Sweet Pete's "Precision Motors" Rebadge

“Sweet” Peter DeLorenzo, the self-styled Autoextremist, has some extreme thoughts on the General Motors predicament. Specifically, his latest “Rant” suggests that General Motors is so compromised as a brand that he’d go as far as to rename the artist formerly known as “the world’s largest automaker.” “If GM is able to emerge from all of this with a strengthening pulse,” writes DeLorenzo (without getting too hung up on that “if”), “then I have a recommendation. Substitute the word ‘Precision’ for ‘General’ in the company title and then move on, burying the old company name – and the associated negativity – once and for all.” Holy unpronouncable symbols, Batman! Precision Motors? What, was “Patriotic Motors” taken? More importantly, how can Sweet Pete think a name change will make a lick of difference, while rejecting bankruptcy, brand cutting and other meaningful reforms? For more insight into DeLorenzo’s Extremist Makeover Branding Edition, check out some of his thoughts on GM’s brands over at the New York Times.

In a round table discussion on the fate of GM’s brands, DeLorenzo practices some intellectual yoga in a hopeless attempt to justify GM’s clinging to its dead brands. “In past decades, brand loyalty was paramount and a very real and powerful aspect of the auto business,” writes DeLorenzo. “Those days went away long ago. When Detroit began its 20-year slide into oblivion (around the late ’70s), the concept of traditional brand loyalty eroded along with Detroit’s dwindling market share. But does that mean that brands like Pontiac are totally dispensable? No. Which is why G.M. is very likely going to retain at least two, if not three Pontiac models going forward (and probably sell them through G.M.C. dealerships).”

And why does the Autoextremist believe that “there are probably enough people who would keep the Pontiac brand in existence as a niche performance vehicle within the abbreviated G.M. product portfolio.”? You guessed it: the same brand loyalty he admits “eroded” long ago. And DeLorenzo completely fails to identify the need for a separate “enthusiast” brand when the Corvette is already a fundamental (and pretty damn sporty) part of the Chevrolet brand. DeLorenzo’s analysis isn’t quite as asinine as Colin “I Want My GTO” Comer, but but for a man who advertises his insights as “the bare-knuckled, unvarnished, high-octane truth,” blind justification of GM’s “strategy” of the moment rings awfully hollow.