GM Marketing Czar Bob Lutz to Ad Agencies: It's All Good

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

You may recall that GM’s Marketing Maven spent forty-minutes or so “crapping” on GM’s current ads before jetting off to Montserrat. After sipping a Piña Colada and walking in the rain, Lutz returned to assure GM’s nervous ad agencies that the status remains quo. (Quel surprise!) Automotive News [sub] reports that the former Car Czar “has no immediate plans to review or fire the automaker’s advertising agencies even though he publicly criticized a recent Buick ad campaign.” Apparently, Maximum Bob declined to specify a deadline for the mad men to get their shit together. But he “acknowledged GM needs to move fast — within the next three to six months — to improve the public’s perception after it spent 39 days in federal bankruptcy protection.” Now why they’d have to go and mention that? Jeez. Anyway, three to six months is a pretty big window from which Leo Burnett and friends will not get defenestrated. And boy, do we have some primo Lutzisms after the jump.

If after strong senior management direction, the agency, for some reason, repeatedly fails to come up with a product where the customer says, “Yes! That’s exactly what I want” and fails to move the needle, then obviously you start reviewing the agency, Lutz said.

Exactly! Accountability is like tomorrow (or a frustrated male porn star/car reviewer): it never comes.

I will always give existing agencies a chance because as one agency head once told me in my career, “The way the American automobile companies deal with agencies is almost a system that prevents brilliant advertising,” Lutz said.

Almost? Whew! Dodge a bullet there, eh?

“I don’t want happy employees on the screen saying how much they enjoyed building the car,” Lutz says. “I want an interesting ad that’s memorable. I want people to have a positively changed perception after viewing the ad.”

Beats the hell out of those negatively changed perceptions.

Lutz is critical of the marketing and advertising process used by many large corporations — a process that he believes actually hinders creativity.

“It’s much like a sausage machine. Many people at the operating level check to make sure this message is here and ‘let’s not forget this piece and let’s not do that because this may offend this group of people,'” Lutz said.

So by the time senior management see a proposed ad, Lutz said it becomes “this highly sanitized product that is often devoid of any risk or breakthrough capability.”

Yeah! Those big corporations suck.

Your TTAC takeaway: Bob Lutz doesn’t “do” irony. And yet, and yet, the best part of this welcome addition to the Lutz oeuvre is actually the AN picture caption: “Lutz: Not afraid of making changes.”

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 5 comments
  • Jolo Jolo on Jul 30, 2009

    If after strong senior management direction, the agency, for some reason, repeatedly fails to come up with a product where the customer says, “Yes! That’s exactly what I want” and fails to move the needle, then obviously you start reviewing the agency, Lutz said. I thought the car companies were supposed to come up with a product that people want, not the ad agency. I guess I've had this wrong all along...

  • Seth L Seth L on Jul 30, 2009

    Gah! I see them in my nightmares.

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next