RE: motivation

["Glenn Wasserman" <glennwa@domain.elided>]

I don't think it's stereotyping, you're talking numbers. And I think you're right - I read somewhere that the average age of the Buick buyer was something like 55 years old. (By comparison, I think the average age of the Camry buyer was 48 years old).
 
I don't think this age group is what Alfa Romeo has typically targeted - but then again, there are a lot more factors than age when looking at marketing demographics (which I claim to know nothing about, but I'll keep typing anyway). Just because someone has reached a certain age, doesn't mean they aren't interested in sporty cars anymore - in fact, some people buy them just for status, no matter how old they are. 
 
I think a really good car can transcend the market it's meant for. Example: I saw a woman last week driving an ML55. That's the AMG-modified hopped-up Mercedes SUV. She was a little grey-haired lady who was probably in her sixties. Now I could really get myself in trouble here with a generalization, but I doubt she's going to go offroading any time soon, and I certainly don't think she's going to need the suspension upgrades, engine tuning, and etc. that the AMG treatment gives the truck. I'd be confident to say that she got it because her next door neighbor has an ML500 and she wanted to get something "better". Silliness.
 
Silly it is.. but then again, ultimately if people buy Alfa Romeos for the same reason, it will maket he marque a success. It will probably mean people like me won't be able to honk and wave to new GTV owners (good way to get beat up, shot at, or run off the road in some spots) but at least we'll have cars on our shores with the cross and serpent on them.
 
-Glenn

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Gregory S. Youngblood [mailto:greg@domain.elided] 
	Sent: Fri 5/3/2002 4:07 PM 
	To: Pottree@domain.elided 
	Cc: alfa@domain.elided 
	Subject: Re: motivation
	
	

	On Fri, 3 May 2002 Pottree@domain.elided wrote:
	
	> Olds and Buick., I think, represent the old paradigm and they have outlived
	> their usefulness and appeal -- the image they carry, which was once part of
	> their success, is now poison as far as market segments with any future are
	> concerned.
	
	I think this is right on the money. Buick is my grandfather's choice.
	Actually, cadillac is, but when you can't afford a caddy, you get a buick.
	He used to say, buy a caddilac if you can. If you can't, get a Buick. If
	you can't afford either one, get a Chevy.
	
	When I travel and have to rent a car I'll often get something like a
	bonneville or caddy or something in that size. Often they try to stick me
	with a Buick. I've learned from driving them that they do not make their
	seats for someone my size - I'm only 5'10/11 but the Buick seat backs are
	too low leaving no support for my head and they don't go far enough back.
	Even at the end of their travel I feel too close to the steering wheel.
	Yet, the same car's sister (Bonneville) has higher seat backs and fits me
	better. I hate to stereotype, but look at the Park Avenue drivers when you
	see them. At least 75% of the ones I see around when I'm paying attention
	fit the profile of the typical "Buick" driver. The last time they had
	something the didn't fit their normal image (as far as I'm concerned) was
	the Grand National.
	
	When I look at GM marketing, I see a few distinctly targeted products and
	the rest a collection of cars appealing to an aging demographic market.
	Poll most non-white middle age and younger people and they do not want GM
	cars. At least the ones I run across. The ones that drive a Chevy or any
	other American car are the exceptions.
	--
	to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
	or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided