Shame on you, GM

Author: Steve

4 Feb

Okay, I’m no tree hugger, but Cadillac’s latest Escalade TV commercials take waste to a whole new level.

There are at least two spots; each showing a giant 5,550 lb. Escalade (EXT or ESV?) slipping through blurry lights of the city strip, its 60.3 cu. ft. of cargo space completely void of any lumber or tractor parts; Not to mention a single family member. The woman, all 98 lbs of her, looks dolled-up for a posh cocktail party. No, she’s not going to pick up groceries or the kids from school. She’s out to make a statement in her “statement ride”.

The scariest part is, GM’s campaign seems to be working. I see plenty of Escalades on the road - empty, of course, except for their 98 lb. drivers.

Look, people. The only thing that’s going to bring change in these car companies is for you to stop plunking down your 60k for these gas-hog tanks, and grab a smaller, lighter, cheaper fuel efficient vehicle instead. As a good friend told me, “My mom hauled me and my 3 brothers around, plus the groceries, in our Fiat station wagon just fine.”

Please comment on this.

Filed under: Branding, TV Advertisements

4 Responses for "Shame on you, GM"

Sharyn February 11th, 2008 at 9:50 pm 1
Well, Steve, I suspect that at least SOME of your objection to the big road hogs is due to the fact that you live in an area that is already overpopulated and largely congested.

Where I live, there are more wide-open spaces, and generally speaking, the distance from point of origin to destination is lengthy. It’s much easier to find a parking space at the local mall when I don’t have to peer around the mammoth box-on-wheels that’s blocking my view since I drive a Mazda Protege 5.

I never have understood the reasoning behind the argument that you pose. IE…seeing all these big vehicles with only one occupant. Would you dislike them less if there were 5 or 6 people in them? They still take up as much room on the road and in the parking spaces and presumably would be even LESS fuel-efficient if they were loaded to full capacity.

I don’t know…I just object to the whole “mobile status symbol” concept, and it is very pervasive here as well. We are being inundated with all the Hummers here. As far as I can tell, “status” is the one and ONLY reason to drive one of those things.
Steve February 15th, 2008 at 3:33 pm 2
Okay, everyone. My mother’s commenting on my blog. Let’s all not be afraid to chime in.

Thanks.
Andy February 19th, 2008 at 5:07 am 3
I’ve grown up with big cars and have always loved the V8s. Granted the big SUV thing (Hummer/Escalade/Yukon etc) is a lifestyle choice driven primarily by the bling or statement factor of which you mention. Most people don’t use them for offroad (I know it’s not the discussion here). I’ve owned a Land Cruiser since October 2007. It seats 8 people and we use it for our family of 6 as a people mover…and a grocery getter (Gulp!) It gets 13MPG in the city on a good day and will only ever see the dirt maybe a handful of times during it’s life.. It’s not a lifestyle choice for us but fills a need. Ironically, my other car is a 5.7l V8 and gets 23MPG on the highway. I only drive it back and forth to work alone. I’m not 98lbs. I’m 227. Time to lose some weight. I guess there are other more important things to worry about.
Lori Saitz February 28th, 2008 at 12:15 am 4
I’m totally with you, Steve. No need for these giant gas guzzlers that take up way too much room on the road and in parking spaces and use up tons of fuel.
I’m not against spending 60K on a vehicle; my ultimate car costs more than that, but I intend to have it converted to a hybrid.
My guess is people just want one more way to say “HEY, look at me!”