The Big Three and branding—now or never

Unless you’ve been in a coma this past year, you’re aware that the Detroit automakers are getting pummeled. GM recently posted a $1.6 billion loss. Ford posted better third quarter numbers than last year, but still suffered a $380 million loss. And Chrysler, facing bankruptcy, had to sell itself to a private equity firm.

But perhaps this is the very root of the problem: being hyper-focused on profits and losses, stocks and projections, numbers and figures.

You see, while The Big Three have been busy pumping out balance sheets and new fleets of vehicles over the last few decades, Toyota and Honda have been busy pumping up their brands. And bit-by-bit, they’ve also gained considerable market share.

So maybe the “strong brands deliver strong sales” premise we’re always preaching in our industry is the real deal. And maybe The Big Three should take the cue. Because the big difference between sobbing in the red and rejoicing in the black is that those in the black—i.e. Honda and Toyota—stand for something. They’re perceived as hip. Intelligent. And socially conscious.

But what do the Ford or GM brands stand for? If your answer comes slow, don’t worry, you didn’t miss your Ritalin. You, like most of us, are just confused. You might have an idea of what the Chevy or Cadillac brands mean (thanks to their belief in branding), but look beyond those two and everything’s a blur. There’s just too much noise. Way too many models. And way too many models.

It’s now or never that The Big Three answer a very basic, but important question: what came first, the Branded-Chicken or the Balance-Sheet-Egg?

All I know is that the Egg is severely cracked. And the Chicken is looking mighty tasty these days.

—Written by Gary Bostwick & Eric Jacobs