Volvo Markets Simplified Identity Against Teutonic Complexities

volvo markets simplified identity against teutonic complexities

Whereas the Teutonic Trinity of Audi, BMW and Mercedes go for complexity in their offerings, Volvo aims to attract luxury consumers through simplicity.

At the 2015 Automotive News Europe Congress in Birmingham, England, Volvo CEO Hakan Samuelsson pointed out the number of buttons the XC90 had compared to two new models from two of the trinity as far as handling the main controls go, Automotive News Europe notes. While the Germans opted for 55 and 37 buttons respectively, Samuelsson stated Volvo only needed eight to get the point across.

Samuelsson’s point behind the button count was to declare his company would not match feature for feature against the Teutonic Trinity, proclaiming “no one wants to buy a copy. They buy the original.” The proclamation was followed by a presentation of an app which would grant one-time access to a given Volvo model to those delivering groceries, dry cleaning, and other items, followed by a text alerting the owner the delivery occurred.

Both examples are meant to demonstrate Volvo’s reinvention following its purchase from Ford by Geely in 2010. Then, the automaker had little product, and relied upon Ford’s platforms and engine offerings to see everything through.

Samuelsson said his company would pursue consumers more concerned about their families and the environment as part of its new strategy, than those looking to destroy ‘Ring times. Said pursuit is expected to be aggressive, as Volvo aims to increase global sales from a targeted 500,000 in 2015, to 800,000 by 2020 via a product offensive which will see all platforms and engines as being 100 percent Volvo starting this summer.

[Photo credit: Volvo]

Join the conversation
2 of 57 comments
  • Czilla9000 Czilla9000 on Jun 13, 2015

    They should embrace their reputation for "WE ARE SAFETY" and go at it HAM. Remind people that driving is still very dangerous, despite safety improvements, and choosing another brand of car can kill you or your kids. You can't do 'Ring times if you're dead. - Do stark cinematic TV ads (have JJ Abrams direct) reminding people how dangerous driving is. "Every 3 seconds..." Insert Hans Zimmer music. - Do cinematic TV ads showing how tough Volvos are engineered. Show their state of the art safety facility with Volvo engineers talking about safety design. Again, Hans Zimmer music. - Do cinematic TV ads showing their traffic accident response team in Sweden investigating car accidents CSI-style. Seriously, why doesn't Volvo market them? Do cinematic TV ads with traffic accident recreations, and people talking about how recent Volvos saved their life. - Offer cars with excessive safety features, like bullet proof glass, etc. Get the gangsta' demo (like Cadillac) on your side. - Do adds showing Volvos crashing into stuff hardcore and protecting their occupants better than the competition. - Build them like tanks.

  • Corey Lewis Corey Lewis on Jun 15, 2015

    "Volvo aims to increase global sales from a targeted 500,000 in 2015, to 800,000 by 2020" I just found a buyer for Alfa.

  • Teddyc73 The Bronco just doesn't have enough editions and models.
  • ToolGuy @Matt, let me throw this at you:Let's say I drive a typical ICE vehicle 15,000 miles/year at a typical 18 mpg (observed). Let's say fuel is $4.50/gallon and electricity cost for my EV will be one-third of my gasoline cost - so replacing the ICE with an EV would save me $2,500 per year. Let's say I keep my vehicles 8 years. That's $20,000 in fuel savings over the life of the vehicle.If the vehicles have equal capabilities and are otherwise comparable, a rational typical consumer should be willing to pay up to a $20,000 premium for the EV over the ICE. (More if they drive more.)TL;DR: Why do they cost more? Because they are worth it (potentially).
  • Inside Looking Out Why EBFlex dominates this EV discussion? Just because he is a Ford expert?
  • Marky S. Very nice article and photos. I am a HUGE Edsel fan. I have always been fascinated with the "Charlie Brown of Cars." Allow me to make a minor correction to add here: the Pacer line was the second-from-bottom rung Edsel, not the entry-level trim. That would be the Edsel Ranger for 1958. It had the widest array of body styles. The Ranger 2-door sedan (with a "B-pillar", not a pillarless hardtop), was priced at $2,484. So, the Ranger and Pacer both used the smaller Ford body. The next two upscale Edsel's were based on the Mercury body, are were: Corsair, and, top-line Citation. Although the 1959 style is my fav. I would love a '58 Edsel Pacer 4-door hardtop sedan!
  • Lou_BC Stupid to kill the 6ft box in the crewcab. That's the most common Canyon/Colorado trim I see. That kills the utility of a small truck. The extended cab was a poor seller so that makes sense. GM should have kept the diesel. It's a decent engine that mates well with the 6 speed. Fuel economy is impressive.