To paraphrase Kurt Vonnegut, the Maybach experiment was a conspiracy between Daimler and the rich to make the rest of us feel smart. The ultimate zombie brand, exhumed during the go-go nineties as a way for Daimler to charge even more for a stretched S Class, has now fallen on troubled times. And now, according to the ever-trusty limobroker.co.uk, none other than Mariah Carey has put the Maybach seemingly irrevocably in its place:

Initially a top class Mercedes complete with a chauffeur was sent to take Mariah to the studios, but this wasn’t deemed exclusive enough for a star of Mariah’s stature and was then replaced by a £250,000 Mercedes Maybach. However the Maybach limo was also rejected and then, third-time-lucky, a Rolls Royce Phantom was dispatched.

Saab has not had an easy path to salvation. The Koenigsegg Group has had to provide finances, agree to a price and conditions with GM, get loan from European Investment Bank (EIB),and coax the Swedish Government into guaranteeing loans. Now there’s one more hurdle left, and it’s the same challenge that scuppered the Opel to Magna deal: The EU.
Reports of recent weeks in the Scandinavian media have told us that the EU is thinking the Saab deal over. And when mighty EU thinks, things take time… So, what are they thinking about? They have to decide whether Swedish Govt’s guarantees to SAAB’s loan in the European Investment Bank should be considered subsidies or not. EU countries are not allowed to subsidize unprofitable companies – and the EU has some questions on SAAB’s and Koenigsegg Groups financial plan, and Saab’s results prior to the reconstruction. So the whole thing might stretch into next year until – or if at all – the deal is closed. Incidentally, questions about the anti-competitive nature of the German government’s support of the Opel to Magna deal killed that sale already. But does GM want Saab back as badly?

As reported here on TTAC, Daimler has decided to start selling smaller, more fuel-efficient cars in the United States. For our international friends, the announcement is meaningless. Outside of The Land of the Free, Mercedes is about as exclusive as the YMCA. (In Germany, Mercedes taxis are a ubiquitous reminder that some Daimler-Benz products are more equal than others.) But for American pistonheads brainwashed by pre-90’s Mercedes products and marketing (“Engineered like no other car in the world”), the arrival of a B-segment Merc is the final nail in the coffin of brand idolatry. Which leaves what?

Ever get the feeling that the car game is dealing with some malaise? Dieter Zetsche sure seems to. “The definition of luxury will be somewhat different,” Doctor Z tells the Wall Street Journal. “It will be fewer CO2 emissions and more modesty in appearance.” And this from the company that sells cars on the back of a brand dripping with immodesty and ostentation. But no matter, the decision has been made: Zetsche wants to chase what the WSJ terms “Americans’ growing interest in downsized models that offer upscale features and finishes.” Wait, growing interest? The MINI sells decently, but the A3 (fewer than 3k units sold year-to-date) and 1 Series (fewer than 10k units year-to-date) are hardly setting the luxury segment on fire. Damn the torpedoes, people want green modesty, and Zetsche’s going to give it to them with four compact models planned for the US sometime after 2011.

For sure, there will be another B-class, which will be pretty similar, address the same customer as the B-class today. The three other body styles clearly intend to target additional and different segments from the one that we can target today, including gender barriers.

Smaller, greener and more identity-politics-y. That sounds like just what the luxury market has been begging for! And we haven’t even started in on the cost-cutting yet.

Reports in the Swedish media have Consortium Jakob AB still in the running to snatch Volvo from Geely. But hiring investment bank Morgan Stanley as collaborators must have spooked Geely — FoMoCo’s “preferred bidder” — and the Chinese automaker has upped the ante with some grand plans for Volvo. Geely is promising to sell no fewer than 1 million Volvos annually within four/five years.

Can you tell the difference between one of these:

and one of these?

One month ago DARTZ presented uberluxury armored car with whale penis interior – PROMBRON’ (ex.RussoBaltique), lot of people name this car as DARTZ.KOMBAT. As the world’s resonance was very huge and DARTZ got lot of angry e-mails from Greenpeace, WWF and also Pamela Anderson, DARTZ make strong decision to stop their plans regarding such interior.“We have no any ideas to kill the whale or something like that. All we want – to make just luxury car. Real luxury car which will be world number one car. Our brand was started at 1869 when in Riga was opened Coach Factory or Russo Baltiysky Vagonnij Zavod – PBVZ, and first products was luxury train coaches. At 1907 was made a decision to open Car Department, and at 1909 first car left factory – the name of this car was RussoBalt. This was luxury and sport cars. At 1911 specially for Monaco Rally car got french style name – RussoBaltique. At 1912 factory made world first 4 x 4 wheel drive car, and at 1914 – armored car. All we want to unite luxury and armoring traditions of RussoBalt factory in one car, which brand celebrated 100 years now. At 1922 RussoBalt was renamed to PROMBRON’ (ex.RussoBalt).

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: if you want proof that Ford’s water-walking CEO doesn’t “get” automotive branding, look at Lincoln. The Blue Oval Boyz’ upmarket marque is in total disarray. Lincoln lacks anything approaching an effective brand proposition; it’s burning through tag lines almost as quickly and ineffectively as the industry standard for pitiful performance (Buick). Does it even matter? Lincoln’s line of lackluster products simply aren’t good enough to make it in The Bigs. And then there’s the Medusa-class disaster known as the MKT: a poorly-built, misbegotten machine constructed on Big Al’s watch. Automotive News [sub] deployed no less than three writers to talk to Mulally about languid old Lincoln, AND they spotted him the lazy journalist’s and persnickety PR person’s best friend: the Q&A format. Even so, the result is an extraordinary non-outburst from an executive who believes that combining Ford and Lincoln Mercury dealers is a good thing. Check out this exchange:

If you’re like me, you spent most of the weekend huddled under a blanket, half-watching television and praying for the flu agony to be over. And nobody who watched a considerable amount television this weekend could have avoided the latest flight of heavy-handed ads from Jeep and Chrysler’s new Ram brand. “ My Name Is Ram” and the E.E. Cummings-inspired “i am. Jeep” campaigns are blitzing airwaves across the country as the New, New Chrysler gears up to make its wildly optimistic sales goals. After five months of total silence coming out of bankruptcy, the ads are coming out in earnest, and they’ll be running non-stop in hopes of catching up with the $100 per retail sale ad spend goal for 2009. Next year, Chrysler’s ad spending will go up to $170 per projected sale, peaking in 2011 at $210 per planned retail sale. And this increase in ad spending appears to explain why Chrysler’s sales projection charts swing wildly upwards after a dismal 2009. After all, if throwing upward of a billion bucks per year won’t change consumer perceptions, what will? Well, besides new product, anyway. There’s many a slip twixt the PowerPoint and the profit.

As you can see from this screen cap of Chevrolet’s website, the brand’s American Revolution is no more. The ridiculous catchphrase—applied as it was to Korean, Canadian and Mexican imports—has been replaced with . . . nothing. Niente. Nada. The big goose egg. Oh sure, there’s the “May the Best Car Win” tag line lurking beneath the fold, but that’s equally ridiculous. The best car is winning—in the only metric that means anything (sales), and it doesn’t have a bow tie on its snout. Yes, yes, it suits the suits. Just ask the guys and gals who attend GM’s death-by-PowerPoint marketing meetings, where execs who don’t mind the perception gap face . . . nothing. Niente. Nada. (Fritz will get around to the cultural change thing eventually.) Anyway, what’s next?

Are you seeing a pattern here? Although Olivier Francois is in charge of the most damaged brand in the Chrysler Group (and yes, that’s saying a lot), at least he’s been here before with Fiat’s problem brand Lancia. So it’s no surprise that Francois’s branding video for Chrysler is remarkably similar to a Lancia ad: it projects a kind of sophisticated sexyness, with lots of celebrities, architecture and passionate-sounding classical music. The only real difference is the copy that goes on and on about the good old days when Americans arrived in style. And unlike Ralph Gilles’ Dodge presentation, Francois’ vision of Chrysler’s brand actually works. But vision is only a tiny part of the battle for the Chrysler brand, and the rest is execution. On that front, things aren’t looking quite so good

The problem with branding exercises like Chrysler’s decision to split Ram from Dodge, is that they tend towards abstraction. Luckily, the back-from-the-dead Nitro is a good case study for how this split will play out. You might think that based on its aggressive styling and upright stance that it would make sense as a Ram-branded vehicle. But you’d be wrong. It will actually be positioned as a youth-market vehicle, within the Dodge brand. Hit the jump for an official concept of the Nitro’s possible repackaging.

Ram is brand. According to the new Ram CEO Frank Diaz, the Ram was “overshadowing” Dodge’s non-truck products… never mind that Dodge’s truck-cued car styling made that phenomenon unavoidable. There’s not much to say about the new Ram brand, except that it will include pickups, heavy-duty trucks and commercial vehicles (read: no SUVs), marketed with the usual John Wayne, hard-working, never quit attitude. Think of any truck ad you’ve ever seen, and you’ll understand everything there is to know about Ram’s branding.

This is the interior of the Dodge Caliber that’s currently on sale in the US market. Not particularly attractive, is it?

Dodge brand boss Ralph Gilles has made his presentation on the future of the Ram-head brand. First up: it’s not the Ram-head brand anymore. Beginning next year, Dodge will be represented by the word “Dodge” in black with red accents. According to Gilles, the de-Ramification of Dodge was due to the fact that trucks were dominating brand perceptions. “Mojo” seems to be Dodge’s new buzzword du jour, along with the tagline cool × fun=Dodge. In addition, Dodge will be getting away from the “base, mid, high” trim level ladder to a “lifestyle-based” trim level system. In the future, Dodges will be available in the following trims: “sweet and simple,” “fun and practical,” “uptown luxury,” “thrill seeker,” and “cool extroverted.”

Automotive News [AN, sub] reckons it’s got the inside line on Toyota’s “new U.S. plan.” They’re so chuffed with the scoop that their article presents the bulleted battle plan in both the body text and a little gray box. And here it is: “Review and possibly trim the lineup of full-frame trucks; Skip midcycle vehicle enhancements to focus on bigger launches; Introduce more hybrids to North America; Give U.S. engineers a bigger voice in r&d.” AN reckons the headline is the potential truck trimming and hybrid adding bit. Which is certainly important news for a company with a “tattered image” (Toyota, apparently, not the American zombies clinging to profits via pickups, who’ve yet to produce a single large-volume hybrid vehicle). But what of ToMoCo leaving existing vehicles as is for longer?

By last Friday, it was clear that the United Auto Workers rank and file found their new, no-strike contract rank, and filed their objections during voting. In other words, the union’s members rejected the deal. Which left Ford CEO Alan Mulally’s rep seriously dinged. After all, Big Al’s been talking-up Ford’s return to profitability ever since he banked that first $25 million paycheck. The union vote against the strike was a vote for Big Al’s plan. If he’d kept his mouth shut or, better yet, constantly warned against looming collapse, the UAW might have made the ultimate concession. But then investors wouldn’t have dumped more money into Ford and the Ford family members signing Mulally’s big ass paychecks would have been seriously spooked. Big Al can’t win from losing, as the Brits would say.

Ever since GM announced that Saturn would be winding down, there’s been a niche-brand-like hole in the Canadian car market. And rather than learning from GM’s struggles, Toyota’s jumping right in to repeat them. The Star reports that ToMoCo have announced that Scion is going to Canada. Toyota will start off with 45 dealerships in urban settings (makes sense for an urban marque, I suppose); 20 in Toronto, 18 in Montreal and 7 in Vancouver. It’ll start off as a “store within a store” format. “The next generation of young car buyers is carving its own unique social and cultural experiences and Scion dealers will be part of their lifestyle,” Larry Hutchinson, Scion’s director in Canada, said. By slathering sensible cars which appeal to empty-nester boomers with youth-oriented marketing? Yeah, that’s been working well so far…

Chrysler’s product and business plan is leaking like a neglected radiator, leading up to next week’s announcement. The latest tidbit: an Alfa-badged version of the new Jeep Grand Cherokee. Alfa Romeo has been hunting after an SUV platform for some time, because as Luca DiMeo put it back in ’08,

We need an S.U.V. for America. Not everyone in the company agrees, but this would be the only practical Alfa Romeo and we will be able to design the sportiest, sexiest and most exciting S.U.V. in the world.

It’s important to note though, that this quote predates the revelation that the Alfa SUV would be a Grand Cherokee reskin, effectively replacing the unlovable Chrysler Aspen as ChryCo’s luxury ute.

Swedish daily Dagens Industri claims to have their hands on Koenigsegg Group’s secret market-plan for Saab. The one they used to secure a 600 million Euro loan from European Investment Bank. And they are aiming…upmarket! The ultimate goal is, by 2016, to establish a true luxury brand, and by then have such exclusive and expensive cars that an annual sale of 65.000 cars will suffice (by doubling the average prices).

Volkswagen and Porsche are about to make it official, as Volkswagen has now bought nearly 49.9 percent of Porsche. And though we’ve had plenty of time to get used to the idea, there are some troubling indications for the future of the Porsche brand in particular. As usual, the worries begin with an executive (in this case, VW/Porsche’s Michael Macht) explaining exactly how the company will be able to have its cake and eat it too.

Porsche needs to become a strong pillar of VW, as well as having its own production and research and development capabilities. It is important to 
use synergies as well as having independence… Any new model would have to be exclusive, sporting and make a good business case. In any segment Porsche has to be the most exclusive, as well as being the best quality and capable of delivering the best driving experience

Unsurprisingly though, these fine sentiments are mere prelude to the nasty reality.

Chinese automaker Geely has been pursuing Volvo for 10 months now, and it’s beginning to look like the chase was in vain. Bloomberg reports that disagreements over Volvo’s intellectual property are about to scuttle the deal, the same reasons GM gave for rejecting Beijing Automotive’s bid for Opel in July. The problem, it seems, hinges on product integration. Volvo’s vehicles are all based on Ford platforms, so giving Geely access to current and in-development Volvo models means trusting them with the special sauce. And Ford is even less likely to do that, after a former Ford employee was arrested last week for attempting to pass some 4,000 secret documents to SAIC and Beijing Auto.

1. The Cadillac V16 Concept – If GM had dared take the brand way up market, where it belongs, things would have been different for the “standard of the world.” But the nettle was not grasped, and the brand continued—and continues—its long march downmarket, into extinction.

If cocaine is God’s way of saying you have too much money, a Ferrari is God’s way of saying you have too much money and too clean a driving license. Of course, there are plenty of good reasons to buy a bit of Maranello magic. The average Fezza makes Marissa Miller look like Hagrid. While a Ferrari will kill you dead with snap oversteer, right up to that point, they handle like a Camillus Sizzle Folding Lockback. The cars smell like sex and sound like . . . sex. Well, someone having sex. Someone LOUD, experiencing a great deal of echt pleasure. Of course, there are plenty of reasons NOT to buy a Ferrari. Chief amongst them: attempting to light a box of wet cigars with hundred dollar bills is a more financially rewarding pursuit. But if you should be considering the possibility of owning a Ferrari, even from afar, here’s something to keep in mind: it will not get you laid. In fact, there was only one time I ever saw a woman put out for a Ferrari owner. It was a key scene in Peter North’s short-lived Maximum Thrust series. And I got the distinct impression that the woman in question (and the man in the woman in question) would have done the wild thing if they’d used a 1967 Camaro as the bait car. Keeping in mind the whole scene was fictional. Well, in terms of motivation. Anyway . . .

Cadillac has upgraded its logo alá Audi. Old logo, for contrast, after the jump.

This is a tough call. But first, let’s play connect the dots . . . Twice upon a time, I touched upon the fact that the expression “The Cadillac of . . .” had all but disappeared from the popular lexicon. Joe Blow was no longer associating otherwise unrelated product excellence with GM’s luxury brand. A few weeks later, one of our Best and Brightest sent us a screen cap of a Google ad for the new Cadillac SRX, which claimed the vehicle was the “Cadillac of Crossovers.”(Someone at RenCen was paying attention.) And now, suddenly, Cadillac as metaphor has re-entered the mainstream. The debate over a proposed federal tax on health care premiums above $8k (private) or $21k (families) refers to said policies as “Cadillac health care plans.” Here’s the lede from today’s New York Times: “A proposed tax on high-cost, or ‘Cadillac,’ health insurance plans has touched off a fierce clash between the Senate and the House as they wrestle over how to pay for legislation that would provide health benefits to millions of uninsured Americans.” The Times, which never met a tax it didn’t like, feels obliged to put the GM brand in quotes. Why’s that then?

Automotive News [sub] offers-up the not-so-startling fact that luxury car buyers are trading down. “Downscaling.” Common sense suggests the number one reason not to buy a high-priced luxury car: the buyer can’t afford it. As any good car salesman will tell you, “afford” is an entirely subjective, infinitely malleable term. Hence the term “consumer confidence” as a measurement of whether or not people think they can afford something. You know; even if they can’t, really. And while you’re contemplating what all that means for the American economy, how about this: the “Power Information Network” (J.D.’s mob) reckons the move down the automotive food chain is a reflection of buyers’ psychological need to NOT impress the neighbors. “Especially in this recessionary period, neighbors may not want to show up one another as ‘For Sale’ signs go up everywhere,” [PIN general manager Geoff] Broderick said.” I call bullshit. Since when do Americans tailor their consumption patterns out of sensitivity to their neighbors’ financial distress? The whole stealth wealth thing is a myth. A California Mercedes dealer disagrees . . .

Ya think? Still, it’s nice to hear the beneficiaries of over $50 billion in taxpayer assistance acknowledge the simple fact that Chevrolet must carry the can for the New GM. “Chevrolet is going to take on a larger role as we go from eight brands to four,” Brent Dewar asserted in a statement that demonstrated his command of English understatement—or represented a worrying obvious insight into what he’s supposed to do for a living. “Here in North America we are going to be responsible for 70 percent of volumes.” Automotive News [sub] runs the numbers. “Chevrolet has represented more than 60 percent of GM’s sales so far in 2009, compared with 54 percent in 2002.” Yes, well, as GM’s U.S. market share has been on a downward trajectory since 1982—dropping 29 points in 27 years—one wonders if Chevy’s entirely theoretical 10 percent growth would be enough to save the sinking ship. Anyone want to know how Mr. Dewar plans on raising the Titanic?

As I’ve been saying since 1846, the Ford “brand” is so amorphous that it wears a set of air quotes. In other words, Ford doesn’t stand for much of anything. It stands for everything (another way of saying nothing): innovation, excitement, great value and family product [sic]. And those are just the four selling points FoMoCo CEO Alan Mulally mentions in the Taurus YouTube video before the editor cuts him off. These days, brand-wise, Ford’s greatest selling point (singular) is that it isn’t GM or Chrysler. Compelling as that may be, it’s not all that compelling. And so The Detroit Free Press reports that Ford is building on its non-GMness by launching a 24-week ad campaign featuring “actual [as opposed to?] Ford customers talking about the features of the Ford vehicles that they like.” Yes, well, does anyone really buy a Ford over a Toyondaissan based on “surprise and delight” features like a capless fuel filler or a built-in refrigerator, neither of which is unique to Ford? I still think The Glass House Gang would be better advised to re-build their brand on the “Built Ford Tough” meme. You?

“I certainly don’t want to leave you with the feeling that, y’know, things are humming,” quips Frtiz. “Because they’re not.” Then what, pray, was the point of today’s “progress report” snowjob? But Fritz is just kidding, things really are ginger-peachy keen. As recent trips to the Harvard and Michigan business schools taught him…

Automotive News [sub] reports that the promotion of Lancia CEO Olivier Francois to Chrysler brand boss heralds a closer alignment of the two brands in the European market. According to AN’s Fiat source, Chrysler and Lancia will share products and distribution going forward, not mention a luxury mandate that has yet to convince the wider market. The association might lend a certain amount of panache to the Chrysler brand, which its former CEO Peter Fong has said should aspire to “a notch above Cadillac.” If nothing else, Chrysler will probably get a version of the next Lancia Ypsilon city car. And Lancia? A new Thesis flagship based on Chrysler’s LX platform, and “a car derived from the Sebring’s successor,” according to AN. In other words, a Fiat. Nothing about these product-sharing plans sound particularly exciting, considering they hardly get Chrysler and Lancia away from their traditions of peddling upscale versions of pedestrian grocery-getters. But Messr. Francois has kept Lancia from going the way of Oldsmobile through his Gallic brand of sultry marketing, like the Carla Bruni spot above (by the way, is that a Chrysler limo?). The hope is that the Francois panache can similarly rescue Chrysler’s efforts, but that’s a tall order for a brand with basically no competitive product. Meanwhile, does Europe need another brand of luxe Fiats?

As Colonel George Taylor would say, they’ve finally done it. Chrysler, the formerly bankrupt, federally-financed, Italian-owned carmaker has created a fourth automotive brand: Ram. As the company can’t come out and say they’re hiving-off Ram trucks to simplify Chrysler’s inevitable Chapter 7 fire sale, CEO Sergio Marchionne’s birth announcement blamed Dodge for the move (of all things). “This reorganization will allow us to protect and develop the unique nature of the product offerings within the Dodge Brand.” Yeah, ’cause all those Dodge Rams were muddying-up Dodge’s otherwise pristine image, used to such great effect with the Caliber and Avenger. To continue Dodge’s evolution towards filling Pontiac’s performance remit (I shit you not), Sergio’s appointed Ralph Gilles as the old brand’s new head, which will, presumably, no longer be that of a male sheep. As Gilles is the Canadian designer who unleashed the gangsta-riffic Chrysler 300, here’s hoping for an official name change to “The Dodge Boyz.” Meanwhile, The Detroit News [sub] is ROTFL about Sergio’s intentions to take Chrysler upmarket. Apparently, it’s going to be a “tough sell.”

If you go on advertising alone, it’s easy to think every 2010 Ford Taurus is an EcoBoosted, twin-turbo wonder. And while the SHO dominates public perception of the new Taurus, its $37,170 base price is a good reminder that SHO-boaters will be paying halo model money to get what the TV ads are dangling in America’s face. But as new Tauruses once again become part of the automotive landscape, another reality is bound to hit intrigued observers: it’s damn hard to tell a $37k+ SHO from a $25k+ SE model. Car and Driver claims that’s because Ford’s clinics revealed “there was no consensus on the level of pizazz the SHO should wield,” so they went with a sleeper. Or, “the cautious side of conservative,” to borrow a phrase. And then they changed their minds.

TTAC’s call for Chrysler to reveal what the hell it plans on doing with U.S. taxpayers’ $10 billion “investment” has been answered. According to Automotive News [sub], a plan for Chrysler’s product line-up is “emerging” ahead of the official reveal in . . . November. That said, calling so-called plan “vague” would like be calling Hillary Clinton’s tome “ It Takes a Village” slightly left-leaning and insufficiently attributed. Anyway, here ya go: “A Chrysler brand with more luxury than Cadillac. A Dodge brand known for driving dynamics. A Jeep lineup that is — well, Jeep. And vehicles to cover every market segment so that wildly fluctuating fuel prices won’t destroy sales.” Sounds crazy and it’ll never work.

Subaru’s first US-market continuously-variable transmission (CVT) was a major factor in the 2010 Outback’s recent two-star TTAC review. Not in the “one niggling fault” way either. Think more along the lines of the “metaphor for myriad brand betrayals” kind of dislike. Subaru’s vehicles are getting heavier, their interiors are becoming more plasticky-gimmicky and much of the driving fun once available in say, a stock Impreza, has gone the way of quirky styling and rugged functionality. And guess what? Subaru’s mainstream trend-encies look to be here to stay.