Linked above is an article in the Detroit Free Press written by Sarah Webster, equating Ford's Mercury division to the "Chick Flick" of the auto industry. This is based on ads over the last year geared toward women and urban chic, a "smarter" more hip buyer. Well I say whatever works do it. Ms Webster points out that 36% of Mercury buyers were women last year up from 32% the year before.While I have seen many of the ads, and think they'r smart and funny, I think it's wrong to label a brand as the "chick" brand. Actually I think it's stupid, sexist and insulting to women. People have tried to label different brands before, either along racial, sexual or "lifestyle" lines.
I guess what ever works, but let me ask this if 36% were women, what were the other 64%? And is some idiot out there trying to measure each brands breakdown?
Ford won't complain, it get's Mercury's name out there, and there is no harm in that. But I feel sorry for the guy driving his new Milan, getting the eye from other guys in their manly Fusions.
This type of fluff sells papers, and I guess keeps my fingers moving across the keyboard.
3 comments:
Well said, Joe!
I agree, Having owned a so called chick car ( Mazda Miata ) . wasn't the Ford Mustang marketed towards single women ? the secretary special?
Anonymous (Miata owner) You're right on several counts.
The Miata, was wrongly labeled a chick car, because of it's size and lower power rating. I always thought that spoke more about the insecurity of those saying it, than about the cars ability.
Yes the Mustang was originally referred to as a "Secretary"s car" and early marketing was directed towards the new class of young working women.
People that try and masculanize an automobile (or emasculate) have persoanl issues.
Now, it's smart to market towards women, but that does not supose that only women will buy that model or brand in the case of Mercury
Post a Comment