GM Won't Be Advertising On Super Bowl Sunday Either

Derek Kreindler
by Derek Kreindler

With GM now dropping out of Super Bowl advertising, what’s next for the marketing bigwigs at the Ren Cen? And yes, I’ll take the Storm, thank you very much.

A report in the Wall Street Journal outlines GM’s plans for Superbowl Sunday.

Super Bowl advertising is effective but has become too expensive to justify the cost, GM’s global marketing chief, Joel Ewanick, said in an interview. Buyers say ads for next year’s National Football League championship game—which is being broadcast by CBS—are so far selling for about $3.8 million for a 30-second spot.

Joel Ewanick, formerly at Hyundai, was once a believer in the efficacy of Super Bowl ads, and Hyundai’s been no stranger to them either. Perhaps we’ll see more details shake out in the next few days. Unlike Facebook, the Super Bowl seems to be a much more effective medium than a tiny ad space on a social network.


Derek Kreindler
Derek Kreindler

More by Derek Kreindler

Comments
Join the conversation
12 of 27 comments
  • Mr_muttonchops Mr_muttonchops on May 18, 2012

    In this day and age I sometimes wonder the effectiveness of Superbowl advertising, especially with cars. Sure the audience is big, but many advertisements in the show are extended online or incorporate the web in some other way. TV ads might work for things like beer and snack chips, but with cars the Internet is definitely the way to go. That said, I will sorta miss seeing fewer car commercials, at least from GM, come next February.

    • George B George B on May 19, 2012

      A good Super Bowl ad can generate lots of buzz for a new product and a new direction. I thought the Volkswagen Passat pint-sized Darth Vader ad did a great job of letting the American public know that Volkswagen had designed a new Passat and it is big and reasonably attractive. The Kia Optima dream car for real life works because the car itself looks great. The problem for GM is what new photogenic products do they have that could benefit from Super Bowl exposure?

  • Benders Benders on May 19, 2012

    This coupled with the cessation of facebook advertising is suspicious. Is GM cutting the marketing budget by $20 million or did GM actually make an intelligent analysis of effective advertising mediums?

    • BklynPete BklynPete on May 19, 2012

      I'd like to think it was an intelligent analysis of effective advertising mediums, simply because I don't see how Facebook can be "sticky" for actual buyers. I don't think GM cut the budget. What I do fear is that Ewanick didn't want all eyes focused on another lousy commercial that says GM is officially out of ideas.

  • Crosley Crosley on May 19, 2012

    I wonder if some of this was a result of the legitimate criticism Chrysler received for making their last Super Bowl ad a taxpayer-funded campaign commercial for Obama's reelection.

    • See 2 previous
    • Highdesertcat Highdesertcat on May 20, 2012

      @highdesertcat 28-cars-later, the way I see it, Chrysler is doing well because for the first time in its history it has a real leader in Sergio who told the UAW to piss off and let it be known who's boss. It is unlikely that the UAW would strike themselves as part-owners in the Chrysler subdivision or collectively bargain themselves into bankruptcy again with demands for higher wages and better benefits. And when everyone is pulling in the same direction, the company forges ahead. To me this is the ideal example of what we should have done with GM as well. Imagine if we had pimped GM to China, or bribed China to take GM off our hands. We would no longer be faced with having to bail them out again in the future and the Chinese owners would have told the UAW where to get off and made changes to GM that would insure its future success, just like Sergio did with Chrysler.

  • Crosley Crosley on May 19, 2012

    If the ad had simply been about "how great" Chrysler cars were, no one would have complained. The fact that it reeked of being a political ad, and that members of the "creative team" actually worked for Obama's campaign rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.

    • See 2 previous
    • Highdesertcat Highdesertcat on May 19, 2012

      @highdesertcat bomberpete, Yeah, I read deLorenzo's blog once a week to get caught up and I never was a Chrysler fan. I owned a total of eight used Jeep vehicles over the years and I thought all things Chrysler were crap. Hell, all things AMC were also crap. I had no expectations for Jeep. But my wife was smitten by the new Jeep Grand Cherokee when one caught her eye sitting on a flatbed in Phoenix, as we were driving on I-10 on our way home to New Mexico. We gave it a home when we took it home with us. I kept the Highlander, just in case. I have to give credit where credit is due. When Daimler owned Chrysler they continued to put out crap cars. Ditto with Cerberus. But now that Sergio has marginalized the UAW's voice on the Board, Chrysler is beginning to put out some decent vehicles. Maybe that was all that was needed, to make the UAW part-owners in Chrysler since they are unlikely to strike themselves and demand pay raises and higher benefits that would collectively bargain themselves into bankruptcy again. Amazing turn-around! And the ironic part of this symbiotic relationship is that bailed out Chrysler is actually keeping owner-Fiat afloat with the profits generated by Chrysler auto and truck sales. Whooda thunk it? I'm no Chrysler fan but I give my woman whatever she wants. If that is a Jeep Grand Cherokee, it is a Jeep Grand Cherokee. But I'm surprised how good the new JGC is. Now I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that her Jeep Grand Cherokee will be at least as good as her 2008 Japan-built Highlander has been, because that Highlander continues to be perfect. I mean as in never having to go back to the dealer for warranty repair since we bought it in 2008. I can only hope but I'll believe it when I see it. Even ONE warranty issue and I'll trade it for a new one before the warranty expires. The way I figure it, Pete tells it like it is. I wish more people would call them as they see them. One company that really needs the treatment is GM. I firmly believe we, the people, should have pimped GM to China or India or any fool who would have them, just like we did with Chrysler, even if we had to bribe the takers with a few billion to get GM's carcass off our hands, just like we did with Chrysler. That made all the difference in the world for Chrysler, for Fiat, and for we, the people. I don't mind Chrysler being foreign-owned. In that respect they're just like Toyota or Honda or any transplant, providing jobs for Americans making cars for Americans in America. That ain't all bad.

Next