To say the internet has become an important marketing tool for automobile manufacturers is like saying radial tires are beginning to catch on. And yet Forrester Research reports that many car companies' websites depend on clunky photo galleries, confusing spec tables, complicated car configurators and other layout clichés. “You can’t frustrate and annoy people into liking your brand,” counsels Ron Rogowski, one of the Forrester's senior analysts. “But a lot of automotive websites seem to be trying to do just that.”
Forrester reviewed 900 automotive websites, looking at site organization and design. They found lots of server space for improvement. I spoke to Rogowski about the deficiencies. “Illegible text is the number one complaint," he revealed. "It’s hard to believe in this day and age that text would be so difficult to read on so many sites.”
Rogowski also chastised automakers for raising consumer expectations, and then failing to fulfill them. Brands run highly-focused, deeply sensuous print ads and TV spots that point customers to websites that are hum, without nary a ho in site. “Boredom is a brand killer,” Rogowski said, startling Camcordima drivers everywhere.
Rogowski singles out BMW AG’s site for electronic excoriation. As any pistonhead will tell you, Bimmer’s corporate mantra is ‘the ultimate driving machine.’ By contrast, their website is the ‘ultimate connecting your DVD player to your television experience.’ BMW’s car configurator came in for a critical caning; Rogowski called it staid and antiseptic. In fact, navigating BMW’s website is only slightly less of a chore than tuning-in an AM station via iDrive.
As you might have guessed, Rogowski is brand-o-centric. He implores car companies to creates user interfaces in keeping with established brand values. He singles out MINI's site for praise, lauding it for being as cheeky, dynamic and engaging as their vehicles.
Despite the MINI template, brand e-faithfulness is easier said than programmed– as illustrated by the fact that some of the best brands in the biz have some of the least compelling websites.
Jaguar’s site looks like a layout in Vogue– which does nothing to reflect the brand's visual warmth (burled wood anyone?) or leverage their heritage. Positioning themselves as a fashion accessory leaves a lot of dyed-in-the wool enthusiasts in the dust.
Cadillac's website is guilty of the opposite sin; the opening animation focuses entirely on collector Caddies and their owners; it fails to offer a single compelling reason to purchase a new model. Even those brands with kick ass multi-media (e.g. Porsche) bury the good stuff in relatively obscure sub-menus.
Audi’s site warns you, right up front: never follow. As in, anyone persistent enough to follow them into the sub-menus should abandon all hope of keeping with the program. Everything on Audi’s website looks and functions like medical equipment– and not in a good way.
At least Audi knows it’s suffering from sudden intended click-through. Speaking at the Automotive News World Congress January 16, Audi’s Head of Audi of America announced that he was frustrated Audi isn’t considered one of the world’s premier brands.
Johan de Nysschen has challenged its online agency, Factory Design Labs, to exploit the web’s “anything-is-possible landscape.” "Our goal is to drive the digital lifestyle and allow our prospects and customers to be even more involved with our products as well as demonstrate our product superiority."
More and more companies are sharing Audi’s realization that the internet is where image building and product familiarity gets done. Some even recognize that web-based branding is a whole new ballgame.
As an interactive medium, people expect more clarity of vision and functionality of form from a website than they do from a print ad, TV spot or brochure. From a design POV, the site’s graphics, sound and function all need to mirror a company’s values and position.
Manufacturers are also beginning to understand that websites are more revealing than other media. If a brand is ill defined, the murkiness becomes instantly clear; an effective website cannot be based on a broad, dysfunctional message. The feedback loop between image and internet grows tighter every year. Strong branding means a better web experience, a better experience enhances the brand.
This movement hints at a fairly significant change: distinction equals success. The preeminence of big tent, something-for-everyone brands is declining as their message gets lost in static. The narrowly defined, purpose-driven brands are in accent.
There is, of course, a large piece missing: true interactivity. Branded automotive websites do not encourage the kind of [relatively] free, intimate and ongoing interaction between content provider and consumer that give sites like TTAC their power. Car companies need to treat websites as an open portal to the people who pay the bills.
When (not if) that happens, the car business will undergo its most profound evolution, as the gates to mass customization and other important commercial developments swing open. Meanwhile, well, that’s entertainment!
115 Comments on “Automotive Marketing: Losing Site...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
My 2 cents: I use slow, older computers, and don’t really care for Flash animation. Give me boring old HTML, center and right-clickable links, fast loading times.
If I want info about a vehicle rather than hit the manufacturers’ site I google “yahoo specs XXXX”, and results usually are sufficient.
I visit all of these sites on a regular basis to gather data for my site. The MINI site Forrester praises is very hard to use, and of limited use, if you’re looking for actual information. The BMW site is much better, especially since you can download all of the brochures in PDF format. Not flashy, just useful. I also disagree that their configurator is difficult.
Worst of all are all the Chrysler Group sites. Thoroughly useless as a source of information.
http://www.truedelta.com
I’m with starlightmica and Michael Karesh. I want to go to these sites for information on a car, not to be sold on a car.
Perhaps the autmakers could have a general site with easy navigation/good information/quality images of all modesl available and then link to a car’s individual site to wow us with nifty Flash advertising.
I also agree with Michael Karesh about the MINI site. I thought it was spiffy when I first visited it – I thought “how cute, just like the MINI itelf” – but then tried finding information about the different models and configurations and lost ineterest fast.
From Automotive News Europe earlier this month:
Peugeot to test Internet car sales
Reuters / January 18, 2007 – 10:00 am
PARIS (Reuters) — French car brand Peugeot, part of PSA/Peugeot-Citroen, plans to experiment with selling used cars over the Internet, while at the same time trying not to upset its dealer network.
Peugeot said today it would put about 100 of its small 1007 models with sliding doors, in three special configurations, for sale on the http://www.vente-privee.com website.
The 1007, launched in 2004, is Peugeot's super mini car that suffered from a slow sales.
Peugeot said it wanted to test the willingness of customers to spend big amounts over the Internet, but stressed it had no strategy to start more general online sales and that the sale did not compete with its dealers who sell new cars.
Vente-privee calls itself a private club that organizes online sales for its members at big discounts of 30 to 70 percent, compared with list prices.
It specializes in ready-to-wear fashion, games, sports articles and watches.
Payment is generally via bank card but Peugeot said it would demand a downpayment by check prior to delivery.
I agree with Rogowskil: it’s all about the brand, stupid.
Everything about a brand’s goods and services should reflect the basic brand message, from the colors used for its showrooms to the look and feel of their websites.
Audi’s site is an excellent example: it has none of the minimalistic chic or ergonomic efficiency of its cars’ interiors. None.
I also couldn’t agree more with Mr. Martineck’s point about the auto websites’ need for interactivity. (I’ve said it myself more than once.)
Here we have the most sophisticated interactive device ever created, and the automakers let people wander all over their sites without any guidance or intelligence whatsoever.
Ridiculous.
Many automaker websites also require Flash players that my corporate computer does not have (and can’t download). Thanks to no backward compatibility I am completely locked out of such sites (and will go elsewhere).
I would encourage the web-designers to accomodate basic browsers as well as the latest Flash-type add-ons.
Seems simple enough… but apparently not.
Note: I see starlightmica also picked up this obvious problem.
The GM Canada website was absolutely deplorable up until last year.
The “Build your car” section gave you check boxes to order option package 1ZF or option 6UK without actually telling you what the hell was in those packages! Cumbersome and frustrating to say the least.
It also amazes me how hard it is to find out basic information, such as “Does this car come with power seats?”
I always get a kick out of the “Compare vs. X” sections. Doing so at the GM website is surely enough to give someone second thoughts. Just for fun, compare the Pontiac G6 with a Honda Accord and Nissan Altima.
“Boredom is a brand killer,”
I will say that the opposite is true. I hate it when I go to a website and the first thing I see is a flash video that is supposed to get me excited about a new product. Most people don’t go to a car company’s website to be entertained, they go there to get information about a vehicle. In fact, a boring website would be like a breath of fresh air on the internet, as long as the information is laid out in a clear and concise way.
Has anyone here said “death to flash” yet??? When you have no content, use flash instead. Most automaker websites use flash that are tested in IE only; this basically locks out technically savvy users that are using Firefox (and Linux).
But on a bigger issue, flash makes websites VERY hard to maneuver through, since Flash designers expect you to do things the way they do. Flash is nothing but a big pain in the ass.
And…ALL websites need to get rid of the introductory splash/flash screen, especially those that make noise without permission. They give web surfers nothing of value.
Flash Is Evil from 8 years ago.
Even when flash WORKS, do I really want the mini-frame on my screen to be the whole of my navigation? Plus, in flash, it’s often hard to differentiate what will take you where (is this a link?), since the target doesn’t show up on the status bar. Did you click the BACK button to return to the last screen? Too bad, it’s all the way back to the intro for you! Bottom line: Flash has its place, but car websites should not use it for any interactive elements.
Another pet peeve–all roads leading me to “fill this out and the dealer will contact you”
Forget it. My take is that if the branded sites can’t provide at least as much hard data as Edmunds or Yahoo or Carpoint, then why am I there? 90% of the time, I’m just looking for specs or basic pricing info.
Yes, that’s another of my irritations with the OEM sites:
“fill this out and the dealer will contact you”
Sure, I’ll volunteer to be harrased by a salesman before my research is complete… Not.
Rogowski singles out BMW AG’s site for electronic excoriation. As any pistonhead will tell you, Bimmer’s corporate mantra is ‘the ultimate driving machine.’ By contrast, their website is the ‘ultimate connecting your DVD player to your television experience.’ BMW’s car configurator came in for a critical caning; Rogowski called it staid and antiseptic. In fact, navigating BMW’s website is only slightly less of a chore than tuning-in an AM station via iDrive.
??? I really do not agree with that. I visit the BMW site regularly, since it’s my favourite brand, but even through my possible bias, I can’t see anyone would say it’s user unfriendly. However, I have to say the configurator at http://www.bmwusa.com differs from the one at bmw.de/bmw.nl in a bad way.
I also visit the audi site quite often (liking that A6 Avant, for instance) and have no serious problems with it either, except sometimes seemingly inconsequent clickthrough.
On other sites, like Honda or Mercedes, I don’t like that you have to choose a division first, but that comes with the diversification territory I guess.
I was less than impressed by Chevrolet’s and Ford’s sites too, even without looking at the cars. The Caddilac site however I didn’t have problems with. Then again, I wasn’t going to buy one, just try to find out why someone else would…(especially in case of the ‘Sclade and DTS)…
Blunozer,
“The GM Canada website was absolutely deplorable up until last year.”
That means it has improved, and isn’t that the point?
“It also amazes me how hard it is to find out basic information, such as “Does this car come with power seats?”
I just visited the gmcanada site and within three clicks found that Impala comes standard with “Power 8-way driver’s seat”
“I always get a kick out of the “Compare vs. X” sections. Doing so at the GM website is surely enough to give someone second thoughts. Just for fun, compare the Pontiac G6 with a Honda Accord and Nissan Altima.”
It’s hard to fault a manufacturer for including a “Compare vs .X” feature, even when (and especially because) the comparison might not always be favorable to their brand.
900 sites? That seems like an awful lot to be able to make general conclusions…after the MFG’s site…what maybe 50-100 and the additional research sites, I find it hard to believe that they weren’t just googling “cars” going to page 34,500 of the results and making conclusions…
I have to agree with the posters who are complaining about flash…nothing turns me off more than a site that takes 30secs to 1 minute to load (on my relatively high speed DSL) and then barrages me with some music that the marketeers have determined to represent the brand…Listen folks, I’ve got my music on, I don’t want to have to search frantically for the “sound off” button to stop the obscenity.
Just a quick reply to Mr. Williams post on vente-privee.com selling Peugeot 1007s. I’m a member of the “private club” that they avow to be…I clicked through to see the sale, just for sh-ts and giggles (I’m definitely not in the market for that [figurative] beast). I’m not sure it was a great deal – they were selling 2004MY, but purportedly “new” (that defines “slow-selling” doesn’t it?), for maybe 2K or 3K€ off the price of a similar 2007MY. However, when I checked about 6 hours after the sale began they were all sold out. Not sure what this all means, but its an interesting experiment to say the least. People I know where talking about the sale, but more in terms of the coup of vente privee getting to sell cars, and not that cars were now for sale on the internet…
I’ve always felt that Mazda had a pretty good thing going with their website. Very easy to use and the layout is appealling to the eyes.
Manufacturers’ USA websites are a whole lot better than their Canadian websites. Why? I still have no idea… Visit http://www.toyota.ca to get the idea.
I think I can speak to this a little bit having be a web designer for the past 9 years. An automotive website or any website for that matter needs a few basic components.
1. It should be easily navigable and intuitive
2. It should be consistent from page to page
3. It should know it’s target audience and cater to that audience
4. It should present a clean and appealing design that is uncluttered
Now taking all that into effect is not always easy. Many websites just like the cars themselves are designed by committee. Very rarely is a designer given free reign to make a site how he or she pleases so you get compromises.
When I go to an automotive website I’m looking for a specific model usually and want a lot of info on that model. That means lots of photos, video, 360’s, build the car, specs etc.
From the manufacturer’s standpoint the website is not just providing additional stats and info to the customer its focus like any advertising is to sell the brand or vehicle to the customer.
As far as making a basic site with no flash and just info on the car you can forget about it. It doesn’t suit the manufacturer and sure as hell isn’t what the web designer wants to do. Which sells better a magazine ad with some text or a commercial? If it was the magazine ad then you wouldn’t see car commercials, don’t know about you but I sure see a hell of a lot of car commercials.
Mini by far is the best car website that I’ve seen and several other car sites have some really good components but are really poor in others. For Mini it captures what the brand is all about and for the target age group it works quite well. One core component of a Mini is individuality, and their “build a mini” does this by being the best I’ve seen.
Keep in mind that the Buick website and the Scion website should be completely and totally different as they cater to different demographics (yes I know boomers drive xB’s).
Most automotive websites don’t utilize the interactivity of the web as much as they should. Why not include a blog from the designers or a question and answer session or FAQ. Also pay a lot of attention to the configurator, make sure it’s really easy to use, the packages are detailed with pictures and prices and include invoice prices alongside MSRP (Ford is the only one off hand that seems to do this). Also let me spin the car in every color and every option. If you provide different kinds of wheels I want to see them on the car, rear spoiler? Let me see it on the car.
The gallery is also a very important, lots of photos, video, commercials, etc. This is how your consumer will get a feel for the car and its looks are what will get them to come in for a test-drive. Looks sell, sex sells, everything. Deny it as much as you want but you would be wrong and I wouldn’t have a job.
that’s funny salok. i usually get emails for the vente-privee sales, and they didn’t announce this sale to me. not that i would have bought thatugly abortion of a car…but i digress
i do think, however, that internet sales are the future of the car business. honestly, how many people need the dealership in order to be able to select their car. i always know what car i’m buying next, and i just call various dealerships and play them off eachother over the phone to get the lowest price. if i could just get the lowest price off the internet, i’d be a happy man.
I’ve actually been quite surprised that automakers choose (for the most part) not to partner with tried and true enthusiasts to market their web sites.
In fact, I can’t think of a single corporate site that does a better job of endorsing the brand than swedeshbricks, the mercedes benz club of america, the ultimate subaru club, and the dozens of other sites that focus on current owners of the marque.
Just having the opportunity to link these sites with specifc brands and models would be an enormous plus to sales. When you have folks singing the praises of your vehicles, it makes it far easier for others to buy into the brand.
Anyone notice the graphic accompanying this post?
Flash or no Flash, content is okay, but what I really want (or even need) is to build a car accurately and quickly and then search dealer inventory for that car.
And I don’t want to horse around with putting in my zip code and having it search only where it thinks I want – I want to find my closest match virtually regardless of where it’s located – 1000 miles away is fine, I bought the last car over the phone, sight unseen.
I also want to see actual window stickers for the matches. The big 2.5 are coming close, but still playing games to try and protect the dealers. Why do I need the weasel at the dealership to search national inventory without multiple searches?
Carmax has a great search engine – were I ever in the used car market, I don’t see how I wouldn’t shop there first.
Robert -
Yes…why the mockup?
I think the new TTAC site should feature a flash intro with some drum’n'bass music and an overdub of Jack Nicholson saying “You can’t HANDLE the truth!” in a loop.
That would be the best site ever.
Anyone notice the graphic accompanying this post?
I changed my User Agent to see if it would appear while spoofing different browsers, but now I see that it’s upcoming.
Looks nice, except for the tinge of Neon Nitrous Yellow.
Great insight and I wholeheartedly agree that many, if not most, auto manufacturer web sites drop the ball. However, some are very well done. Two examples.
Maybachusa.com: This site is full of the Flash animation, movies and symphonic music put to good use. They collaborate to create an aura and sumptuousness for the brand. The site experience tells you everything a potential Maybach owner (and that ain’t me) what they need to know about the cars. It isn’t about performance statistics; it’s about tradition, opulence and exclusivity. After spending a few minutes at the site is somehow begin to feel superior due to the exquisite taste I demonstrate by looking at their cars. Mission accomplished. Communicating brand values are critical to establishing (or in this case, reestablishing) the marquee.
Jeep.com: Jeep’s site has been honored by Internet industry groups for innovation and interactivity. In addition to the commonplace auto site features, it offers interactive instructional training (for lack of a better word) on how to utilize 4WD Jeep vehicles to drive through and over various obstacles, lifestyle events, accessories, and even product-related games. Throughout, the site remains true to promoting Jeep brand and heritage (except for the whole Compass section – but that’s a separate problem).
Dammit Farago! The RSS line scared the #$%^ outta me. It’s too early in the AM for this kind of melodrama…
I spent a couple of years working for an in-house ad agency owned by 11 car dealerships. I design websites for a living. I’m also well-versed in Flash – as a member of “Team Macromedia,” the author of two books on Flash, et cetera.
The comments here on Flash and website design largely miss the point.
Flash is neither good nor evil, any more so than and SUV or a handgun. It’s the way you USE it that matters. Most car websites are crap. That reflects a web-wide trend – most websites are crap. Little attention is paid to the “why” and “who” questions. Most companies want a website – they don’t put a lot of thought into who their audience is, what they want, or even what they can see.
Creating flexible sites that accomodate all kinds of users (slow PCs, fast PCs, multimedia-enabled, vision- or hearing-impaired, etc.) is, frankly, a bitch. Same for multi-lingual sites. It at least doubles the amount of work, not only for design, but for maintenance. It’s not unlike adding a 4-door model to a 2-door assembly line. It complicates things. Lots of things.
The guys that whine about Flash? Sorry. Flash has a valid purpose – it lets designers add things like streaming video, interactivity, and dazzling effects to a site. Depending on the site, that may or may not be a good thing. Think of site design like the setting for a jewel – it should support, protect, and enhance the jewel (the message/information). It can’t, however, turn a zircon into a diamond – or worse, turn a pig’s ear into a silk purse.
The real challenge of designing a website is to make it work for so many different types of users, for many different reasons.
My question to the group here, is that if most automobile manufacturers are so obviously tone-deaf when it comes to their own products – their design, manufacture, distribution, and marketing – what makes you think their websites should be any better or any different?
captain,
i think you’re missing the point of a lot of the comments on flash (or at least mine). Flash, well done, makes for a professional site and can add a lot of the “multimedia” effect of a site…interactivity is good. But as someone said above (i can’t be bothered to go check…) Flash seems to be a lot of people’s answer to “what the hell can we do to make this look professional and cutting edge.”
additionally, to the programmers/designers that can’t make it work on firefox…why should I even care about their site? I don’t use IE for a reason, so being forced to open IE to view a page just bugs me and screams, “we aren’t making any effort to accommodate you”
RE: Farago. It almost looks like TTAC is trying to appear respectable with the new site :) I personally like the minimalist look of the current site, but one way or another, I’ll be back…
Admittedly, I am not a web designer; although I have taken classes in HTML, as the web became more important in the lives of writers – 1997 – and used it just a bit.
That said, my feeling is Flash kills web sites. I resent starting to read an article in the NY Times only to have an ad appear and almost literally run across the screen, like a beetle on an old newspaper.
People who design web sites try to be too clever. There's a saying that, to my knowledge, started with a prominent self-help group and has gotten picked up by a lot of other groups, and sometimes modified so as not to offend. I don't mean to offend but here it is: Keep It Simple Stupid, known as the KISS rule Ultimately, it is as simple as how well does a web site give information to people who want it?
Of course, a site by an automotive dealer will have a sales component; which is why Peugeot might be fighting its own dealers soon (and why so many auto dealers distrust and disdain the Internet). Auto, truck and motorcycle dealers want to control the sale or sales. They don't want any middle man or woman, be it the manufacturer or a flash designer, mucking up the works.
Many years ago, as television assumed the predominent role it has in our culture, an English professor, living in Canada, coined the phrases, "the medium is the message" and "the medium is the massage." His name was Marshall McLuhan. It led to all sort of experimentation with film (this was before digital media took hold) and television.
I oftentimes wonder what Professor McLuhan – he passed away in the 1980s – might have thought of the Internet taking sway. He believed that visuals would rule over words; and that seems to be true. However, when you are dealing with words and numbers – specifications and data charts – as with these auto web sites, a little bit of simplification and straightforwardness would go a long way towards meeting both goals: informing the public and getting them interested enough in your product to buy it.
I think Porsche has one of the better auto sites. Especially
their “Compare Models” page. (To see it click on “search site”
and then “Compare Models”). I wish all manufacturers had a
handy chart like this. The “build your Porsche” page is nice
and clear and easy to use as well. Now I just wish I could
afford a Porsche!
Rob
I hate manufacturer websites like I hate TV commercials. I know that the unwashed masses want to be told what to think and what to buy and need to be *sold* a product.
I just want stat sheets, feature lists, prices, and about a thousand photos. It doesn’t have to be interactive, but make sure that all trim levels, all wheels, and all colors are represented in the gallery–not all combinations are necessary, but I want to see some of everything.
I *HATE* when websites are so twisted that the back button no longer works properly. I also hate flash. Photos uber alles.
85% of all web users use IE. I’ll test a website in IE and Netscape and to hell with any others. You don’t want to use a mainstream app that’s your problem. Like I have time to make a site work in every browser someone wants to use at every resolution he or she may have and oh lets make sure the blind can navigate it too (section 508 for the feds know what I’m talking about), etc. That’s the kind of stuff that makes you think what graphic design am I actually doing anymore when I have to design for the blind. Sorry its graphic design not braile. Don’t get me wrong I feel bad for you if you are blind but its not like you can drive a car either.
You want to know why Flash is liked by designers? It allows me to do what I want, the type I want, it will show up the same as long as you have the plug-in, it allows for animation, transitions, video, sound, cool shit! I’m not stuck with freaking Times, Verdana, Arial and Georgia any more, worrying if someone has JavaScript on, are they using their own style sheets, do they have Google freaking toolbar on which changes input fields to yellow so they can’t see my white type on a black background, etc. You get to see my design exactly as I intended it, the way it should be.
Flash or any tech is a tool like any other, everything in moderation and it’s all how it’s used. And get a broadband connection already, put away the dial-up, 8 track tape, rotary phone, B&W TV, and your Ford Tempo and come into the 21st century. Hell I have broadband on my cellphone. Uggg.
Some tell Jalopnik to redo their site, it’s a terrible design.
I like the new Comp RF, looks good, I even like the green.
Captaindigital:
Flash is a tool, just like HTML. I've worked with marketing people before too. You guys get so wrapped up with all the "cool" bells and whistles that Flash gives you that you forget the purpose of why you're creating the website in the first place!
I think the main problem with most automotive websites is that they're designed by clueless marketing droids who totally miss the point about why people visit a manufacturer's website. Clue 1: I've got better things to do with my time then to go visiting car maker's websites to see a stupid commercial.
Website designers should first and foremost stop and think about why people go to their website in the first place. Clue 2: I go to a car manufacturer's website to learn about their cars (not to be forced to watch a stupid commercial).
As far as I'm concerned, if they just scanned in their brochures and let me look at those, that's far more informative and useful than a cluttered website full of flash animations and videos about their meaningless "message". Clue 3: A website is NOT like "interactive TV"; A short fun You-tube style video is fine as long as it's out of the way, but people don't go to websites to be forced to watch stupid "interactive" commercials.
So to all you marketing people out there, here's a final hint about websites: a website is kinda like a first date; eye candy is nice, but if you want people to come back to really look around, you need substance.
Nobody mentions the JD Pow(d)er survey that put Kia’s website on top followed by Hummer…
http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0926INGFS10075730&catid=23376#
I hate IE and I won't use it unless absolutely necessary so if you and your little designer fascist friends want me to look at your work it had damn well better be Firefox compatible…If uncle joe designs his own browser and your site doesn't work…I'll forgive you. Firefox isn't exactly niche anymore.
I get something like 10mb/s on my DSL line and it still takes up to a 1 min. to DL some of the flash junk that people throw out there. I am sick of sites having lots of flashy Flash graphics just because some designer "can." When its done well, it's cool, but it's not always done well or coherently…
Its not the websites per se but the marketing shibboleth in it that turns me off. When they start describing a chevy aveo as european inspiring touring world class machine… I just lose it.
Glad to see everyone else is annoyed by carmaker websites, they are the absolute worst. I want to know what kind of stereo options are available in Model X it takes a half hour of slogging through heavy handed Flash animation, my wheezing laptop about to set the desk on fire and crashing twice. They make it impossible to download pictures of their cars (why distribute them for free when you can pay a fortune to get the pix in Motor Trend?), or print off pages, or order brochures (why distribute them for free when you can pay a fortune to some printer?)
Having worked in large corporation Internet marketing I know there’s a bunch of pathological web designers who’ve never seen anything they didn’t want to bury in a minute-long Flash download, because you can charge a dumb large corporation $60,000 for a bit of Flash programming that takes one guy two days to create, the idiots will pay the bill without hesitation.
Wm Montgomery: If you like the Jeep site, clearly you’ve never used it to figure out which features are standard and optional on a trim/model. Absolute worst there is.
The Audi site lately looks like they’ve ripped it up and haven’t quite gotten around to putting it back together. Look at the standard features and options pages for the Audi A8, for example.
I think much of it comes down to what someone is looking for in a site. I’m always looking for thorough info, and few OEM sites provide it well. I’ll restate the MINI does it very badly, and is generally a pain in the ass to use as an information source.
I hate flash, even if this is blaming the tool for the faults of its user.
RF: I like the minimalist look of the current site. The new one is much less distinctive, it looks like many others I’ve visited that cater to car buyers. Definitely not bad in any way, just mainstream.
All of this said, I’m clearly no expert. People still tell me that my own site (truedelta.com) needs a lot of work. So if anyone here has some bright ideas about how to improve the organization and navigation, feel free to send them along.
That’s what separates good design from bad. There is no reason not to have a nice flash intro as long as it’s contained within the context of the site and the navigation is outside or it. Along with a skip button. A website should not force you to do or watch anything, it’s a portal to information that you choose to look at or not. Having to wait while a flash animation/video loads before you can do anything is bad design. Again its not the tool it’s how its used. Invariably the most expensive part of any website is the programmer not the designer. Remember its form follow function but you can’t design to the least common denominator or you have bland crap to look at.
Mr. Karesh:
Comparing standard features couldn’t be easier on the Jeep site. Just mouse over the model name, choose standard features, and compare up to three trims.
I second Michael Karesh’s thoughts on the new TTAC look.
Models that are specifically targeted at a techno-savvy audience ought to have their own websites, complete with moderated message boards, wallpapers, etc. The movie companies build buzz this way; why not the hot hatch makers too?
Mr. Furst:
You get a long, yet incomplete, list with no section headings and no apparent mode of organization. Here are a few of the standard features on the Grand Cherokee:
*accent-color license plate brow (good to know, wouldn’t want a car without one)
*center high-mount stop lamp (amazing)
*enhanced accident response system (which is?)
*floor carpet (a rarity, I know)
*”Jeep” badge
*Halogen headlamps
*warning chime (warning of what?)
*door trim panel (certainly good to have)
I met the people in charge of it 2-3 years ago (Julie Roehm and her supplier at Organic), and they said they were about to fix this and other problems. Still not fixed.
Mr. Niedermeyer: I was already seconding someone else here. You’ll have to take the third spot in line. Unless I was myself third. Then you’ll be fourth.
I’m actually okay with it, just not intrigued by it. It’s far from the unmitigated disaster than is the new print Car and Driver.
Dbl post:
What drew me to TTAC in the first place was the phrase: “bloated, but attractive, like a post-partum Britney Spears.” Couldn’t really care less about what font that was in, still teh funnay.
If the new site has a bit better search engine (the ability to search by author) that’s great. Maybe less blue and green (it’s a bit edmundsian).
The bottom line, however, is whatever keeps the prose flowing.
As a side note:
Ford has presented at several web usability conferences that I have attended. They actually have a usability team and they (at least they appear to) give them a decent amount of influence.
That said, I also am sick of flash in EVERYTHING.
Flash is great for videos and interactivity, but not for when I just need to look up a quick fact. There should always be an HTML bridge to simple HTML-based information. Of course, this isn’t just an automotive industry thing…
Anyone here know how much it would cost a car company to create and maintain a full bore kick-ass website ?
This site is so elegantly simple, it’s almost intimidating. There’s no where else it like that I’ve seen. Please do not cave to the urge to make it more pretty and complicated just because. It will be ironic if the redesign of this site does exactly what it decries about most car makers.
On the point of the article, indeed the sites of most car manufacturers are sucking pits of flash animation and uselessness. Flash is the refuge of lazy designers and a scourge inflicted upon the internet. If you want the freedom to do whatever you want visually, go work in print media, where I don’t have to worry about if I will need some special proprietary tool to view your work.
TreyV, you hit the nail on the head. If the preview is what the site will become, I know I will not like it. Added clutter, navigation and Google ads is not welcoming. I much prefer the simple way this site is layed out know.
Please don’t ruin it…
I agree with the Flash haters. I visit websites to get information. I want as much information about each model as possible, I want it to be well organized and I want to be able to see where to get it the first time I get there. My favorite site is VW’s German site – http://www.volkswagen.de. It has a lot of accessible info but recently they have added annoyng and useless Flash content. In contrast, VW’s international site; http://www.vw.com, is both useless and annoying.
Interesting discussion. I am surprised by the number of postings that curse the use of Flash or that condemn the manufacturers for trying to actually sell their products via the Web. Is the Chevy Aveo site supposed to say, “Our car looks like an elephant suppository and is unfit for a clown to drive?” No. That’s what TTAC writers do.
The comments from posters saying that they only want stat sheets are equally absurd to me. The Internet is a great visual medium. Claiming that all you want from it is text is like saying that you read Playboy only for the articles.