QOTD: Do Auto Show Media Days Matter to the Consumer?
Amid the Chicago Auto Show hoopla last week came reports that Mercedes-Benz was considering dropping out of next year’s Detroit Auto Show, news that has since been confirmed. I was invited to a dinner with journalists by an OEM during the Chicago show, and while eating, the PR guy posed a question – “Does the auto show still matter to you guys?”
Immediately, all in attendance agreed that the shows are as important as ever to consumers and the dealers who sell them cars. Which makes sense – the shows are usually run by dealer associations, with the intent of generating sales leads.
For us in the media, though, it’s been an open question. Thanks to changes in technology and how both journalists and PR departments do their jobs, many journalists now find it easier (and cheaper) to cover the shows from home (especially if they snagged embargoed material in advance).
Not to mention that automakers are increasingly spending time and money on off-site reveals (granted, those reveals are still based around the dates of the auto show press days, since the OEMs know journalists will be in town) and sometimes unveiling vehicles well outside of show dates. Ford unveiled the latest Mustang during the public days of last year’s Detroit show, and GMC is doing a major event for the 2019 Sierra in Detroit in a couple of weeks, instead of unveiling it at an auto show.
Auto show media days still hold value for the media, in my opinion. They’re useful for networking, gathering info on background, listening for rumors, photography, and video work, among other things. You’ll notice, though, that with exception of photo and video, none of those things really have a lot to do with “breaking news.”
What say you, dear reader? Are you combing TTAC and our competitors’ sites for info during each press day? Does what happen during the media days affect your decision to go to a show? Do the unveilings influence your buying process? Or are media days simply irrelevant now?
The PR guy who hosted us in Chicago reps a brand that skipped Detroit this year, one of several that didn’t go to Cobo. Yet his brand, and most of the others that skipped Detroit, had a presence in Chicago. I was told that some OEMs will skip a show if they don’t have a product to announce because it’s not a good sales market for them – but they will come to cities that are strong markets. So if a brand doesn’t do well in Detroit but sells lots of cars in Chicago or New York, they’ll skip Detroit (unless they have an announcement to make) and spend the money on a stand in one of those cities.
That makes sense from a business perspective, but it does limit that brand’s exposure to media and consumers. Or maybe not, at least from a media perspective, if those media days matter less than they did 10 or 15 years ago.
Consumer days aren’t going away anytime soon, but perhaps our editorial calendar will look vastly different in five years’ time. Weigh in below.
Ronnie Schreiber on Feb 15, 2018
This discussion is being held in just about every industry. Are trade shows worth the money spent, and if you do decide to exhibit, which shows give you the most bang for the buck? Gibson decided to not exhibit at the big NAMM show in Anaheim last month. Instead they showed their new guitars at the CES show in Vegas. Sound familiar? Car companies have been using the Consumer Eletronics Show as they've rushed into technology, with the LA, Detroit and Chicago shows losing out on some reveals to CES. I agree with Peter DeLorenzo that they should move the NAIAS from January to June, in part to create some separation from the CES, but also because Detroit is a much better place to visit in June than in January. Back when all new models went on sale in September and magazines had lead times of months, it made sense to do car reveals in January. Now, new models are introduced year-round.
Latest Car ReviewsRead more
Latest Product ReviewsRead more
- Secret Hi5 Cream of mushroom interior looks good. Impractical for families and denim jeans wearers.
- Matt Posky Hot.
- Lou_BC Murilee is basically correct on the trim levels. People tend to refer to Ford's full-sized cars as "Galaxie 500" or "Galaxie's" even though that's just the mid level trim. I was never a fan of the '69 snout or any of the subsequent models. The vacuum controlled headlight covers typically failed. It was a heavy clunky system also found on the Mercury's like the Cougar. The XL's and LTD's could be purchased with factory bucket seats and a center console with a large shifter, similar to the type of throttle on an airplane. The late 60's era Ford cars had coil springs in the rear which rode nice. The shape of the fender wells did not lend themselves to fitting larger tires. The frame layout carried on to become the underpinnings of the Panther platform. I noticed that this car came with disc brakes in the front. There was a time when disc's were an upgrade option from drum brakes. Ford's engines of similar displacement are often assumed as being from the same engine families. In '69 the 429 was the biggest engine which was in the same family as the 460 (385 series). It was a true big block. In 1968 and earlier, the 428, 427, 390's typically found in these cars were FE block engines. The 427 side oiler has always been the most desired option.
- Drew8MR Minivans are expensive new if you are just buying them for utility. Used minivans are often superfund sites in back compared to the typical barely used backseats in a lot of other vehicles and you aren't going to get a deal just because everything is filthy, broken and covered in spilled food and drink.
- Arthur Dailey This is still the only 'car' show that our entire family enjoys. This is not Willie Mays with the Mets style of decline. More like Gretzky with the Blues. It may not be their 'best' work but when it works the magic is still there.