[CantCatchMe]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

I do. I like an easy way to use the navigation, tight functionality with syncing and pairing my iPhone since that's how I play my music.

Syncing to my calendar to quickly pull up appointments, meetings, dinners, etc and the ability for the car to recognize addresses in your calendar and put it in your GPS if need be. Also being able to send an address from my phone or computer instantly to my car.

I also enjoy little gadgets like the head up display. None of that has anything to do with "lazy driving habits" and more so to do with day to day convenience.

Personally, keeping your eyes on the road is important, not on a navigation screen to see your dinner dates and appointments. It's not hard to look before hand on your phone or calendar.

By lazy driving habits I'm talking about having the car park itself, pull out of the garage now a days, and heads up if you decide to be lazy not to use your turn signal...see it often btw.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by CantCatchMe

Personally, keeping your eyes on the road is important, not on a navigation screen to see your dinner dates and appointments. It's not hard to look before hand on your phone or calendar.

I agree, which is why it's useful to have the technology to be able to quickly do it before I set off. By doing what I described, I don't actually have to type anything. The iDrive pulls it up and I go. Sure it's not hard to look beforehand on my phone or calendar but if I want GPS directions, looking at it beforehand doesn't do me any good does it? It's also why HUD is useful, allows me to keep my eyes on the road more often than if I didn't have one.

By lazy driving habits I'm talking about having the car park itself, pull out of the garage now a days, and heads up if you decide to be lazy not to use your turn signal...see it often btw.

I don't think those are "lazy" habits, those are more "see what my car can do!" features but yeah point taken.

[CantCatchMe]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

I agree, which is why it's useful to have the technology to be able to quickly do it before I set off. By doing what I described, I don't actually have to type anything. The iDrive pulls it up and I go. Sure it's not hard to look beforehand on my phone or calendar but if I want GPS directions, looking at it beforehand doesn't do me any good does it?



I don't think those are "lazy" habits, those are more "see what my car can do!" features but yeah point taken.

I agree with your points as well. Just wanted to clarify mine as well.

I have iDrive that I only use when I go out of state or up north.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by Boland01

I rented a 2016 Malibu last week. I will admit the structure was solid- no vibrations or thunks going over bumps. Other than that there is NO comparison to our 535ix or 335i sport.

I didn't like the key fob that still had a flip out key or the start stop feature. For a rental or basic car it was fine but not something I'd look to buy for myself.

2016s at rental fleets are not the new body style.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by CantCatchMe

No kidding, no wonder why GM cars tend to look like crap besides their superstar vehicle, the C7 lol.

This is not unique to GM but the industry as a whole.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

The message on the screen may simply be communicating the people in the commercial are not professional actors. However, the "real people" could be provided a script of what to say and do and still not be consider professional actors, similar to "reality television". There's no way to really know.

You can conspiracy theory it all you want. I am stating the fact from professional experience.

Those were pretty damn good/natural responses from amatueurs handed a script.

None of that would be necessary. They recorded tons of people and cherry picked reactions. I am sure they had sound bites that were less than flattering too lol. Those people didn't have scripts either.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

You can conspiracy theory it all you want. I am stating the fact from professional experience.

Those were pretty damn good/natural responses from amatueurs handed a script.

None of that would be necessary. They recorded tons of people and cherry picked reactions. I am sure they had sound bites that were less than flattering too lol. Those people didn't have scripts either.

Cherry picking would be more believable if each person saw the car by themselves one-by-one and they pieced together individual reactions. However, what makes it less believable is the fact there is a group of idiots who named several other cars in front of each other (none agreeing with each other on what it was, with each naming a premium brand) and none named a GM brand. So they had to record not just tons of people, but tons of groups of people to get that reaction from each person in the group, which is far less likely than piecing together cherry picked individual reactions.

Here's a better conspiracy theory than mine, which actually accuses GM of using actors:

http://thenewswheel.com/are-chevrole...mercials-fake/

[mookie45]

The best part is the fine print at the bottom of commercial.

"Shown at $36,500"

There are a lot better places I could spend $40K.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by mookie45

The best part is the fine print at the bottom of commercial.

"Shown at $36,500"

There are a lot better places I could spend $40K.

That's true of almost every car commercial. Always shown with optional equipment. All the midsizers, Accord, Camry, Fusion, they all show fully loaded out in the $34-36k range.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

Cherry picking would be more believable if each person saw the car by themselves one-by-one and they pieced together individual reactions. However, what makes it less believable is the fact there is a group of idiots who named several other cars in front of each other (none agreeing with each other on what it was, with each naming a premium brand) and none named a GM brand. So they had to record not just tons of people, but tons of groups of people to get that reaction from each person in the group, which is far less likely than piecing together cherry picked individual reactions.

Here's a better conspiracy theory than mine, which actually accuses GM of using actors:

http://thenewswheel.com/are-chevrole...mercials-fake/

This is getting more convoluted lol.

The Spanish speaking version...the laws of factuality I know for sure apply to the US. So mixing in foreign market commercials to disprove the US factuality does not play out.

And to your point about individuals vs groups, carefully watch the editing. A person is talking and its a close up where its hard to make out other people. In other words it looks very pieced together, you are unable to see the consistent 5-10 people each time a statement is made.

Again, I am only inserting myself as a person with first hand experience in the following mediums:

Worked for a known company on products which led to commercials and dealing with legal and claims.

Working and designing for car companies and the degree of study that got me there.

Participating in OEM focus groups

Being a psuedo reality TV personality where I experienced the power of editing

I am also published in articles such as the Boston Globe about GM advertising tactics

Does that mean I am without a doubt 100% right about this? No. Unless I was there during the Chevy shoot AND during the editing, I can't be 100%.

But I am as qualified as it gets on giving really accurate back ground on this scenario. I am more qualified than your typical journalist or blogger on the subject like the link you posted

[M6Pilot]

It is what it is ! When I sit in any vehicle I pretty much know what I'm in, just look around at the details, they do distinguish themselves quite well! metal looks like metal, wood looks like wood, leather feels like leather. I'm not confused by faux leather (pleather),vinyl and plastic. If you can't tell the difference then maybe this would suit you and your wants or needs for luxury. I'm not saying this car doesn't work for some, I'm just saying "it is what it is" an imitation of luxury brand vehicle.

[Efthreeoh]

I think had none of the people in the commercial said "BMW" this thread would not exist.

It is just amazing how BMW fanboyz are so easily offended.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I think had none of the people in the commercial said "BMW" this thread would not exist.

It is just amazing how BMW fanboyz are so easily offended.

Poking fun at this particular ad isn't limited to BMW forums. Same thread here (and I'm guessing others elsewhere):

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthrea...ibu-commercial

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I think had none of the people in the commercial said "BMW" this thread would not exist.

It is just amazing how BMW fanboyz are so easily offended.

Haha I don't think anyone is offended, just the sheer stupidity of the ad since BMW (much like any luxury automaker) has very specific design cues.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

Haha I don't think anyone is offended, just the sheer stupidity of the ad since BMW (much like any luxury automaker) has very specific design cues.

I think Chevy was making a different point, which was to the general buying public the badge influences the purchase decisions more than the design, engineering, and perceived quality of the product. Put a roundel on the Malibu and they buyers would believe it WAS a BMW.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I think Chevy was making a different point, which was to the general buying public the badge influences the purchase decisions more than the design, engineering, and perceived quality of the product. Put a roundel on the Malibu and they buyers would believe it WAS a BMW.

I may have mentioned this earlier...

We studied a focus group from like 2002 where Caddy had the first CTS with no badging. People said great things about it. The minute they learned it was a Cadillac most people literally took back their positive statements. The brand perception, status and brand bias completely overpowered positive response to design, quality and percieved value. It's very frustrating on the inside that no matter what design and engineering does well they can't win the fight that advertising/marketing has on its hands.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

I may have mentioned this earlier...

We studied a focus group from like 2002 where Caddy had the first CTS with no badging. People said great things about it. The minute they learned it was a Cadillac most people literally took back their positive statements. The brand perception, status and brand bias completely overpowered positive response to design, quality and percieved value. It's very frustrating on the inside that no matter what design and engineering does well they can't win the fight that advertising/marketing has on its hands.

So not to get too political here, but I 100% agree with you. I'll use the Volt and Prius as an example. Having good experience with both cars now, it is clear the Volt is an extremely well designed, well engineered and well built automobile. It achieves all of it's design goals with room to spare. As does the Prius. However some observers, mainly GM bashers, view the Volt as a sales flop. In its 5th year I think to total sales in the US is just over 100,000 units. I think the Chevrolet badge bias has a lot to do with the sales of the Volt.

Had the Volt been a Toyota Prius branded car, it would have sold double the unit sales. A large segment of hybrid market is to people on the Liberal side of the aisle - the people who believe the planet is undergoing climate change due to human activity. And they believe the hype that driving a Prius is far better for the planet than driving a Hummer. The Volt in most instances is actually better for the planet in terms of direct tail pipe CO2 emissions than a Prius (if you believe the hype), so one would think that the Prius crowd would flock to the Volt. They didn't. It was a GM/Chevrolet product.

[FriskyDingo]

Originally Posted by davesz4mc

How does the 250 hp 2.0t make more power than the 365hp 3.5tt SHO? The SHO is a full second quicker in the 1/4 and is AWD.

The second generation Ford Taurus SHO had 220hp.


Reading comprehension is your friend.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

I may have mentioned this earlier...

We studied a focus group from like 2002 where Caddy had the first CTS with no badging. People said great things about it. The minute they learned it was a Cadillac most people literally took back their positive statements. The brand perception, status and brand bias completely overpowered positive response to design, quality and percieved value. It's very frustrating on the inside that no matter what design and engineering does well they can't win the fight that advertising/marketing has on its hands.

That experience seems to imply the marketing approach in this ad won't work.

[FriskyDingo]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

So not to get too political here, but I 100% agree with you. I'll use the Volt and Prius as an example. Having good experience with both cars now, it is clear the Volt is an extremely well designed, well engineered and well built automobile. It achieves all of it's design goals with room to spare. As does the Prius. However some observers, mainly GM bashers, view the Volt as a sales flop. In its 5th year I think to total sales in the US is just over 100,000 units. I think the Chevrolet badge bias has a lot to do with the sales of the Volt.

Had the Volt been a Toyota Prius branded car, it would have sold double the unit sales. A large segment of hybrid market is to people on the Liberal side of the aisle - the people who believe the planet is undergoing climate change due to human activity. And they believe the hype that driving a Prius is far better for the planet than driving a Hummer. The Volt in most instances is actually better for the planet in terms of direct tail pipe CO2 emissions than a Prius (if you believe the hype), so one would think that the Prius crowd would flock to the Volt. They didn't. It was a GM/Chevrolet product.

Agreed.

Being in the car business, I see extreme instances of this. At least half the people in the business are loyal to the brand they work for to a fault and will defend them to no end.

Touching on your Volt comments, when I worked at a Toyota store, I often heard talk of bad the Volt was. Never mind that it rode and handled far better than a Prius. Or that it was much more conventional inside. Or that it power a Prius could only dream of. According to them, it was vastly inferior to the Prius. If it were built by Toyota, they'd have been singing it's praises.

I now work at a GM store owned by the same group, and when the new Colorado came out, we got it and the old Tacoma together for a comparison. All they did was talk shit about the Colorado. Even though the Chevy is a far nicer truck, and drives immensely better.

People are so narrow-minded and ignorant, it's not even funny.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

That experience seems to imply the marketing approach in this ad won't work.

Cadillac and Chevy inhabit different space in the market and have different brand perception hurdles. Big three car qualtiy has also come a long way in 14yrs. But the theme of product execution vs brand bias/perception is still an issue.

[Ricfutures]

Originally Posted by auf Deutsch

So sick of these Chevy series commercials. There's like 8 of them.

"How much do you think you'd pay for a car like this?....50-65k", responds the scripted actor. GTFO!

"Chevy, Chevy, Chevy."