AK Buickman Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 I've been hearing radio commercials advertising Mercedes Benz vehicles. At the end of the commercial, the announcer says, "All things considered, Wouldn't you really rather have a Mercedes?Is this a big compliment to Buick owners from Mercedes Benz?Did the advertising agency forget to research past auto advertising before letting this out to the public?Was Buick Motor Division robbed by MB?Did Buick forget to copyright this GREAT slogan? Does Buick really care? AK Buickman............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUICK RACER Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Very interesting, haven't heard that commercial here, not sure I will. R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest my3buicks Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 somehow it doesn't have the same ring to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Mercedes has to do something, their cars are rapidly becomming something <span style="font-style: italic">not</span> up to their past reputation. The new <span style="font-style: italic">Consumer Reports</span> 2004 Annual Auto Issue came out yesterday. If you want a good laugh, look up the Mercedes reliability ratings. Their horrid!Buick is now the top rated U.S. car in overall reliability, besting all but the top 6 Japanese brands (Lexus, Infinity, Honda, Toyota, Acura, and Mazda). And the Regal is indeed the top rated mid-size car (reliability only) overall. Really impressive. Mercedes was 7th from the bottom. Rated worse? Check out this list: GMC, Mini, Cadillac, Hummer, Jaguar, and Lincoln. Those ratings are for 2003 cars, for 2001 cars (as of today) Mecedes was second worst to Cadillac. Their 1999 cars were roughly average in reliability. Only Lincoln (which is actually above average in 1999 and worst overall in 2003) has fallen further and harder than Mercedes lately. Buick is consistently above average of late.Now, what would you rather have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranchero Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Dave - I've got two Buicks and two Mercedes. If we are talking about a new, 2004 model year car the answer is clear. I would much rather have a Mercedes.I find any new 2004 Buick to be absolutely boring. Mercedes are incredibly satisfying to drive and are available in desirable body styles that Buick gave up years ago - two door hardtop coupes, two seat roadsters, four seat convertibles and rwd wagons. Until you've driven a Mercedes on a 1,000 plus mile trip, you don't know. They are safe, fast, comfortable and best of all confidence inspiring - every model from C class to S class. I get no confidence from the rent-a-Regal that I get from Avis. I know that is not the way it used to be and I also know that the reliability of Mercedes has been poor lately (complicated electronics that I dislike too). I love the history and style of Buick (as well as that of Mercedes), but between the two brands in the model year 2004 there is no Buick that I would rather have than any Mercedes. I hope that changes sometime soon as I've got lots of GM card points to use to go along with those $4,000 rebates that Buick has to have now. I like Buicks, but now is not the time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Friend of mine who owns an import repair business once showed me a black plastic box with 2 wires sticking out of it. It fit in his palm. He said, "Guess what this is!""I don't know.""It's a blower motor for an '80 Mercedes 240D <span style="font-style: italic">(then 8 years old)</span>. Guess what it costs.""I don't know.""$425.00!"That conversation was 15 years ago, when Mercedes electrics were reliable. 'Nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranchero Posted March 14, 2004 Share Posted March 14, 2004 Dave - If the deciding factor in buying a new car is the price of parts to repair an older, out of warranty car - then I might rather have a Buick, or better yet a Ford F-150. But an F-150 is completely uninteresting and any current Buick is boring now and will never be a collectible old car. If we are talking a new, 2004 model year car I would still rather have a Mercedes. I'd rather have a '53 Skylark or wagon than any '53 Mercedes but there is no current or recent Buick I would rather have than a similar vintage Mercedes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted March 15, 2004 Share Posted March 15, 2004 Just keep the window cracked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Chapman Posted March 15, 2004 Share Posted March 15, 2004 It would seem the quality malaise of the Chrysler empire has cross-infected the Teutonic master... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTX5467 Posted March 15, 2004 Share Posted March 15, 2004 John, that quality issue with Mercedes had started before the "merger" was consumated. It has allegedly been a fact of life in Europe for several years--a fact that is somewhat concealed by their national border. When's the last time you heard of Mercedes or any other German company admitting they did something less than stellar (before the "merger", especially)? If Schrempp had been in a USA company and done what he did to the stock prices of DC, there would be someone else in charge of the company now. But the German pride has resulted in carefully worded press releases about his performance as to say otherwise would indicate some cracks in their German unity. Just my observation.As for the "great" new Mercedes vehicles? Why do they look like they ought to have a Hundai "H" on the grille instead of the Mercedes Star? And they call American styling "blahhh"? Mercedes has typically been a "state of the art" automobile (with respect to engineering), but we all know that when the vehicles get more electronically complicated and offer new electronic gizmos to satisfy what the upscale buyer allegedly wants (and might never learn how to use, BMW I-Drive included), little quality glitches can happen. Even if the problems are confined to just a few vehicles, it's still something that makes headlines.As for what's been going on with Mercedes, local (Fort Worth, TX) automotive historian Ed Wallace mentioned a few years ago that Mercedes was having serious quality control issues back then, much less now. Lots of cars were not making it out of the plants due to them consistently needing in-house repairs prior to shipment. Something you have to get into the German or European press to read about.The Mercedes vehicles that we see stateside are just a small number of what they sell in their homeland. They are not all loaded megabuck cars over there either. We seemingly get the more upscale models instead of the taxicab versions over here.Of all of the Chrysler products I've rented (pre and post merger), none had quality control issues or mechanical failures. They were just as reliable as any GM or Toyota I've similarly rented. As some of the FAQs at www.allpar.com point out, many of Chrysler's alleged problems come from technicians not knowing how to diagnose and/or fix the vehicles OR an opportunistic service writer at the dealership--and that can happen to any vehicle regardless of nameplate. I know, according to JDPowers, they've still got work to do, but then so does GM. It always amazed me that a Plymouth Breeze would score higher on a customer satisfaction survey than the highly similar Dodge Stratus or Chrysler Cirrus. Or why a GMC Sierra, Chevrolet Silverado, or Cadillac Escalade vehicle would have similar differences in how they score when they all came down the same assembly line? It all depends on who's filling out the surveys and what their state of mind is at that particular time.The last time I really thought Mercedes was a neat car was during the 1960s when they had that neat little coupe model--and Studebaker was the designated importer. When I finally sat in one in 1973, I was shocked at how uncomfortable the seats were. That was the end of my "love" of Mercedes vehicles, although I respect them for what they are. Like Lexus, it's what I call "perceived goodness" and "demand" that keep their lease residuals and resale values up. I'd much rather have a Jaguar instead of a Mercedes if I was buying "ferren" cars. I used to think I wanted a BMW, but that's now faded too (but the 760 in one AWESOME running car!). In the mean time, I'll stay with my fleet of vintage, semi-worthless American cars and enjoy buying inexpensive parts and doing maintenance myself, waiting a few more years until all of the new GM designs hit the ground. Look at all the fun and greasy fingernails I'm not missing by owning a new Mercedes or Lexus!Everyone drive what they like and enjoy it to the limit of your tolerance!Enjoy!NTX5467 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 15, 2004 Share Posted March 15, 2004 Regarding the whole merger, I'm not sure how many people have ever heard of Kokomo, Indiana, but thats where I live. And around here, there used to be 4 major employers: Chrysler, Haynes International, Delco (Delphi), and Continental Steel. Continental is now just a memory from 25 years ago, Haynes is on it's way to Hell in a handbasket, Delphi hasn't done too bad, and Chrysler has cut more jobs than Subway has cut fat from their menu. Even though some workers were making excellent money at Chrysler, some still left after what we call it around these parts, The Big One. I for one disapproved of the merger, as did a lot of people around here. I have one friend who worked security at Chrysler for 5 years, then when DC moved their own union to replace them, he lost his job, as did many other people there. But on the other subject, I would rather stick with my beautiful '75 Buick, than buy a car that I would have to take somewhere just to replace something simple that cost more than the down payment for the car, or some of that computer controlled...whatever is in those engines. Just my 2 cents like always... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK Buickman Posted March 19, 2004 Author Share Posted March 19, 2004 This Mercedes Benz radio commercial using Buick Motor Division's 1960's era slogan "Wouldn't you really rather have a...Mercedes" is still being broadcast on local radio, and it is from a local Mercedes dealer here in Anchorage, Alaska, not a national radio ad.A friend of mine here in Anchorage heard this commercial recently, and told me that this ad sounds very awkward because she was used to hearing this slogan years ago using the word "BUICK."If I recall, the first use of "Wouldn't you really rather have a BUICK" in advertising dates back to 1962 (?) AK Buickman, BCA #1955..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 I was reminded when this thread started of one of Mercedes-Benz's stupidest markting moves. About 7 or 8 years ago they briefly ran an ad campaign (at least in Pittsburgh) using the first line of Janis Joplin's <span style="font-style: italic">Mercedes-Benz</span> as part of the soundtrack. A stupifying mis-reading of a lyric if ever there was one.I didn't bother to post it, but then a new ad campaign started this week that just leaves me incredulous.Lincoln-Mercury is running ads now using Peter Gabriel's <span style="font-style: italic">Big Time</span> as the soundtrack. It is prominently featured in the audio mix, to the extent that the lyric is obviously meant to be associated with the achievment of being able to afford a new luxury car. However, if you've spent any time listening to the song, studying popular music, and/or were around in the go-go 80's when the song was released, it is <span style="font-weight: bold">patently obvious</span> that like <span style="font-style: italic">Mercedes-Benz</span> the song was meant to be taken as an ironic/sarcastic critique of just the sort of materialism a new Lincoln represents. While you can argue the merits of that point of view as long as you want, using a song defined by that point of view to promote your product seems more than a little out of touch.For me the most upsetting part of using <span style="font-style: italic">Big Time</span> to sell cars is that the artist/author is still alive this time and (I assume he still owns his material) allowed Ford to use the song. Either he is giggling himself silly right now, cynically cashing in his art, or both. It's a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest my3buicks Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Dave, didn't he pass away in the last year or so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 No, thankfully not. He's currently touring in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Dave,I thought I was the only one who felt frustration when I heard a great song being abused at the hands of an advertiser. The worst was a creedence song "Fortunate Son." Levi's used it several years ago. The comercial showed lots of flags and other patriotic symbols while the music played. Then you hear the first verse which is "Some folk are born made to wave the Flag, Ohh they're Red, White and Blue..." Then the lyrics cut off. By using the song this way it apears that it is a patiotis anthem. Which it is not!! the rest of the above verse that they cut off is "And when the band plays "Hail to the Chief," Ohh they point the canons at you!" Kinda ripped the whole meaning of the song right out of it in an attempt to sell jeans.I dont have any problem with patriotism, (I'm an active duty Naval Officer) I just have a problem with folks selling things with a popular song that was originally written to make a statement that is the exact opposite from what you see in the sales add. You said it better above Dave, i just wanted to bring up another example.Randy (Digger) Birt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest my3buicks Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Dave, I was thinking about Robert Palmer, lucky for Peter Gabriel! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now