Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ian Hunt]

Caleb Dick wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:41

John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 07:56 Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 08:56 Mercedes Benz (from the smart to the maybach) Edit: because I can Ian I've never seen one so I had to google it, and it appears they are trying to sell them here. A couple $k more than rice burner entry level, for a car that looks like it would be blown off the road by a passing vehicle or strong gust of wind.  Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn? -snip- I've seen a few of those 'pregnant roller skate' Smart cars around.  In addition to passing breezes, I bet a couple solid linebackers could scare it.   I would agree that there are very few, if any, brands that can cover the very-cheap and very-high end well.  Basic business - you can't be all things to all people, all better than the competition, and profitable at the same time.   For the Mercedes example - I would argue they are essentially independent brands under a common umbrella.  If the same engineers designed everything from Smart to Maybach, then yes one company has the breadth required.  Just like I will assume Behringer will use different engineers for their Behringer branded gear vs Midas - not ignoring some cross-pollination. Caleb

The Maybach is merely (merely!) one of the big S class Mercedes with a new frock and extra toys, so that counts, the Smart is an inhouse design also (the A class first showed some smart technology a few years prior). Germany has very tough safety laws and the Smart complies fully, but I wouldn't want to get in an accident in one, I wouldn't want to get in an accident in a Suburban either.

Ian

[Ian Hunt]

John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 09:56

Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 08:56 Mercedes Benz (from the smart to the maybach) Edit: because I can Ian Well that's 15 minutes I'll never get back... I've never seen one so I had to google it, and it appears they are trying to sell them here. A couple $k more than rice burner entry level, for a car that looks like it would be blown off the road by a passing vehicle or strong gust of wind.  Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn? I won't debate other peoples perceptions of brands. My thesis is success in the low end, erodes high end panache, and is probably harder to do. Didn't Mercedes already cut and run from one attempt at the larger mid-low end with Chrysler?  I guess that failure was Chryslers fault? I recall past efforts from Mercedes for cute smaller cars, but they always struck me as cars for rich people to buy their college kids (or mistress), not cars for kids to buy themselves. This looks like a run at that market so good luck.   JR

Apologies if you don't like the answer but I thought the question was show me a company selling product in the lo, mid & hi end of their market. Mercedes meet that definition with the cars mentioned, all of which are successful in many Mercedes markets, the Smart has only recently come on sale here, time will tell if there is sufficient volume for the USA to stand amongst the successful Smart markets.

The Maybach costs a fortune and by the standards of the over 400K class sells well enough.

Then there is the Mercedes Benz line, I think they have been successful in the 121 years they've been making cars.

Ian

[John Roberts {JR}]

Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:43

You probably have seen the maybach, looks exactly like every other nondescript large car, but big enough to sling a couple of smarts off the side, like lifeboats. Ian

I've heard of the Maybach(?) on that effete BBC car show. I'd heard of the Smart also, in passing, but not as a serious commercial venture. I stand informed that the Smart is a serious attempt, but I fear it is a zero sum game, as success there will come out of their other pockets.

or not...

JR

[John Roberts {JR}]

Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:49

The Maybach is merely (merely!) one of the big S class Mercedes with a new frock and extra toys, so that counts, the Smart is an inhouse design also (the A class first showed some smart technology a few years prior). Germany has very tough safety laws and the Smart complies fully, but I wouldn't want to get in an accident in one, I wouldn't want to get in an accident in a Suburban either. Ian

The Smart branding effort involved input from Swatch (I learned in my lost 15 minutes), a decidedly different, more nouveau fashion conscious mindset. The Maybach is probably just mercedes on steroids, perhaps with a hint of Italian design, depending on who they are trying to appeal to.

JR

[John Roberts {JR}]

Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:59

Apologies if you don't like the answer but I thought the question was show me a company selling product in the lo, mid & hi end of their market. Mercedes meet that definition with the cars mentioned, all of which are successful in many Mercedes markets, the Smart has only recently come on sale here, time will tell if there is sufficient volume for the USA to stand amongst the successful Smart markets. The Maybach costs a fortune and by the standards of the over 400K class sells well enough. Then there is the Mercedes Benz line, I think they have been successful in the 121 years they've been making cars. Ian

Again, I won't argue about your perception, and will try not to weasel the definition of my thesis too much.  

Mercedes is no doubt successful (if we ignore Chrysler), but in my mind are still an upper to upper-mid positioned car brand. Many companies have tried to be all things to all people and some in head scratching ways. I recall one series of advertisements from Ford, including all of their sundry car badges in one ad, (several sold or retired now). My response was WTF are they trying to accomplish? IMO such an ad will impress maybe 10% of the audience, and confuse or diminish the image of the other brands positioned above the Ford badge, which is all  of the other brands. Kind of like shooting yourself in your wallet.  

Sorry if I hijacked this away from an Uli bashing rant... but I have been a student of brand management ever since it was a day job (among others), and I think the brands involved are what he bought to exploit, because they aren't Behringer and locked into that Behringer place in the consumer's perception.  It would be far cheaper and easier to just copy the successful KT and Midas SKUs, if he could do that and succeed in their market niche.  

JR

[Ian Hunt]

John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 12:52

Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:59 Apologies if you don't like the answer but I thought the question was show me a company selling product in the lo, mid & hi end of their market. Mercedes meet that definition with the cars mentioned, all of which are successful in many Mercedes markets, the Smart has only recently come on sale here, time will tell if there is sufficient volume for the USA to stand amongst the successful Smart markets. The Maybach costs a fortune and by the standards of the over 400K class sells well enough. Then there is the Mercedes Benz line, I think they have been successful in the 121 years they've been making cars. Ian Again, I won't argue about your perception, and will try not to weasel the definition of my thesis too much.   Mercedes is no doubt successful (if we ignore Chrysler), but in my mind are still an upper to upper-mid positioned car brand. Many companies have tried to be all things to all people and some in head scratching ways. I recall one series of advertisements from Ford, including all of their sundry car badges in one ad, (several sold or retired now). My response was WTF are they trying to accomplish? IMO such an ad will impress maybe 10% of the audience, and confuse or diminish the image of the other brands positioned above the Ford badge, which is all  of the other brands. Kind of like shooting yourself in your wallet.   Sorry if I hijacked this away from an Uli bashing rant... but I have been a student of brand management ever since it was a day job (among others), and I think the brands involved are what he bought to exploit, because they aren't Behringer and locked into that Behringer place in the consumer's perception.  It would be far cheaper and easier to just copy the successful KT and Midas SKUs, if he could do that and succeed in their market niche.   JR

I agree, Mercedes brand perception is upper to middle class, I think they are hoping that the cachet will trickle down and make the Smart more desirable. I looked up the sales figures, since it went on sale in the US (mar 08) 38,553 have been sold, no idea what MB need to make it work though.

Ian

[Jason Dermer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s
You wouldn't see me in one, there are far better cars for the price that also beat it for MPG and what not, and the half of the design theory behind it is invalid in the US market. However, the SMART is actually a very well built little bugger.

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

Smart is co-owned by MB, but it doesn't bear the Mercedes Benz name, roundel, et al.

[Kristian Johnsen]

John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 16:56

Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 08:56 Mercedes Benz (from the smart to the maybach) Edit: because I can Ian Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn? JR

You'd probably be surprised to hear that they do very, very well in crash tests against stationary objects.  Their low mass gives them less energy to crumple the "cage" surrounding the passengers as well as making it easier for the vehicle to be deflected to one side or the other upon impact.

Against other vehicles?  It depends, the low mass is working against you in a head-on, but then again - unless you're driving a big-rig there is always someone bigger around.  The big SUVs that some of us are so enamoured with are a lot less safe than might be expected, particularly due to their tendency to roll over.

[Christian Tepfer]

Bob Lee (QSC) wrote on Mon, 21 December 2009 23:25

Smart is co-owned by MB, but it doesn't bear the Mercedes Benz name, roundel, et al.

The smart brand is strongly associated with Mercedes Benz, event though they disconnected it from MB.
Good work of the marketing guys I think, they built a whole new line of cars, not all very good (mileage is still a laugh, they should go with less than 3l/100km for a car that tiny) but whatever, everybody knows, MB is involved in this, nobody really draws negative conclusions regarding actual MB models.

I liked the smart roadster very much, nice little fun car, drove it as a rental a few times, sadly it was discontinued.

What does that mean for UB? I think he knows what he does. So he might well have a strategy for Midas and KT. He knows about good engineering (everybody who owns older "black face" gear knows) and he knows about lowering cost to the minimum needed to still have a product to sell.
I can think of stretching the brands, Midas can have some lower end products (like a digital desk for the rest of us, mid range club gear), Behringer can stretch up (and have digital consoles like the DDX and one higher end model, still sufficient for bigger bars and smaller clubs). If he can really close the gap I don't know but he can try.