Archive for the ‘spin’ Category

Porsche Spins Its Wheels… Into Trouble?

Porsche got reasonable coverage of its recent announcement that it will cut its Canadian prices by 10 per cent over last year to compensate for the strong Canadian dollar.

“We cannot ignore our customers and dealers in Canada who can look to the U.S. and recognize a substantial price difference,” said Peter Schwarzenbauer, president and CEO of Porsche. “We listened to the market and did what is best for our customers in Canada.”

Update: Interestingly, the announcement doesn’t seem to be anywhere on Porsche’s website.

At first glance this seems to be good news (at least according to the traditional media). However, look under the skin and you’ll see this is more about good PR than good customer relations.

As numerous commenters on the Globe and Mail’s story noted, Canadian prices were 30 per cent higher than those in the US before this announcement. The 10 per cent drop therefore still leaves prices 20 per cent higher north of the border.

The Toronto Star confirms this, noting the Boxster S is still about $15,000 cheaper down south, at $55,700 (US) compared to $70,200 (CDN).

Porsche is in danger of alienating its customers here. As a high-end car manufacturer, its reputation is central to its brand.

I don’t think any reasonable person would have expected a 30 per cent cut – given the state of the automotive industry in North America, what manufacturer could afford that?

However, by trying to position its price cut as a response to the parity between the Canadian-US currencies, Porsche may have spun itself into trouble.

Sidenote: In related news, the Toronto Star reported today that several automakers are being hit by a class action lawsuit about their US/Canada price disparities.

Democratic Debate… Or Branding Genius?

Mitch Joel wrote on his blog this week that the real winner of the recent democratic presidential debate wasn’t a candidate, but was YouTube.

I completely agree.

You’ve got to admit, Monday’s debate was marketing genius. Almost all of the reporting (and blogging) I’ve seen on this has been about the companies, not the candidates. To this extent, regardless of the problems associated with the debate, YouTube has come out on top. Even Jon Stewart, who you can usually rely on to cut through to the real issues, focused on YouTube.

(For the record, I don’t rely on Stewart for my current affairs knowledge – it’s a comedy show. However, his show is probably the best thing out there for cutting through marketing and spin).

I could rant about the state of democratic debate when two huge brand names dominate coverage, but I’d rather marvel at the marketing genius that managed to set this up. The two brands managed such dominance of the event that it became, not “the democratic debate sponsored by YouTube/CNN,” but “the YouTube/CNN debate.”

You’ve got to admit, this was fairly cool. The video question format helped not only to engage the increasingly alienated younger demographic, but also brought some relevance to the predictably-themed questions.

Unfortunately, a lot of people/groups missed their opportunies on Monday night:

  • The candidates, rather than taking a few chances in this new format, stuck with their same, old, standard answers to the questions, and did nothing to distinguish themselves
  • CNN, while it did well out of this too, stirred up controversy (deliberately? you decide) about its choice of questions

YouTube, however, came out on top. Google strikes again.