Mercedes-Benz Changes Its Marketing Strategy for 2010

[Shining Star]

Mercedes has decided to stress safety over luxury in its new marketing campaign. As the tables have turned in the economic downturn, so have consumer priorities. It is becoming more popular to brag about how little you just spent on a new car as opposed to telling your friends how ridiculously expensive your new car is.

Steve Cannon VP of marketing for the U.S. believes that the new safety technology Mercedes has to offer should play a bigger role in its vehicle sales. In an interview with Automotive News, Cannon said, "You have to give people the justification that says, 'Yes, a Mercedes-Benz is relevant to me -- it can save my life.' " At a time when hybrids and less expensive cars are hugely popular, Mercedes has to give America a reason to shop for a Benz.


Mercedes has just launched its all new E-class, which is equipped with the latest technology. The new E-class is equipped with several features previously only available in the top of the range S-class. Blind spot detection, lane-keeping assist, night view, and attention assist, which monitors the driver's road awareness, are a few safety features available on the 2010 E-class. These features set Mercedes ahead of the pack in terms of safety and the company is banking on its innovation to help it sell some cars.


Cannon quickly touched on competing brands and their marketing tactics. He said that Mercedes would not lower its game and that the company would continue to focus on innovation and safety.


http://rumors.automobilemag.com/6595383/news/mercedes-benz-changes-its-marketing-strategy-for-2010/index.html

 

[HighestOfHigh]

Yea, I've noticed that the commercials for the E-class have focused on Safety. I think it's a good idea. They still need the address other advantages to owning a Mercedes-benz as well.

I always loved the S-class ones...saftey yet focusing on the excellent background of the car.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

Wow. MB adopting a marketing strategy that for once makes sense. lol

 

[coolraoul]

They should just update this ad...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[fortuner]

They should just update this ad...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That was one brilliant strong Mercedes the W126..

I would bet that family would not buy another car besides Mercedes benz after that incident..

My dad about 15 years back driving a W123 230e had a rollover accident after a tyre blew he was doing around 180km/h no safety belt he came out off the car with not even a scratch the car rolled 3 times..

Mercedes = saving lifes..

Its a pity my dad still dont wear a safetybelt when driving.

 

[Gullwing]

That is a great commercial.

Stirling Moss never wore a seat belt racing. He felt it was better to be thrown free of the car then to be strapped in and burned. Even so the crash that ended his career pined him in, but that wasn't a Mercedes.

My dad when he was little watched his dad and three brother roll their car and trailer right in front of him. His youngest brother wasn't wearing a seat belt and came out his open window, once the car cleared he stood up with his hands in the air. Another brother was wearing a seat belt and hit his head when he unbuckled since the car was on it's roof. In the end everyone was ok.

 

[fortuner]

Yeah gullwing i get what you saying but i think its safer to where the belt..Whebever me and my dad travel together thats our first fight lol...

 

[Mr Robert]

Yeah, there are always those that think they are better of without the belt. Very strange reasoning that has no bearing at all in the real world.

 

[Germaniac]

Stirling Moss never wore a seat belt racing. He felt it was better to be thrown free of the car then to be strapped in and burned. Even so the crash that ended his career pined him in, but that wasn't a Mercedes.

There's a difference between an open-topped race car and the enclosed cell of a passenger car - for Moss' reasoning to ring true every car on the road would have to be roofless and designed to 'fling' their occupants to safety in the event of a crash. Neither of these are plausible... and think about the whole raft of other potential safety hazards that would occur with occupants leaving their cars at a high rate of speed!

Seat belts save lives. The highest road toll in Australian history was in 1970, when over 3700 were killed. Seat belts became mandatory in 1973. Last year, the road toll was less than 1600. (Keep in mind Australia's population has nearly doubled in that time). Seat belts (among a host of other safety implementations) are the main attributed reason for this trend.

My dad when he was little watched his dad and three brother roll their car and trailer right in front of him. His youngest brother wasn't wearing a seat belt and came out his open window, once the car cleared he stood up with his hands in the air. Another brother was wearing a seat belt and hit his head when he unbuckled since the car was on it's roof. In the end everyone was ok.

So you will trust the sheer luck necessary for you to 'come out' of an open window during a crash as opposed to trusting the proven safety seat belts? It is established knowledge that you can be injured by a seat belt, but the injuries are insignificant when compared with the catastrophic result that usually occurs when not wearing one.

Also consider that all modern race cars and passenger cars feature seat belts or harnesses. There is a reason for this.

 

[Merc1]

Yeah that old W126 commercial is what they should update. WOW. Reminds me of some of the old W124 and W140 commercials.

M

 

[Gullwing]

There's a difference between an open-topped race car and the enclosed cell of a passenger car - for Moss' reasoning to ring true every car on the road would have to be roofless and designed to 'fling' their occupants to safety in the event of a crash. Neither of these are plausible... and think about the whole raft of other potential safety hazards that would occur with occupants leaving their cars at a high rate of speed!

Seat belts save lives. The highest road toll in Australian history was in 1970, when over 3700 were killed. Seat belts became mandatory in 1973. Last year, the road toll was less than 1600. (Keep in mind Australia's population has nearly doubled in that time). Seat belts (among a host of other safety implementations) are the main attributed reason for this trend.

So you will trust the sheer luck necessary for you to 'come out' of an open window during a crash as opposed to trusting the proven safety seat belts? It is established knowledge that you can be injured by a seat belt, but the injuries are insignificant when compared with the catastrophic result that usually occurs when not wearing one.

Also consider that all modern race cars and passenger cars feature seat belts or harnesses. There is a reason for this.

Whoa whoa whoa, I never said I don't wear a seat belt. I wear it all the time. I was just bringing up some rare examples against it. Moss didn't wear one because he didn't want to get trapped and burned, in the end he was trapped, but luckily not burned.
Maybe there was someone looking out for the pastor and his three sons

 

[Germaniac]

Whoa whoa whoa, I never said I don't wear a seat belt. I wear it all the time. I was just bringing up some rare examples against it. Moss didn't wear one because he didn't want to get trapped and burned, in the end he was trapped, but luckily not burned.
Maybe there was someone looking out for the pastor and his three sons

No worries, man - the figures on seat belt usage (or rather non-usage) in the US specifically are rather alarming however...

 

[tennmb]

That strategy hasn't served Volvo all that well.

Mercedes is always at its best when it is leading, not following.
Regarding marketing. Mercedes seems to be in a state of confusion, even though it has very good products. Never in my 11+ years selling MB, has MB asked me, "what would help you sell our cars?" We talk to the most important people. The ones who buy, and the ones who don't. We know why a person chooses a Lexus over a Mercedes. We know where we are missing the market. Does MB ask? Not that I can tell.

I am speaking of the US here. Mercedes has done a poor job of knowing the market. They have also missed some critical points in the market.

Example: E-class starts at $50k
The S-class starts at $90k

Buyers have to make a $40k leap to go from mid sized to full-sized.
Guess who sits conveniently positioned in the middle of that price gap? Lexus. You can get a full sized car for $65-$75.

Can you get a standard wheel base S-class in the US? Nope. Mercedes doesn't even have to design or build a new car to capture market share. All they have to do is look at the market, and import what they already make. And they pay people millions to figure this stuff out.

Another example.
Diesel appeals to the buyer concerned with economy and efficiency.
You can't buy a diesel sedan in the US for less than $55k. Does that fit the profile of a diesel buyer? Not most of them. Now Audi, BMW and Volvo have plunged into the US market with diesel. Where is Mercedes? Sitting back, scratching their hind quarters trying to figure out how to get more sales in a tough economy. In a tough economy you must emphasize the more cost conservative offerings in your product line. Have they? Not that I can tell.
And somebody is getting paid millions.

 

[HighestOfHigh]

^For a Mercedes-Benz Salesperson you sure have a lot of issues with how they do business. You probably have a much better view of Benz then we do, but it seems so negative.

 

[Wolfgang]

I wouldn't say they changed it. They just may include safety more often.

Here's how benzblogger expressed it:


"If you ask most people which car company was the first to use seat belts, airbags, and electronic stability systems in their cars they would probably credit another European automaker that is always hyping their safety. Since a Mercedes-Benz is so much more than just the safest car on the road, their rich history of pioneering safety innovations is often overlooked. We invented airbags, crash testing, stability control and now Attention Assist all with the goal of first, preventing the accident, and then keeping you safe from injury if it can't be prevented."


Mercedes Benz | Atlanta Classic Cars | Jesse Cannon-Wallace

 

[Merc1]

tennmb

Interesting. Originally there was supposed to be a S450 along with the S550, but then the Lexus LS460 happened. I think Mercedes did it exactly right by not offering the underpowered S450 along side the more powerful A8, 7-Series and LS. They all would have cost the same or less and had more power. Mercedes took the high road with the S550 offering more or the same power than those cars and a bigger price. Buyers looking for a S-Class had only one choice, and they had to choose the S550 and they did. It was worth the premium over the LS460 and the previous 7-Series.

Now since the W221 has been out a few years I'd say bring over the S450 to sit in that price gulf between the E and the S-Class. Problem is 335hp hp in such a car (as in the GL450) is not enough anymore. Notice how W220 S430 got beat pillar to post, but W220 S500 almost never did and when it did face down the previous LS430 it won. Now if Mercedes would get with the program and offer DI on the V8s (and V6s) they'd be able to see a 365hp S450 and a 400+ hp S550 and the S450 wouldn't be seen as such a weakling.

That price gulf isn't as big as you make it out to be either. Yes the E-Class starts at 50K, but there is a E550 in there and it can run 70K with everything. More like 20-25K between where the non-AMG E tops out and the S-Class starts. Who looks at a base E-Class and think they're going to get a "full size" Mercedes for less than 30K more. Buyer is more or less cluess in that regard IMO.

Lexus the example you use pays a price for having the LS so close to their mid-size car, the GS. Look at the GS' sales. They have never, ever been anything. They're in the toilet a year after each new generation of the car comes out. It isn't worth the money, Lexus buyers don't buy sporty (which it really isn't, but tries to be) and thus they get a SWB LS460 for only about 10-12K more, hardly a S550 buyer. Would they buy an imaginary S450? Maybe, maybe not.

I do agree that Mercedes is falling behind in the diesel race. A diesel GLK and C-Class should have been added for 2010. As I see more 335ds on the road I'm convinced of that Mercedes needs to engage that market asap. The new 4-clyinder diesel would be perfect IMO.

Mercedes is also behind in Direct Injection. Every other luxury car maker (except Infiniti) has this feature now. BMW, Audi, Cadillac, Lincoln, Acura, Porsche etc. have it. Something really funny is going on if Mercedes says it can't use the gasoline here and all the others can.

M

 

[cawimmer430]

During my internship with Mercedes Munich I had a stint in the internal mail delivery program. I came across many letters written by Mercedes owners telling the company of their accidents and how the Mercedes they were driving saved their lives.

Most of these letters were from W210 E-Class owners too.

 

[Shining Star]

MB needs to make more commercials like this.

YouTube - Mercedes Benz S-class Commercial

It's a great ad; even though it doesn't talk much about safety.

 

[cawimmer430]

You can't buy a diesel sedan in the US for less than $55k. Does that fit the profile of a diesel buyer? Not most of them. Now Audi, BMW and Volvo have plunged into the US market with diesel. Where is Mercedes? Sitting back, scratching their hind quarters trying to figure out how to get more sales in a tough economy. In a tough economy you must emphasize the more cost conservative offerings in your product line. Have they? Not that I can tell.

Last I heard, BMW was having trouble moving 335d's off their lots. This might have put on hold any plans for other manufacturers like Mercedes-Benz to bring over some of their European diesels.


How would a C-Class diesel fare in the US? I'm getting mixed signals here with all the C300 and C350 bashing all over the Internet from a performance point of view. As a European I find nothing wrong with the performance of these two cars. A C250 CDI sounds like a good deal for the US, but then again I'm already wondering how Car and Driver will rip it apart because a 4-cylinder Camry is faster and costs less...

 

[Gullwing]

I think the C250 would sell great in the US. Performance is not bad, mixed with over 40mpg. It would outsell the 350 and maybe 300.