in large part to its Prius hybrid, which capitalized on Toyota's well-established reputation for reliability and then redefined the brand as earth-friendly. Four products from Toyota--the Highlander, Prius, RAV4 and Sienna--all earned 'top-pick' status from Consumer Reports this year, the most of any one brand.
'Top picks' are considered the best all-around models in their category. To earn the distinction, they must score at or near the top of their segment in more than 300 road-tests and reliability and safety requirements set out by Consumer Reports. Each model must also sufficiently pass government safety tests and offer electronic stability control as standard or optional equipment.
Ninth ranked Hyundai is one brand on the rise. The Genesis sedan won Car of the Year at the 2009 Detroit Auto Show, and the company's Elantra SE was the top-rated small sedan by Consumer Reports.
'The consumer perception for Hyundai is moving very quickly right now,' says Jake Fisher, a senior automotive engineer for Consumer Reports. 'I think consumers deserve more credit. I think they're going to take a look, and they will give them a chance, and perception will change to the reality that Hyundai makes reliable cars and quite well-built cars.'
For a Brand, Image is Everything
The rough economy doesn't necessarily hurt brands, as Hyundai can attest. In fact, a strong brand actually reduce financial risk.
'In down times, you get what you call 'flight to quality' or 'flight to safety,' and people tend to buy things that they trust,' says Jez Frampton, CEO of Interbrand.
What all the automakers on our list have in common is that they differentiate their brand and remain consistent with an identity. Consumers therefore remain familiar enough with the brand to be aware of its latest offerings.
Others have not fared as well. General Motors' Saturn and Pontiac brands have suffered in the past few years--they are slated to be discontinued and reduced, respectively--because they haven't clearly defined what they stand for, Passikoff says.
'I say 'Toyota,' and you say 'reliability'. I say 'BMW,' and you say 'engineering'. I say 'General Motors,' and people go 'uh?' And that 'uh?' That's the sound of a brand dying.'
03-20-09, 07:48 PM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
General Motors' Saturn and Pontiac brands have suffered in the past few years--they are slated to be discontinued and reduced, respectively--because they haven't clearly defined what they stand for, Passikoff says.
Though I admit I was not the only one to do so, l predicted this several years ago. The Saturn people, at auto shows, gave me funny looks when I told them that it was imperative that the company return to plastic-bodied vehicles and the great customer-service it had in the 1990's, otherwise it wouldn't last.
A number of them merely looked at me and said that they simply could not do that...that Saturn had to "adjust with the times" and that the thermo-plastic bodies and space-frames were just too expensive to produce. I told them they couldn't afford NOT to.
You can lead a horse to water, but...............
A shame, too, because the Aura, even with a steel rather than plastic body, is a pretty nice vehicle.....one of only two current GM vehicles (along with the similiar Chevy Malibu) that I wouldn't mind owning.
Last edited by mmarshall; 03-20-09 at 08:03 PM.
03-20-09, 10:39 PM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
IMHO, I for one won't miss Saturn, with it's long history of mediocre cars and continuous I/S losses for GM.
The decisions are getting down to desperate business decisions at this stage.
The decisions are getting down to desperate business decisions at this stage.
03-21-09, 07:00 AM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
I had a 1999 SL-2 for a few years, and really liked it. And it had better-designed gauges in it than some "enthusiast" cars I've driven.
Customers also loved Saturn for the sales and service policies, even more than the cars themselves. At one time, (and I clearly remember this) Saturn ranked with Lexus and Infiniti at the very top of the customer-satisfaction list, and for a couple of years, tied with lexus.
Any way you look at it, GM had a GREAT thing going with Saturn......and then blew it, big-time.
03-21-09, 09:03 AM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
The S-series cars, which were built from 1990 to the early 2000's, were unique, had some great features, and, unlike most American-designed cars of the period, were generally reliable. No, they weren't high-powered "enthusiast" cars, and some of the interior plastic parts were on the cheap side, but they were nontheless still a pleasure to own and drive.
I had a 1999 SL-2 for a few years, and really liked it. And it had better-designed gauges in it than some "enthusiast" cars I've driven.
Customers also loved Saturn for the sales and service policies, even more than the cars themselves. At one time, (and I clearly remember this) Saturn ranked with Lexus and Infiniti at the very top of the customer-satisfaction list, and for a couple of years, tied with lexus.
Any way you look at it, GM had a GREAT thing going with Saturn......and then blew it, big-time.
I had a 1999 SL-2 for a few years, and really liked it. And it had better-designed gauges in it than some "enthusiast" cars I've driven.
Customers also loved Saturn for the sales and service policies, even more than the cars themselves. At one time, (and I clearly remember this) Saturn ranked with Lexus and Infiniti at the very top of the customer-satisfaction list, and for a couple of years, tied with lexus.
Any way you look at it, GM had a GREAT thing going with Saturn......and then blew it, big-time.
But as an enthusiast, I have little respect for their cars and I did drive one extensively (owned by a tennis club member and friend). I did admire their sales approach, but that was something that could not be patented and in fact was copied by several dealerships locally.
But the real evidence of Saturns decline was declining sales and the lack of repeat buyers to the brand. Both you and my tennis friend for example failed to return to the brand.
03-21-09, 11:24 AM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
Well, I tried to explain WHY I didn't return to it. (Actually I did, briefly; I had a yellow SC2 coupe briefly in 2001, but only kept it a few weeks. It had a couple of unacceptable defects, even after a number of repair attempts (both me and the service shop-foreman worked on the car together), and I returned it for the 30-day money-back guarantee (which Saturn honored)
Shortly after that, I got a yellow IS300....and, later on, joined CL.Even today, though, the Aura is a nice car (IMO, the nicest product Saturn currently sells), but it would be a lot nicer with a plastic body like the original Saturns.
Last edited by mmarshall; 03-21-09 at 11:28 AM.
Trending Topics
03-21-09, 11:55 AM
#8
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Customers also loved Saturn for the sales and service policies, even more than the cars themselves. At one time, (and I clearly remember this) Saturn ranked with Lexus and Infiniti at the very top of the customer-satisfaction list, and for a couple of years, tied with lexus.
Any way you look at it, GM had a GREAT thing going with Saturn......and then blew it, big-time.
Any way you look at it, GM had a GREAT thing going with Saturn......and then blew it, big-time.
You and I, mmarshall, have seen eye-to-eye on Saturn's decline and demise for a long time. They created magic back in the early 90's, only to throw it all away.
Oh, and BTW, I don't think the article was total nonsense when it said Saturn doesn't know what it stands for. The article is talking about TODAY, and that is certainly the case. Originally it stood for technical innovation, over-the-top customer service, high reliability, attractive design, reasonable prices, which all added up to an American car company trying to do to the Japanese what they did to us in the late 70's and 80's. For a few years it worked, but then the bean-counters in Michigan meddled in the affairs of the Spring Hill crowd, who all left. And they turned it into just another badge-engineering clone brand with nothing to distinguish itself from other GM products, let alone competitive brands.
03-21-09, 12:21 PM
#9
Lexus Champion
I think Saturn will be remembered as an interesting, somewhat successful, experiment by GM that didn't work out for a variety of reasons.
Who knows, maybe in years to come someone else, maybe even GM, will roll out a new brand and use some of the learning gained from Saturn.
Who knows, maybe in years to come someone else, maybe even GM, will roll out a new brand and use some of the learning gained from Saturn.
03-21-09, 12:57 PM
#10
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really buy into the whole argument that Saturn's failure is becuase it dropped what it stood for in the 90s. The cars, on a whole, were still built like cheap also rans, I'm sorry. The coupe with the rear hinged doors (SL2), the sedan, etc. They had deplorable interiors, sub-standard engines (unrefined, pushrod V6), questionable build quality, and generally couldn't stand to compete on a point for point basis with class leading Japanese and European entrants, on any single front. The dealer experience, in my opinion, is completely separate from how the vehicle is designed, engineered, and built. You can put some plastic body pannels on a poorly designed vehicle, but at the end of the day, it's still a poorly designed vehicle. They were also ran, second rate, just as the Chevy, Buick, and Caddys were during the late 90s, going into the 00s,
Saturn of late has shifted their strategy to become the "euro" brand of the GM portfolio, and too little too late. The Aura is actually a great car, so is the Outlook. The Astra carryover is the face of what Saturn could have been.
The fact that Saturn changed their ways from the 90s is what has kept them around for so during the last ten years. They would still be here if it weren't for the global credit crisis and economic meltdown, so I completely disagree with the notion that they are being cut becuase they strayed from their original ways. There are much larger factors at play here, and it isn't some costly plastic body panels that would have never translated into increased marginal revenue during the auto market climate of the last three years.
Saturn of late has shifted their strategy to become the "euro" brand of the GM portfolio, and too little too late. The Aura is actually a great car, so is the Outlook. The Astra carryover is the face of what Saturn could have been.
The fact that Saturn changed their ways from the 90s is what has kept them around for so during the last ten years. They would still be here if it weren't for the global credit crisis and economic meltdown, so I completely disagree with the notion that they are being cut becuase they strayed from their original ways. There are much larger factors at play here, and it isn't some costly plastic body panels that would have never translated into increased marginal revenue during the auto market climate of the last three years.
Last edited by FKL; 03-21-09 at 01:01 PM.
03-21-09, 01:14 PM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
Well, I tried to explain WHY I didn't return to it. (Actually I did, briefly; I had a yellow SC2 coupe briefly in 2001, but only kept it a few weeks. It had a couple of unacceptable defects, even after a number of repair attempts (both me and the service shop-foreman worked on the car together), and I returned it for the 30-day money-back guarantee (which Saturn honored) Shortly after that, I got a yellow IS300....and, later on, joined CL.
.
Shortly after that, I got a yellow IS300....and, later on, joined CL..
03-21-09, 01:18 PM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
I don't really buy into the whole argument that Saturn's failure is becuase it dropped what it stood for in the 90s. The cars, on a whole, were still built like cheap also rans, I'm sorry. The coupe with the rear hinged doors (SL2), the sedan, etc. They had deplorable interiors, sub-standard engines (unrefined, pushrod V6), questionable build quality, and generally couldn't stand to compete on a point for point basis with class leading Japanese and European entrants, on any single front. The dealer experience, in my opinion, is completely separate from how the vehicle is designed, engineered, and built. You can put some plastic body pannels on a poorly designed vehicle, but at the end of the day, it's still a poorly designed vehicle. They were also ran, second rate, just as the Chevy, Buick, and Caddys were during the late 90s, going into the 00s,
.
.
And compare that with the steel-bodied Saturns of today, which are, admittedly, more refined, but, for the most part, are just clones of German Opel-designed or other GM-Division products. Today's Saturns (as a whole), reliability-wise, rate much lower than the Saturns of the 1990's. Again, the Aura is the exception.....its repair record is average, according to Consumer Reports.
03-21-09, 01:40 PM
#13
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See, there is always a constant disconnect between build quality and reliablity. They are not one in the same.
Saturn, and GM products historically during the late 90s, have been poorly designed, engineered, and constructed. Sure, some may have had good reliability ratings, but that doesn't equate to excellent materials and can hardly paint the entire portrait for the vehicle as a whole.
In layman's terms, a Corolla may have excellent reliability ratings, but it in no way competes with the overall build quality of a more expensive, and less reliable Golf. "Being built well" goes beyond which colors Consumer Reports fills the bubbles in with.
Saturn, and GM products historically during the late 90s, have been poorly designed, engineered, and constructed. Sure, some may have had good reliability ratings, but that doesn't equate to excellent materials and can hardly paint the entire portrait for the vehicle as a whole.
In layman's terms, a Corolla may have excellent reliability ratings, but it in no way competes with the overall build quality of a more expensive, and less reliable Golf. "Being built well" goes beyond which colors Consumer Reports fills the bubbles in with.
03-21-09, 02:34 PM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Saturn, and GM products historically during the late 90s, have been poorly designed, engineered, and constructed. Sure, some may have had good reliability ratings, but that doesn't equate to excellent materials and can hardly paint the entire portrait for the vehicle as a whole.
Insurance companies liked the old plastic-bodied Saturns, too. The cheapest insurance on a car I ever owned (with GEICO), was a 1999 SL2. The GEICO people told me that Saturns cost the company significantly less in claims, repair, and liability payouts than most other brands.
Anyhow, have we talked about Saturns enough? (yes, part of it, of course, is my fault....I droned on and on myself)
We've dominated the whole thread with just one make. Let's move on to some more brands. 
03-21-09, 06:38 PM
#15
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go back farther. The 1991 Saturn SC, for example, was absolutely the equal if not superior to all of its Japanese competitors in terms of both reliability AND build quality. Just go back to magazine car reviews of the day--they were universally blown away that an American make could produce a car of such quality, particularly when undercutting the competition by a few thousand dollars. They weren't luxury cars, but you have to remember what Civics, Celicas, etc. were built like in those days--"good enough" was good enough to completely blow away the American competition but those cars also were not filled with luxury amenities or materials.
Saturn got it right, across the board, out of the chute. That is remarkable enough, but what was equally remarkable was how quickly GM was able to ruin the experiment.