Joel Ewanick On "The Parent Company"

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

In recent interviews with Automotive News [sub] and AutoObserver, GM’s recently-hired marketing boss Joel Ewanick dished out some of the insights that have earned him the reputation for being an ace image guy. He tells AN [sub] that

Consumers don’t buy General Motors. General Motors sells nothing

Oh, really? Because GM decided to remove the GM Mark of Excellence from its vehicles right around the time it emerged from bankruptcy, the better part of a year before Ewanick was brought on board. Since the first Government Motors joke emerged on the internet, GM has sought to distance itself from its corporate umbrella’s brand… and this is the insight Ewanick is bringing to the organization? Hell, Automotive News [sub] suggested that “Stop mentioning General Motors” when he was hired in June of this year. Which leaves Ewanick only one choice: don’t talk about General Motors more than anyone might imagine.

AutoObserver notes

Ewanick even has been insisting lately on saying “the parent company” instead of “General Motors” or “GM.” He simply doesn’t want to give any quarter, any more, anywhere, to the notion of a corporate brand, because he believes it’s meaningless in helping sell vehicles and only gets in the way of the vehicle brands that must become clearer to American consumers.

Of course, there’s a fine line between emphasizing consumer brands and using the corporate brand to sponge up consumers’ righteous anger at GM’s bailout. Does Ewanick really want Americans to think of Chevy and Buick as truly independent brands, or does he just want everyone to stop talking about GM’s decades of failure?

We’re moving sheet metal instead of telling our story. We’ve got to get back to telling our story. What do we want to tell people about Chevrolet? We’re going to remind you from time to time that we’re part of the fabric of society

So Ewanick is against talking about GM, so he’s going to present Chevrolet’s “story” as being somehow authentically American? How does one separate Chevrolet’s contribution to “the fabric of society” without mentioning GM’s government ownership, bailout-bankruptcy, mass layoffs and dependence on overseas product development? According to AN [sub]

Ewanick said that to relax, he likes to watch auto auctions on cable TV. The shows reinforce for him the visceral connection that millions of Americans feel for specific brands of automobiles.

He said he noticed that most of the cars auctioned are GM products, and a lot are Chevrolets. He said he was surprised that one Chevrolet station wagon from the ’60s sold for $35,000. That’s the kind of feeling that GM’s four brands must tap into.

But there’s more to Ewanick’s vision than just charging more money based on emotional appeals. He tells AutoObserverIf you ask someone to build a ‘collage’ of the Chevy brand as researchers often do, you’ll see them include rational things like performance and quality, but they’ll always layer on the feelings that Chevy brings out. That’s the strength of Chevy, and you’ll see us take advantage of this.

Rational, emotional… Chevy can do it all. As long as it never mentions its parent company… or tries to do it all.

We made a conscious decision not to get too fancy about the brand as we launch these vehicles. We don’t want to get in the way of ourselves

In fairness to Ewanick, it can be tough to outline a vision… perhaps he should start with explaining the problem he was brought in to fix.

My boss, Mark Reuss, asked me to bring people into the organization that will challenge the way we look at things. As you go through a war and you get too close to things, you forget. You forget to see things through the eyes of the consumer

Wait, are we sure Ewanick wasn’t hired to be GM’s corporate PR boss? Because his ability to hide the truth about GM seem far more compelling than his ideas about selling GM’s cars or rebuilding its brands. In fact, his first truly innovative move in terms of selling GM’s products was just announced [via AN [sub]]: for the launch of the Chevrolet Cruze, GM is encouraging dealers to offer comparison test drives in Honda Civics and Toyota Corollas. Getting customers into those two market-dominating but aged competitors should help change perceptions about Chevrolet the way Ewanick was able to change perceptions about Hyundai, but goosing test drives has little to do with Chevrolet’s contribution to “the fabric of society.”

It’s nice to see Ewanick getting some of the “walk” right, but he might have waited a bit before so publicly talking the talk. After all, his interviews give the impression that GM has changed him more than the other way around.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 19 comments
  • Truckducken Truckducken on Sep 01, 2010

    I can't slag the guy for any of this. At least he's bright enough to recognize that the GM brand is worthless at best for selling cars, unlike the fools before him who thought that sticking the GM logo on Saabs would be something other than a $5000-off coupon. As for how to represent the actual brands: what the hell would you say about Chevrolet? He can't tell the truth - that they've been pushing total shite since the Vega era - so he's gotta come up with an alternative approach that alienates neither the public nor his company. And meanwhile, we all have to hope the product itself continues to improve.

  • Mjz Mjz on Sep 01, 2010

    If Ewanick were truly a marketing genius he would get Toyota and Honda dealers to provide Cruzes for comparison! Now that would be news.

    • Rob Finfrock Rob Finfrock on Sep 02, 2010

      Unlikel, of course. Despite their current woes, neither Honda nor Toyota are desperate for credibility, and have no reason to even acknowledge the competition... particularly this laughable "rival" that combines the worst of Detroit and Daewoo. Government Motors, on the other hand, is desperate. Ewanick best pray his dealers keep those comparison Civics and Corollas absolutely filthy, with under-inflated tires and other performance subtractors. That's really the Cruze's only hope.

  • ToolGuy "Nothing is greater than the original. Same goes for original Ford Parts. They’re the parts we built to build your Ford. Anything else is imitation."
  • Slavuta I don't know how they calc this. My newest cars are 2017 and 2019, 40 and 45K. Both needed tires at 30K+, OEM tires are now don't last too long. This is $1000 in average (may be less). Brakes DYI, filters, oil, wipers. I would say, under $1500 under 45K miles. But with the new tires that will last 60K, new brakes, this sum could be less in the next 40K miles.
  • BeauCharles I had a 2010 Sportback GTS for 10 years. Most reliable car I ever own. Never once needed to use that super long warranty - nothing ever went wrong. Regular maintenance and tires was all I did. It's styling was great too. Even after all those years it looked better than many current models. Biggest gripe I had was the interior. Cheap (but durable) materials and no sound insulation to speak of. If Mitsubishi had addressed those items I'm sure it would have sold better.
  • Marty S I learned to drive on a Crosley. Also, I had a brand new 75 Buick Riviera and the doors were huge. Bent the inside edge of the hood when opening it while the passenger door was open. Pretty poor assembly quality.
  • 3-On-The-Tree Alan, I was an Apache pilot and after my second back surgery I was medically boarded off of flying status due to vibrations, climbing on and off aircraft, so I was given the choice of getting out or re-branching so I switched to Military Intel. Yes your right if you can’t perform your out doesn’t matter if your at 17 years. Dad always said your just a number, he was a retired command master chief 25 years.
Next