The new Dieter Ads
Lotsa talk about the newly running ads out there; here’s my 2 pennies.
In short, the worst part was the ‘german and american’ engineering, which they’ve reversed. The best part was the mustache joke with the little girl. That was cute.
Digging a little deeper, the pragmatic part of me says:
I’m not apopletic about the ads like DeLorenzo is (of course now that Vines slapped him back DCX & especially Chrysler won’t be doing anything right for some time, so we might as well get used to it). Their focus isn’t really on the vehicles themselves, it’s on establishing the relationship between Chrysler and Mercedes in the public’s eye using the vehicles as examples.
It’s probably a good idea to do that now, as it’s true, and it sets them apart from Ford & GM. Given the news and the fact that most people get their only information from the news, that’s not a bad thing. We sometimes have to sit back and realize John Q. Carbuyer doesn’t look at Chrysler, DCX, or the takeover like we do.
Ideally, DCX will best succeed with a true mixing of MB and CG, where and when appropriate, and since it’s been awhile since the takeover, people have moved on and any general ill will has possibly been replaced by ‘well, they make Mercedes too, so….’ Might as well run that up the marketing flagpole and see if it salutes.
The ads themselves? Frankly I think they’ll prove unmemorable. They’re cute and kind of ‘haha’ funny, but they’re not really hilarous or particularly attention getting. I get the feeling they seemed a whole lot better on the drawing board. This is, however, a step up from some of the dreck they’ve served up in the past, so…
There’s been talk about the ‘It’s a German thing, you wouldn’t understand’ in reference to Lederhosen…Hmm. I kinda thought it was just a toss away line. I didn’t think it was a tag line, and didn’t find it particularly offensive either. I also didn’t associate it with the “It’s a Jeep thing” line either, though as often happens after it was pointed out it suddenly seemed fairly obvious.
Of course, the other side of the scales contains the still-smoldering ire that the whole takeover thing happened in the first place, and tucked away there in a corner is the hope that one day Chrysler will stand on its own again. But the two dartboard-fodder execs that forged this organization are thankfully gone, and it’s probably much better to spend more time in the ‘now’ than in the ‘then’.
Although…I still can’t help but wonder…What If….what if Iacocca handed the reigns to Lutz instead? Maybe he did in some parallel universe….
If he had, I believe Chrysler would still have Plymouth, for one thing.
Chrysler would be in a better position in today’s market which is now
demanding more basic, four cylinder cars (like the old Breeze). Instead, under
the leadership of our friends from Stuttgart we get the Smart. Remember,
the main reason for killing Plymouth, as it was stated, was to save marketing
costs (having to market and advertise for Chrysler, Dodge, and similar
Plymouth models). What a joke! Mercedes has lost $2.6 billion on the Smart. Now they
are going to spend even more marketing it in the US. The Smart may win a few sales in
New York or San Francisco, but other than that, it is not a car most Americans
will want. For $12,000, American’s want more than two seats and a tiny engine. It
is certainly no competitor to Kia or Scion (or Yaris or Fit for that matter).
Do you think that Plymouth could have won its share of sales away from Toyota and
Honda if it was allowed a piece of that $2.6 billion? You bet.
We’d probably have the Imperial on sale already. Mercedes seems to think that there is no room for a more expensive Chrysler. Maybe they are afraid of being upstaged (a la ME412). Chrysler can certainly build a better car than a Town Car or a DTS–and it should be
given the chance to do so.
There are advantages in a partnership, I definitely agree with Rich on that–for example, there is no reason for Chrysler and Mercedes to independently develop ESP systems. That’s
a great place to share: that is appropriate. But Chrysler needs autonomy to survive long
term. If it wants to distinguish itself from GM or Ford it needs to be free to develop
cars that will draw people to the showroom without incentives. That is the key to beating
Toyota. And that comes from the American creativity that brought us the hemi, the 300’s,
Exner’s 57’s, the minivan, the LH, Ram, and the Neon. It doesn’t come from Mercedes
(Mercedes has a lot to be proud of but they can’t take credit for those, American things).
Dr Z on TV glorifying German technology doesn’t help Chrysler one bit.
I know Lee Iacocca never intended Chrysler’s takeover by Daimler-Benz. His own takeover
bid went south when Kerkorian and Jerry York failed to raise enough money to make the deal work. Kerkorian then turned around and made alot of money selling out to Mercedes.
I keep wanting to “Ask Dr. Z” what a lifelong Chrysler customer who wants a small sedan with good gas mileage is supposed to do, faced with the current product line.
Gas mileage is a major factor for me, and I’m not too thrilled that the only Chrysler/Dodge that could match or surpass the EPA numbers on my ‘91 Daytona (2.5/5-speed, 24 city/24 hwy), the Neon (25/32 AT, 29/36 stick), has been replaced by a baby SUV (the Caliber, 28/32 with the 1.8/stick that will be impossible to find, 26/30 with the 2.0/CVT that adds a grand to the sticker).
You make a good case for the Hornet. ‘07 Sebring 2.4L looks good for mileage too: 23 city /31 hwy.
Jeremy..a note on the minivan…Daimler is taking credit for it. Dr. Z. himself says DaimlerChrysler invented the minivan in one of the ads.
Revisionist history is a wonderful thing, eh?
Yep. Next, he will take credit for inventing the wheel.
I just caught my own typo: The numbers on my ‘91 Daytona are 24/34, not 24/24.
Got 40 mpg in it once, going to Englishtown and back.
I live in the Sacramento, Ca area. All TV stations in this area play your ads 3 to 5 times every 30 minutes. Any more when I see one I just want to scream. Please tell the executive in charge of advertising enough is enough. I like most of your products but because of these over-saturated ads I would sonner buy a Yugo…………John
I agree with you John. I don’t know about other parts of the country, but in my area of Florida these commercials are shown all the time. Too much. And I don’t think they are cute. I liked the commercials they had done for the 300 recently, but these new ads are a huge step backwards in my view. Jeremy is right, Lee Iacocca never intended the takeover by MB, that is ludicrous. And the smart car?? No one but tree hugging hippies in California will even consider buying that, it’s just not practical. I support Chrysler products (I have recently replaced my older Concorde with a new 300C and love it) but I am starting to lose a little respect for the company as a part of MB.
like my 68 plymouth boattail coupe, 48 mpg and 174 mph
Does anyone understand what Dr. Z says as he climbs out of the car after crashing it into the wall? I can’t get through the infernal German accent. I believe he ends a few other ad spots with the same words.
Lame, totally lame. I live in Quebec and here, the ads that work are the adds made here. For example, Honda hired a comedian to advertise the Civic, and it’s been around 2-3 years that his adds are constantly funny (its about a Civic owner laughing at a gas station worker because he never has to put gaz since the Civic’s mileage is great). Same thing about Toyota, where they hired a comedian that supposely makes a roadtrip with her dog all throughout Quebec in her Yaris, and constantly says her Yaris costs almost nothing of gaz, and you see the Yaris driving through very nice places, where there are forests and all (mixing Toyota with environnement, even if Toyota pollutes the earth with the Lexus LX).
And now you got Daimler-Chrysler, with it’s totally amateur way of making an add. You put the “Ask DR.Z” adds, and you translate them in French. Well, it simply doesn’t work. They have no idea of the needs of consummers in Quebec especially, who want small cars with great mileage. Keep in mind though, that the Ram and 300C adds are pretty well made in my opinion, but it’d be much better to make local adds.
And also, when Dr.Z crashes his pacifica, where are the airbags? safety features sure.
I cerainly won’t be replacing my ‘95 Concord with the current 300. The 300M was a posibility.
I’ll be staying with Chrysler simply because my ‘95 Concord which I wanted to trade last year was better than any current Chrysler product.
Chrysler only has one FWD mid sized and smaller car. Yes I know about the Caliber, but it looks like a truck. The new Sebring was my hope, but not holding a full sized spare and the ugly impractical channels in the hood killed that. Also the Sebring needs the 2.7L V6 engine to be upgraded to VVT.
If something sad were to happen to my Concord I’d have to look elsewhere after buying Chrysler for 25 yrs.
By the way Chrysler please depart from joke ads and give us some FACTS about your products!
One word: Avenger. Personally I don’t mind not having a full size spare, not having had a flat tire since my wife exchanged her Escort for a Neon in 1995, and before that not since I sold my Camaro in 1988. I don’t mind the hood channels… have you driven the Sebring 2.7 or is that an opinion based on paper ratings? I don’t mean to sound offensive but I think we have to drive these things before judging power…