http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20121111/GLOBAL03/121109851/gm-wooing-chinas-affluent-preps-cadillac-makeover
Here’s an article from Automotive News on the expansion of luxury car brands into the growing Chinese markets. With China now the world’s largest car market and with a luxury market already rivaling those of the west, car makers are scrambling to appeal to Chinese consumers and gain market share in this increasingly competitive market. [Yes, because everyone is there now and the easy pickings have been had … margins aren’t what they used to be, and we’re starting to see winners and losers. Before we only saw winners and bigger winners…]
GM is counting on the success of Cadillac in the Chinese market to keep the brand afloat, but recently the luxury brand’s penetration has fallen behind not caught up with German luxury cars like Audi, Mercedes, and BMW. Many attribute this recent decrease in the chinese market to a design which does not appeal to the preferences of Chinese Customers. While Cadillac’s bold and futuristic look, with sharp curves and angles, has appealed to many American customers, the confucian foundation of Chinese culture, and a preference for ‘Zhongyong’ leads consumers there to see the car as too “bold and harsh.”
With success in China paramount to Cadillac’s survival, GM is now altering the design of the cars to cater to Chinese preferences, adopting a less acute, more contemporary look. How might this affect Cadillac? Will the increased costs caused by producing different products for American and Chinese markets cover the benefits of increased market shares in China? Think back to Minimum Efficiency of Scale. If Chinese consumers have different preferences for luxury cars than Western consumers, how might the car companies react? Would they attempt to separate operations or find a middle ground between preferences which allows them to enjoy the production efficiencies of producing a product at large quantity to serve both markets?
4 Comments
This is an interesting article. I’ve never really thought about how culture and history can influence a country’s preferences in regard to automobiles. While it may take a large capital investment upfront to create a new brand of car to serve the Chinese market, I do believe it is crucial to GM’s success, because this is the largest market and they need to gain market share in the region to see some top-line growth. Another thing to think about is status symbols, of which seem to be very important to Chinese consumer preferences. It seems in the US, large Cadillacs have a certain status appeal, but it seems unlikely that very large trucks of that sort will pick up in popularity in China.
Cadillac has been trying to adapt to markets for years. The BLS was made for Europe when everyone was buying Volvo wagons. Cadillac knew it couldn’t sell it here and didn’t even bother to try.
The Cadillac ATS was born as a way to get consumers that never thought about buying a Cadillac into the market. I am sure they are going to use the ATS as an example of what they are going to sell in the Asian market.
That is an thrilling article. I’ve by no means surely thought about how subculture and records can influence a country’s preferences in regard to automobiles. While it may take a massive capital funding upfront to create a brand new emblem of car to serve the Chinese marketplace, They want to advantage marketplace proportion inside the area to see some pinnacle-line increase. Any other issue to consider is reputation symbols, of which appear to be very important to Chinese language patron choices. It seems within the us, massive Cadillac have a positive repute enchantment, but it seems not going that very massive vehicles of that type will pick up in recognition in china.
Comments are closed.