RE: The Camaro
 

Well, an unfortunate fact is that marketing can make or break a car, no matter how good (or bad) it might be. The 04-06 GTO was a perfect example of that (I oughtta know, I had an 04) - yes, the car had bland looks and looked like a Grand Am/Grand Prix/Cavalier/'59 Edsel - whatever, but I'm convinced that if that car was better marketed it might not have been the sales dud that it turned out to be. Remember the Merkur XR4ti back in the late 80s? Another marketing disaster, even though it was a half-decent car.

Dodge will already have an advantage by having the Challenger beat the Camaro to the market by a year... it HAS to find that perfect balance of asset investments and proper marketing for the car to succeed - otherwise the car could tank, and tank HUGE.

RE: The Camaro
 

Chevy had years to put in the retro look and they never did. The drive train was always there, you could get a six speed. But the sales still continued to fall. So they drop it a few years and come back with with it, only to not listen to what their base asked for. Hot Rod Mag. had the perfect retro Camaro in an article. Based on the 67-69 it was awsome. Did GM listen to their base...nooooo! They brought out another car with Cadillac styling and yet similar drive train. GM the door is still open to give the Camaro fans the car they want or you could plod ahead and give them a Camarillac. The retro fad will not last long, it comes in cycles.

RE: The Camaro
 

I agree...a perfect example of marketing is the Plymouth Laser / Eagle Talon versus the Mitsubishi Eclipse. Same car right? HUGELY different sales results. Why...? Marketing approach.


Noone can convince me Chrysler just does not have the marketing dollars...please. It does not cost much to throw up a cool website.

RE: The Camaro
 

I know all about the importance of marketing. I'm a marketing major for crying out loud. Take a look at the new Tundra. They went nuts with marketing it, and they have to offer incentives to get them off the lots. Sometimes, some models sell and others don't. The Challenger gets plenty of attention in the media simply because it has been received so well; meanwhile, what some would consider the backbone of Chrysler for the last 23 years is being replaced shortly, if you were going to promote either the backbone of your company or an attempt to get back in a seasonal market place, which would you put more effort and time into. I don't recall the 300, Magnum, or Charger really having much more marketing support than this pre-production and those have been successful for the most part.

The case of the Laser/Talon, although they might not have had as much advertising, the simple fact is there is more to their failure than just the marketing approach for that specific model. The problem with the Laser was that Plymouth itself had lost its desirability identity at that time, (how bad is it when an almost unheard of brand with less dealership support is able to outsell you making the same model). Part of the problem with the Talon had to be Eagle itself. Eagle was known for offering mostly cheap and undesirable Mitsubishi models like the Summit. Plus why would you buy an Eagle when you can get the same car under the Mitsubishi badge? The audience that likes Japanese cars will normally buy the brand that it was originally. Besides the Stratus coupe and Sebring coupe still were not smashing successes in popularity despite being a rebadged Eclipse as well. It could partly be the product offering and that some people like myself will not buy a rebadged Mitsubishi, Mercedes, Chery, or any other non-Chrysler product just because it has the Chrysler labeling.

Some models just sell pretty naturally. The PT Cruiser was an over night success. The G6 took a lot of marketing before it finally took off.

RE: The Camaro
 

The Camaro looks like Pokemon, to me.

RE: The Camaro
 

I love the 1978 Gold Trans Am.
I think that's the best looking of all the trans ams, camaros, and firebirds.
It'd be great if they made a new one of those.