Luxury Car Brands Comm Analysis (H12008)

Slide Title of the Presentation , CorpoS, (9Pt.), Date

Competitive Communication Analysis H1 2008

by BBDO Moscow for Mercedes-BenzAugust 2008


• Every brand tries its best to build a conversation with the consumer via its communication

• It is necessary to make the consumer take part in this conversation in order it would be constructive

• To succeed in this the brand should produce emotional impact on the consumer

• To affect a person emotionally it is important to follow 5 basic principles formulated by NOP World, a British company currently ranked no. 5 in the list of major global market research organizations

Slide Title of the Presentation , CorpoS, (9Pt.), Date8

Audi


Audi: keep it simple

many of the prints deployed in H1 contained headlines only which

made them simple but often bland due to the low quality of the copy

a 3D model was used instead of an actual car for the R8 campaign

which made it look like a toy

some parts of executions were so subtle they were hard to notice


Audi: grab them by the eyes

some of the prints successfully used red as a color theme or in order to accentuate the details

generally, the black color scheme prevailed in 2008 and made Audi's communication rather boring


Audi: avoid ambiguity

…but excessive laconism of the ads made the copywriting flaws too obvious

despite an interesting idea the Audi Exclusive print wasn't clear enough due to the poor execution

thanks to the overall simplicity of communication the brand managed to avoid ambiguity in most cases…


Audi: if you have a good story, tell it

12

the stories on sport achievements were good as well as the non-verbal storytelling, but apart from that copies and headlines were abstract and haughty

the brand also made good use of its halo vehicle and the awards it had won

the S-Line package campaign was a rare example of appropriate multi-car story


Audi: sell the benefits not the product

the brand's communication was executed in a way too haughty tone of voice as there was just no place for the consumer in the conversation


Audi: 2007 vs. 2008


Audi summary

•Audi tried to leverage some of the strong points of the last year's campaigns (consistency and high production values as the main ones)•In fact the brand narrowed down the range of topics significantly and upset the balance of its values by concentrating on 'leadership' in the large part of this year's communication


BMW


BMW: keep it simple

most of the prints deployed in this year were stylistically simple…

… while the campaigns started in the last year were not


BMW: grab them by the eyes

the brand did a great job in improving its eye-grabbing techniques (especially by implementing color coding for the cars)…

…which was also extremely noticeable in case of the prints that used large font for headlines…

…but examples of dull communication were also still present


BMW: avoid ambiguity

the brand managed to improve its communication it terms of avoiding ambiguity…

…except for the M5 campaign which apparently tried to address amateur sports car drivers on a quasi-professional language but did that neglectfully


BMW: if you have a good story, tell it

20

the brand's storytelling was still mediocre due to the fossil copywriting…

…stylistic issues…

…and tactical campaigns in

general


BMW: sell the benefits not the product

the brand got rid of product attributes communication which drastically improved its benefit delivery capabilities and enabled the brand to speak about consumer benefits


BMW: 2007 vs. 2008


BMW summary

•BMW's communication still suffers from mild inconsistency but the brand did a good job in solving its main problems, namely large amounts of attributes and uninspiring complex visuals•Should be considered primary competitor in terms of communication for Mercedes-Benz


Lexus


Lexus: keep it simple

the brand featured ridiculously overweighed communication: too many attributes, excessive amounts of text plus some print structure issues


Lexus: grab them by the eyes

the visuals of the brand's print ads were simply boring…

…but b/w color coding was smartly used to differentiate petrol and hybrid engines


Lexus: avoid ambiguity

thanks to the almost complete absence of comprehensible messages the brand managed to avoid ambiguity…

…but the tonality and topics of communication did not change according to specific carlines and thus the ads promoted the brand itself


Lexus: if you have a good story, tell it

28

…and the headlines were placed way too high to be readable

the copywriter failed to recognize the difference between a copy for a print ad and a brochure…

the 'attribute belts' still worked for creating the innovative feeling of the brand (although it seemed to be a new

template but the brand continues to use the old one which points to inconsistency or uncertainty in the minds of those

who produced the ads)


Lexus: sell the benefits not the product

excessive amount of product attributes killed any attempt of successful benefit communication


Lexus: 2007 vs. 2008


Lexus summary

•Lexus was still very consistent visually and continued to maintain the innovative feeling of the brand but its communication is still in a desperate need of bold messages and striking visuals


Volvo


Volvo: keep it simple

most of the prints were simplistic rather than simple but nonetheless succeeded in confusing with their logic


Volvo: grab them by the eyes

some of the ads still managed to attract attention…

…but most of them were ill-structured…

…and executed in a low-key fashion


Volvo: avoid ambiguity

the brand's communication still suffered from lots of contradictions

in visuals and copy…

… and totally incomprehensible headlines were still present


Volvo: if you have a good story, tell it

36

apparently some of the ads tried to tell something…

…but inexcusably fossil print

execution…

…and awfully clichéd copy ruined all good intentions


Volvo: sell the benefits not the product

the brand tried to build emotional communication…

…and lacked product and consumer benefit base to do that

…but did that way too naively…


Volvo: 2007 vs. 2008


Volvo summary

•Volvo's communication was an undisputable champion in producing emotional impact last year•But the problems that were visible (low production values and incomprehensible stories in the first place) started to dominate•As a result the brand's communication unfortunately turned into inconsistent mess


Infiniti


Infiniti: keep it simple

the brand's print ads were relatively simple…

…but the pompous copy was sometimes hard to read

…and special headlines tried to position each carline emotionally…


Infiniti: grab them by the eyes

color coding still did its job well enough…

…but it will doubtfully last for long as the current template implies difficulties in storytelling and creative diversification


Infiniti: avoid ambiguity

messages were too simple to be ambiguous…

…and the brand thankfully quit speaking of multiple values at once…

…but the headlines were definitely too abstract for doing their job well


Infiniti: if you have a good story, tell it

44

the amount of copy was cut down…

…but the ads still lacked good storytelling due to limitations

set by the template

except for the Infiniti G campaign which successfully

combined its copy with the visuals and created a strong 'Japanese premium' feeling


Infiniti: sell the benefits…

the brand tried to communicate consumer benefits via copy…

…and successfully continued to sell its interiors as a unique product benefit


Infiniti: 2007 vs. 2008


Infiniti summary

•Infiniti has definitely improved its communication by solving copy issues and continued to capitalize on the color coding which still helps to differentiate the carlines•But the persistent lack of drama and one-way style of conversation keep the brand uninviting

Slide Title of the Presentation , CorpoS, (9Pt.), Date 48

Mercedes-Benz


Mercedes-Benz: keep it simple

early campaigns' messages were simple enough…

…but the latter adaptations were probably even too basic to trigger emotional reaction


Mercedes-Benz: grab them by the eyes

major campaigns' visuals were relatively simple but tasteful…

…while some of the details could have been executed more neatly


Mercedes-Benz: avoid ambiguity

the brand did a good job comparing to the last year and almost completely avoided any ambiguity in its communication…

…but the headlines sometimes looked artificial due to the adaptation issues


Mercedes-Benz: if you have a story…

52

the storytelling was generally good…

…but the ads often lacked a few sentences to make the product speak for itself

unfortunately minor stylistic issues were also present

…and the humor was used rarely and aptly…


Mercedes-Benz: sell the benefits…

the brand managed to communicate consumer benefits successfully in most cases


Mercedes-Benz: 2007 vs. 2008


Mercedes-Benz summary

•Mercedes-Benz deployed a lot of adaptation campaigns which were too laconic at times and some of the local prints had minor execution issues•But in spite of relatively small amount of communication the brand has become the most conceptually interesting in the segment


Conclusions

•Still almost no human images are used in the communication of premium brands except Volvo campaigns (which doubtfully took any advantage of those images) and the A-Class campaign (which definitely stood out against the background), though such images could help to amplify the emotional impact of a message•Thankfully the segment's communication has passed the 'attribute period' but hasn't yet managed to continue the conversation on the consumer benefit level except for Mercedes-Benz

Luxury Car Brands Comm Analysis (H12008)

Documents

Transcript of Luxury Car Brands Comm Analysis (H12008)