|
It's right up there with the all-time worst PR / branding decisions:
New Coke;
Ratners (the 'carp' quip from its then owner);
Disney going hard woke (amongst many other entertainment brands, but they're the worst) leading to huge losses on the entertainments division and a massive knock-on slump in toy sales of affects brands;
British Airways removing the flag and replacing it with twee designs;
Gillette with it's anti-white men ad campaign;
MS-Windows Vista / 8 for PC (the latter is not so bad for phones/tablets, given that's what it was originally designed for).
|
|
Well, I think I recognised Tilda Swinton (back row, extreme right) but can't place the 'others'.
What an absolute pile of ***** – embarrassing isn't the word...
...and with prices for their intended new range of EV models starting at just under £100,000.00!!!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha (repeat to fade)...
|
Well, I think I recognised Tilda Swinton (back row, extreme right) but can't place the 'others'.
Don't think that is her, too young and too short.
I do recognise a hair style though, that of Moss from the IT Crowd ;-)
|
|
...I was 'joshing' bbd!
The 'IT Crowd' – utterly brilliant for its day...
|
|
...perhaps this is the launch of the NEW Jaguar Trans Mission?
|
|
And Ford are once again making the decision to become 'upmarket'.
I remember they tried that before and promised it was the end of deep discounting. It never happened.
|
|
Jaguars heyday was the 1950-90s - grace, space and pace combined with a competitive price. They lived up to their reputation even though they could be temperamental and rot.
They are now average performers. With EV inevitable they need to adapt to survive.
They need to build on brand strengths.
Going down market - cheap, more basic won't work. They don't have the ability or culture to produce low cost.
Mid market they are up against the Koreans and Chinese. both of whom produce entirely competent cars.
That leaves up market. The demand for £100k+ motors is very limited and they will be up against prestige brands - prestige being defined generally as more money than sense for a product which delivers mainly pricy compromises rather than better.
I don't expect them to succeed - Ferrari, RR, Bentley, Lambo, Maser, etc etc are already there.
|
|
I am saddened to see the way the brand has fallen.
Yes, in the days that i worked for the various brands they were "quirky" to be polite, but probably the best era was actually the Ford ownership time. Jaguar improved a lot till they used the bases of the fat XJ american car and the mondeo based s type. Range Rover one of the best was based on a US Suv. I didn't at all like the final XJ as i never liked my backside dragging along the ground. Sadly it'll all be gone soon.
My uncle Bill would be turning in his grave.
|
|
...along with Sir William Lyons no doubt...
|
...along with Sir William Lyons no doubt...
And Morse :-)
|
|
I am saddened to see the way the brand has fallen.
Yes, in the days that i worked for the various brands they were "quirky" to be polite, but probably the best era was actually the Ford ownership time. Jaguar improved a lot till they used the bases of the fat XJ american car and the mondeo based s type. Range Rover one of the best was based on a US Suv. I didn't at all like the final XJ as i never liked my backside dragging along the ground. Sadly it'll all be gone soon.
My uncle Bill would be turning in his grave.
In my view, the S-type was the beginning of the end. The X-type (which was the Mondeo in drag) was another step. Jaguar (in my mind) offer two models - a big saloon and a GT. As soon as the started making smaller, cheaper cars they lost that fundamental. The moe recent addition of SUVs.has totally destroyed what image they had left.
|
I am saddened to see the way the brand has fallen.
Yes, in the days that i worked for the various brands they were "quirky" to be polite, but probably the best era was actually the Ford ownership time. Jaguar improved a lot till they used the bases of the fat XJ american car and the mondeo based s type. Range Rover one of the best was based on a US Suv. I didn't at all like the final XJ as i never liked my backside dragging along the ground. Sadly it'll all be gone soon.
My uncle Bill would be turning in his grave.
In my view, the S-type was the beginning of the end. The X-type (which was the Mondeo in drag) was another step. Jaguar (in my mind) offer two models - a big saloon and a GT. As soon as the started making smaller, cheaper cars they lost that fundamental. The moe recent addition of SUVs.has totally destroyed what image they had left.
So you think the introduction of the mk2 was a mistake?
Adding SUVs has increased Porsche's desirability and profitability a lot.
|
I am saddened to see the way the brand has fallen.
Yes, in the days that i worked for the various brands they were "quirky" to be polite, but probably the best era was actually the Ford ownership time. Jaguar improved a lot till they used the bases of the fat XJ american car and the mondeo based s type. Range Rover one of the best was based on a US Suv. I didn't at all like the final XJ as i never liked my backside dragging along the ground. Sadly it'll all be gone soon.
My uncle Bill would be turning in his grave.
In my view, the S-type was the beginning of the end. The X-type (which was the Mondeo in drag) was another step. Jaguar (in my mind) offer two models - a big saloon and a GT. As soon as the started making smaller, cheaper cars they lost that fundamental. The moe recent addition of SUVs.has totally destroyed what image they had left.
So you think the introduction of the mk2 was a mistake?
Adding SUVs has increased Porsche's desirability and profitability a lot.
The MK2 was a successor to the (retrospectively named) MK1, so no. Do I think that the introduction of the MK1 was a mistake? No, obviously not, but I don't really think of it as being the equivalent of an S Type. I know Jaguar wanted people to think the S Type was just like a MK2, but it lacked the grace and space.
What has added to Porsche's profitability is getting VW SUVs, putting a pointy nose and a Porsche badge on the front and selling them to fools for silly money. It has undoubtedly diluted the brand, only time will tell if it was worth it or not.
|
I am saddened to see the way the brand has fallen.
Yes, in the days that i worked for the various brands they were "quirky" to be polite, but probably the best era was actually the Ford ownership time. Jaguar improved a lot till they used the bases of the fat XJ american car and the mondeo based s type. Range Rover one of the best was based on a US Suv. I didn't at all like the final XJ as i never liked my backside dragging along the ground. Sadly it'll all be gone soon.
My uncle Bill would be turning in his grave.
In my view, the S-type was the beginning of the end. The X-type (which was the Mondeo in drag) was another step. Jaguar (in my mind) offer two models - a big saloon and a GT. As soon as the started making smaller, cheaper cars they lost that fundamental. The moe recent addition of SUVs.has totally destroyed what image they had left.
So you think the introduction of the mk2 was a mistake?
Adding SUVs has increased Porsche's desirability and profitability a lot.
The MK2 was a successor to the (retrospectively named) MK1, so no. Do I think that the introduction of the MK1 was a mistake? No, obviously not, but I don't really think of it as being the equivalent of an S Type. I know Jaguar wanted people to think the S Type was just like a MK2, but it lacked the grace and space.
What has added to Porsche's profitability is getting VW SUVs, putting a pointy nose and a Porsche badge on the front and selling them to fools for silly money. It has undoubtedly diluted the brand, only time will tell if it was worth it or not.
Check on your history - the Cayenne was a Porsche development when they were independent of VW Group - but once within the group it was obvious that it could be used to create siblings for VW and Audi, namely the Touareg and Q7, with the combined total volume reducing unit costs.
It's good business when customers drive out owning both a 911 and a Cayenne.
|
|
I've seen the visualisation of the new electric car. It looks OK apart from the front, that looks like a bulldozer blade!
Car companies need to move with the times but Jaguar has a wealth of styling features that could influence a new design without being retro. The XF managed that very well without looking like any of its predecessors and so did the F type.
A radiator grille might be a bit pointless on an electric car but replacing it with a bulldozer blade is even more pointless! Anyway, the illustration was just a visualisation so maybe the actual car will look better.
|
What has added to Porsche's profitability is getting VW SUVs, putting a pointy nose and a Porsche badge on the front and selling them to fools for silly money. It has undoubtedly diluted the brand, only time will tell if it was worth it or not.
Check on your history - the Cayenne was a Porsche development when they were independent of VW Group - but once within the group it was obvious that it could be used to create siblings for VW and Audi, namely the Touareg and Q7, with the combined total volume reducing unit costs.
It's good business when customers drive out owning both a 911 and a Cayenne.
Well yes and no. Yes in that Porsche was independent when the Cayenne came along, but no in so far as it was co-developed with VW.
As to the Cayenne diluting the brand and whether or not that was a good thing?. Without the Cayenne, Porsche wouldn't have survived. So unless you'd have preferred the company to have gone under staying true to their sports car roots, its a moot point.
Yes, the Boxter was a success and got some much needed money into the company coffers, but it was nowhere near enough for Porsche to survive. The Cayenne did that, and while Porsche is now a part of VAG, they do retain a high level of independence.
|
|
|
|
...I was 'joshing' bbd!
The 'IT Crowd' – utterly brilliant for its day...
So r****** now?
|
|
...The company has said that a team of 800 people worked on the radical redesign and re-branding...
My brother has worked for JLR for almost 30-years. He's currently SVOp's management. When I asked him if he'd 'bought into the rebrand' he replied:
"I'm an engineer. It means nothing to me". :-)
|
|
800 !!? Must have been Management Consultants, at least some of 'em ... Reminds me of what Shell spent on inventing a slightly different version of the familiar sea-shell. BP the same, a bit later.
|
|
In reply to this advert for the new logo on Twitter Elon Musk ask the question “;Do you sell cars ?”
https://x.com/i/status/1858800846646948155
|
|
Think what they are doing could actually be very clever - the big 'furore' about it at the moment gets them talked about and they don't have any cars to show...as soon as they do have something to show the media will have to show them and get interest again...clever/cheap marketing for the company...assuming they aren't just daft!
|
|
Jaguar cars have always been talked about, especially in the last 20 years. Yet it's never translated into great sales, with only the F-Pace helping keep the balance sheet from distintegrating, because its a large SUV.
And that's the crux of the matter. Porsche were in dire straits at the turn of the millennium, so crafted the face of 996-era 911 onto a gawky VAG-platform share SUV and called it "Cayenne"
The press were horrified, said the brand would suffer, screamed sacrilege to Porsche's sporting heritage and on and on.
None of that happened. Porsche had released a money-printing machine, much like BMW did with the first (and still best) X5.
But did Jaguar look at their competitors SUV success and change strategy in the early 2000s. No, they just stayed where they were. Eventually the F-Pace arrived in 2015, a very good car but 10 years too late.
c*** strategy. Three decades of c*** strategy. Their current status is bizarre - a working car brand with no products on sale. Even Morgan is making and selling cars!
Edited by Sulphur Man on 21/11/2024 at 23:36
|
|
|
|
|
"Gillette with it's anti-white men ad campaign;"
1. Perhaps you would be good enough to explain precisely what, in your opinion, makes Gillette's adverts "anti-white men".
2. If, in your perception, Gillette were to run an "anti-black man" campaign, what would that look like - and would you think it mattered?
|
|
|
|
