This article is part of the GM Authority Opinion Desk series, where you can see exactly what’s on the minds of the GM Authority crew.
In case you haven’t heard, Chevrolet will present a retro-themed, rear-wheel drive concept this week at the 2012 Detroit Auto Show. What makes this vehicle interesting, besides the fact that it could prove to be the spiritual successor to the venerable Pontiac G8, is that nobody — not the press nor the public, have seen or heard about this vehicle.
In fact, there have been no teaser photos or videos, no square-by-square striptease reveals, and no “let’s have our fans name this car on Facebook” mumbo-jumbo (we’re looking at you, Toyota). No, ladies and gentlemen, this bow tie-wielding concept car is new to the core. And herein lies our question: can marketers the world over learn from such an introduction?
For starters, there is something to be said about building buzz before an event or an official introduction. Releasing a sneak peak photo or some kind of interactive game gets people to take notice and the press to start writing. We get it. But what about introducing a product that no one is anticipating? A vehicle that no one is expecting, let alone prepared for.
Apple is the master of such releases. The amount of excitement and elation among Apple fans reaches record levels before an Apple press event. This alone gets the media to take note that something is about to be announced… and that people are genuinely waiting with anticipation. Like children on Christmas Eve, waiting with bated breath for Christmas Day — for the time to tear apart the wrapping paper and find out what their parents got them.
Now, we’re not fooled: there’s much more planning and strategizing that goes into a product announcement and unveiling than deciding when and how to present the product initially. In either case, there’s much more to it than we can discuss in this article. But we’re still fans of the power of surprise. Are you?
This article is part of the GM Authority Opinion Desk series, where you can see exactly what’s on the minds of the GM Authority crew.
Comments
“But we’re still fans of the power of surprise. Are you?”
Yes. I think it is a very smart move on Chevy’s part to hold back. We used to see things literally years in advance and by the time it was released, the look was not only dated but watered down too! These are good times to be a GM fan as it seems they are doing many things, such as holding off on this introduction, right finally.
Everybody is saying the Fusion is going to steal the show. I’m hoping this complete mystery reveal will.
I just hope that it doesn’t take 3-4 years to build it after the concept been unveiled. Why does it take 2 years to Install a oil burner in a Cruze?
Good question. This is totally unconfirmed and unofficial — but it seems that they first tried to build the diesel in the ‘States, which failed (not sure of the reason). So they then decided to move production to Austria (where the current 1.4T is built), and this necessitated finding new suppliers and changing up logistics, etc.
The power of surprise is only as strong as the product they’re unveiling. That “one more thing” moment is the one everyone is waiting for because they have good reason to believe it’s going to blow their socks off. Apple rarely disappoints (iPhone 4S was really the first time they didn’t meet or exceed expectations). Consumer Reports does a lot of hatin’ on GM but even so there is still plenty of room for improvement in terms of overall quality/reliability, feel, and fit and finish of many GM vehicles. They have done better, but there’s more work to do. GM is no where near the same level as Apple – in either the superior quality of their products, or consequently in the cult following and fever pitch anticipation that comes from selling the best stuff. The surprise needs to be worth the wait, otherwise after a few times GM will look like the boy who cried wolf and no one will care if they say they have a surprise. And it needs to be available for sale within a reasonable time frame (months not years) – in the same form or very similar to what they unveil.
Well-said, sir. I wonder if there is an automaker with an Apple/cult-like following. It may not be GM… BMW? Audi?
It’s hard to compare the two industries directly (refresh cycles way different, fewer people in a position to re-up in given economy – most people can afford the new iPhone, far fewer a new car), but the idea is to have inspired fans looking for whats next rather than just nostalgia for the past. If I had to pick one I’d say BMW (once the new M3 comes out, time to start rumors about the next one…just like iPad/iPhone), with Audi mounting a challenge – they make some damn sexy cars- but Cadillac is starting to make a similar splash. Not as calm cool and collected as the super slick Audi or the cult following of the outfit in Bayern but a more refined American muscle has been making a statement, and they have people’s attention now. ATS is another move in the right direction, now if we can get the ELR and a new Provoq…
Hard to see Chevy build that kind of fan base but I think Cadillac has the potential, they’re not just for Grandpas anymore.
Does anyone think it might be an alpha based concept, not unlike the ATS we just saw?
I hope it’s the caprice for non law enforcement types 6.0 /6 speed / SS
They’re both coupes:
RWD:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/gallery/2012-chevrolet-code130-r-concept/
FWD:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/gallery/2012-chevrolet-tru140s-concept/
Yep, it’s Alpha-based, and yep, it’s ugly. Seriously, the 1-Series is the only BMW whose styling you don’t want to copy. Maybe we didn’t hear much about this concept because no one who worked on it wanted to be associated with this ugly thing? It’s seriously hideous. If this is the future of Chevrolet, well, maybe it’s time to hit the Eject button…
It’s slightly reminiscent of the 1er, but carried itself much better. Sure, the overall profile looks similar, but it’s usually the front headlamps that make the 1 not the most attractive vehicle in the world.
I love both of these concepts, but the 130R is what I’ll buy in the next 2 years.
Why the hell can’t GM learn from Hyundai. The ZO6 debut with 505 hp in 2005, don’t you think in 2012 the car should at least have 550 hp Alex? GM needs to learn about quick adaptation accross the board to keep their products fresh Alex. There is no way that Hyundai 5.0 V-8 should be matching a base Corvette for hp or even a Camaro. Mr. Luft please reply and tell this Corvette and Camaro diehard fan that GM is about to shock the competition.
I still think that GM takes to Damn long to respond to its competitors. Check the Hyundai V-6 at 348 hp while GM 3.6 can only muster 323 hp. Now look at the 1.4 turbo at 138 hp again very poor. Hyundai now has a 1.6 turbo making 201 hp and 195lbs torque with outstanding EPA numbers. What is this, is Hyundai really that advance ahead of GM in technology that all of a sudden all its vehicles are becoming the most powerful and still so fuel efficient? Hyundai is now 2nd to Porsche flat 6 in hp ratings, for 6 engines. LOL
Why, where do I begin?
“Why the hell can’t GM learn from Hyundai.”
Learn what, exactly? Hyundai’s “interesting” design language or the disconnected ride & handling of most Hyundai vehicles? Or the fact that for every Hyundai sold, nearly 4 (more expensive) Chevys go out the door?
“I still think that GM takes to Damn long to respond to its competitors.”
You ain’t seen nothing yet. Remember, it was only two and some-odd years ago that GM emerged from bankruptcy as a new company? The giant hasn’t even begun its warm-up, and you’re already screaming for the final match.
“Check the Hyundai V-6 at 348 hp while GM 3.6 can only muster 323 hp. Now look at the 1.4 turbo at 138 hp again very poor. Hyundai now has a 1.6 turbo making 201 hp and 195lbs torque with outstanding EPA numbers.”
For starters, you’re referring to Hyundai engines that haven’t even been released! So what are we talking about here? These things are so new that they haven’t even begun production!
Additionally, in case you haven’t noticed, the industry and its players operate on cycles. Hyundai is undergoing an introduction phase in models and technology — which is very good for it. But as I already said, the new GM is just warming up. The engines you refer to (1.4T) is a 20-year-old design that’s not turbo-charged or optimized for performance. As for the 3.8 making 348 horses — yes, that’s what happens when you increase the displacement.
Let’s see what happens in three years when Hyundai has played all of its cards… and GM is undergoing its own introduction/expansion phase…
Should I also begin to end my comments with LOL?
You make a good point about response times from GM. I think a lot has to do with the fact that GM is still a massive ship trying to correct itself (they did just fight off backruptcy don’t forget.) It will take time. The good news is that they ARE on the track, improving slowly but surely. I think their new products are fantastic (Cruze, Sonic, Camaro.) as well as their concepts (the 130 and 140 are both great cars for younger buyers.) I think they will speed up they’re response time to competitors in due time.
Now, as I always say: Bring on the C7!!
“The ZO6 debut with 505 hp in 2005, don’t you think in 2012 the car should at least have 550 hp”
The passage of time does not demand HP output of a car to follow suit.
What if the Z06 had 450hp but weighed 250KG less? Would it be less of car because its HP rating didn’t following the unsound idea that HP numbers should increase over time?
, I meant 6 cylinder engines
You think the number of cylinders matters? The arrangement matters.
A V6 is not harmonically balanced as a flat 6 is and thus the Porsche would have less mass sloshing about as the crank rolls over leading to better performance numbers. The same goes for straight 6’s, flat 12’s and V12’s; all four piston arrangements are naturally harmonically balanced and do not require balance shafts.
It’s unwise to think just about the HP numbers of 2 different 6 cylinder engines and to think they are comprible without considering their arrangement.
I think it says somewhere that Hyundai’s horsepower claim is about 20+ horsepower less than what Hyundai claims. And then I think someone told the EPA to re-rate the fuel economy on the Elantra too!
The Monte Carlo should be & couldve been a TRU muscle car
In absence of the Camaro, w/ it’s great style; low wide great
Line; FOR WHAT?! DAM STUPID ASS FWD, should’ve had
LS-1, then 2 w/ 6 SPd manual. W/, repeat with t-top like the
Camaro should add!!!!!!!!! Get w/ it Charger,challenger & mustang
And even 365 HP Tuarus for GODS SAKE. do the Carlo RT & add
A chevelle? If u want to rule!!!!!!!! Also we want a TRANS-AM!
Being Camaro (2nd main muscle car behind the vette & grappy
GTO & so so (4 dr) G8. U totally made a beautifully designed
Monte Carlo; great stance, nice lines perfect to carry an LS-1 and
LS-2, but WTF??! a BS FRONT WHEEL DRIVE, I’d hope y’all
Would consider making it a RWD W/ auto & 6 SPd man w/ 375-
400 HP , & why is THER a tunnel under car as though it couldve
Had a drive shaft. Give ur customers what they want and need,
MORE RWD v-8. The M Carlo could’ve carried that need while
The Camaro slept for 8 YEARS !!!!! GO BOW-TIE! gooo!