General Cycling Discussion - GM campaign: "Stop pedaling...start driving"

I think GM needs some more input on how cyclists feel about this. Totally inappropriate.

http://www.bikerumor.com/2011/10/12/reality-sucks-for-gms-stop-pedaling-start-driving-campaign/

Not inappropriate if it sells cars... You may not like the message, but if it sells cars then it has served its purpose. If it doesn't the message will change until they find one that works. In other words a self correcting problem... Something we seem to have forgotten in this land of the perpetually offended.

Cyclists? like we matter.... we are nothing but a subculture to most people.

Not inappropriate if it sells cars... You may not like the message, but if it sells cars then it has served its purpose.
Fair enough, though I do have to disagree that anything that achieves its purpose is appropriate. Taken one step further, if the ad said something along the lines of "Buy a car so you can run cyclists off the road rather than get run off the road yourself," would that be considered appropriate? Legal, sure, and it may even sell cars, but appropriate?

Fair enough, though I do have to disagree that anything that achieves its purpose is appropriate. Taken one step further, if the ad said something along the lines of "Buy a car so you can run cyclists off the road rather than get run off the road yourself," would that be considered appropriate? Legal, sure, and it may even sell cars, but appropriate?

That's a pretty big leap there, Zephyr.

I think y'all are too thin skinned.

Not inappropriate if it sells cars... You may not like the message, but if it sells cars then it has served its purpose. If it doesn't the message will change until they find one that works. In other words a self correcting problem... Something we seem to have forgotten in this land of the perpetually offended.

As I stated in my email to them, I just bought a new chevy truck last year, the first chevy I have owned in decades. If they think so little of me as a cyclist, perhaps it will be my last chevy too. Yeah, great sales tool, offend a percentage of your customers because you don't take the time to understand their demographic make-up prior to getting all cutesy.

wow, regardless of the potential message received by some people, that ad is just plain cheesy. GM should be ashamed on multiple levels.

As I stated in my email to them, I just bought a new chevy truck last year, the first chevy I have owned in decades. If they think so little of me as a cyclist, perhaps it will be my last chevy too. Yeah, great sales tool, offend a percentage of your customers because you don't take the time to understand their demographic make-up prior to getting all cutesy.

Just about anything one says in public (like an ad) will offend someone. For advertising the issue is does it increase sales... If it does, then those who are offended are irrelevant, if it doesn't the ad goes away and those that are offended are still irrelevant... It is a simple fact that even the offended who then decide to never do business with the company who offended them largely change their minds if they really want a product from the company...

The United States of the Offended.

more on this parallel thread : in Commuting...
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php/774650-GM-Blunders-onto-Campus

American girls expect to go in the guy's car, on a date.

I bet it's still OK to ride on the rear of the bike rack on a date in Amsterdam.

Put Obama on a bike instead of his diesel-hogging busses! I thought he believed in "global warming". GM is after all, ObamaMotors. Laughable.

I think GM needs some more input on how cyclists feel about this. Totally inappropriate.

http://www.bikerumor.com/2011/10/12/reality-sucks-for-gms-stop-pedaling-start-driving-campaign/

This anti cheap transit policy is a trillion dollar skeleton in GM's closet. This is not the first time GM has attacked non-automotive means of transportation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-wasserman/gm-must-re-make-the-mass_b_144154.html

Just about anything one says in public (like an ad) will offend someone. For advertising the issue is does it increase sales... If it does, then those who are offended are irrelevant, if it doesn't the ad goes away and those that are offended are still irrelevant... It is a simple fact that even the offended who then decide to never do business with the company who offended them largely change their minds if they really want a product from the company...

If I'm irrelevant I guess they won't mind if I purchase my next 30k vehicle from another vendor. Yeah, that's a great way to do business...I'm amazed that we've been in business since 1919 without adopting this brilliant ad strategy! :lol:

Hey, if we start ticking off our irrelevant existing and future customers, will the government bail us out too?

The United States of the Offended.

I'm offended by stupidity...which is perhaps why our company has managed to stay in business for the last 90+ years without needing the government to bail us out or our workers to concede to lower pay and benefits, ya think? :lol:

Maybe GM isn't as arrogant as some of the advertising gurus in here after all?


GM is backing down pretty hard according to thier twitter. They were taking a lot of crap from this.
https://twitter.com/#!/GM
"Wanted 2 let you know we are making changes to the campaign from this feedback. We didn't mean any offense--our apologies."
"Thanks for recognizing the change! Sorry again for any offense."
"wanted to make sure people knew we were listening! Grateful for social media for the conversation."
over and over and over.

:lol:

If I'm irrelevant I guess they won't mind if I purchase my next 30k vehicle from another vendor. Yeah, that's a great way to do business...I'm amazed that we've been in business since 1919 without adopting this brilliant ad strategy! :lol:

Hey, if we start ticking off our irrelevant existing and future customers, will the government bail us out too?

No I don't expect they will mind you buying a vehicle from another company... assuming that by the time you do, you still care... Its a simple fact that in the US cyclists represent a very small percentage of the population, therefore the possibility of offending them doesn't matter if they are not your target audience. And when one considers that even among cyclists those that integrate cycling into their life to such an extent that they would be offended are less likely than the general populace to have the financial wherewithal to purchase a new vehicle, THEY DON'T REPRESENT MUCH OF THE TARGET MARKET...

So you gripe about the bailout, yet you had no problem buying a vehicle from a company that received that bailout? Either you didn't care that much, or you prove my point that even the offended don't actually let that dictate what the will or will not buy...

The cyclist does not present much of an income base to GM or their financial division... we should not forget that GM is in the business of making loans.

Those who choose to adopt sustainable living practices like cycling, re-using, and re-cycling who ignore the constant pressure to buy now and pay later are contrary to what business and banks want as it cuts into their profits.

You have to start these kids out early on their road to debt slavery ya know...

::::sigh:::: Yet another reason for me NOT to buy GM....

Its a simple fact that in the US cyclists represent a very small percentage of the population.

No, that is not a simple fact, unless you define 'cyclist' as only the uber-enthusiasts, as many in here like to do. Consider this:


More than 20 million new bikes were sold in 2000, a record high. Throughout the 1990s, sales averaged more than 16 million bikes per year, including more than 11 million “adult” bicycles. The bicycle industry generated sales totaling $5.89 billion in 2000. More than 5,400 specialty bicycle dealers and 1,000 companies are involved in the manufacture, distribution, and sales of bicycles in the United States."

http://www.bikeleague.org/media/facts/#sold

Think about that for a minute...while many of us, the uber-enthusiasts, may buy new bikes each year (I've been slipping, I haven't bought a new one in two years), most people buy a new bike that lasts them for many years. So at a rate of say 11 million new "adult" bikes a year, with an average life of 10 years, one could make the case that a good 1/3 of the population own and ride bikes...hardly a number that you'd want to discount lightly. Indeed, compare that to the 4.5 million new firearms sold each year....does anyone think gun owners are irrelevant and fair game to offend in their ad campaigns? ;)

::::sigh:::: Yet another reason for me NOT to buy GM....Their quality control is enough reason for me.

Their quality control is enough reason for me.

MY 2010 Silverado has been problem free...but of course that's just anecdotal. Of course no good deed goes unpunished...I give them a chance and their marketing morons piss in my wheaties!

Anyway, I don't believe "offended" is quite the right term anyway. I think "saddened" is probably more appropriate. Keep in mind that less cyclists equates to less trails, less bike paths, less MUPs, etc. I doubt there are many (if any) people on this board who are okay with less places to ride their bike. While obviously this ad alone isn't going to radically change the tide of how many people are ridng bikes, the "stop pedaling, stop driving" mentality is toxic. And to assume that media such as this advertisement does nothing to influence the public's view of bicycles is naive. If the ad doesn't influence anyone, it's not doing a very good job as an advertisement, is it?

American girls expect to go in the guy's car, on a date.

I bet it's still OK to ride on the rear of the bike rack on a date in Amsterdam.

True, and I said something along those lines about using that as an excuse not to date girls in college, but something about your phrasing makes me think of 40 year old virgin and the girl not understanding what Steve Carrell meant when he said he wanted to put his bike in her "trunk".

No, that is not a simple fact, unless you define 'cyclist' as only the uber-enthusiasts, as many in here like to do. Consider this:



Think about that for a minute...while many of us, the uber-enthusiasts, may buy new bikes each year (I've been slipping, I haven't bought a new one in two years), most people buy a new bike that lasts them for many years. So at a rate of say 11 million new "adult" bikes a year, with an average life of 10 years, one could make the case that a good 1/3 of the population own and ride bikes...hardly a number that you'd want to discount lightly. Indeed, compare that to the 4.5 million new firearms sold each year....does anyone think gun owners are irrelevant and fair game to offend in their ad campaigns? ;)

Owning a bike doesn't make a cyclist... Riding one does. The numbers (Census, ACS, NHTS, etc) indicate most of those bikes spend their time in the garage, before they get sold in a yard sale to someone who will then put them in a new garage. And all of the information indicates that occasional riders number between 5 and 10% of the population. It is unlikely many of those occasional riders would be offended by the GM campaign, since they too likely only view bikes as "recreation". Now those who get offended are likely only those who view bicycles as a means of transportation--in the US that is roughly 0.5%... And a half percent that also show a strong correlation to being lower income... hence not much of the market for new cars...

Oh, and gun owners are routinely the but of jokes/ads much like the GM one... All one has to do is turn on the TV... Don't you know that those that own guns are macho, paranoid rednecks?

GM's so stupid,that ad is being talked about in every media source available.......really stupid!

Almost as bad as Lindsay Lohan getting in a fight.......

Free is free......

Come on folks,it's not real,it's made to sell cars.......Do you really think Fruit Loops are good for you also?

MY 2010 Silverado has been problem free...but of course that's just anecdotal. Of course no good deed goes unpunished...I give them a chance and their marketing morons piss in my wheaties!
My company car is an '08 Tahoe with less than 18000 miles. The panel on the back of the front seat recently fell off.

Compared to the 6 Toyotas we've owned, it feels and rides like a POS.

The United States of the Offended.

I don't think it is so much as offending someone. I think we apologize too much.

American girls expect to go in the guy's car, on a date.

I have NEVER picked someone up for a date, especially on the first date. We always meet at the location.


I would never own a GM, and I would never buy a new car (just like i would never buy a new bike) so i don't really care that much about this.

Owning a bike doesn't make a cyclist... Riding one does. The numbers (Census, ACS, NHTS, etc) indicate most of those bikes spend their time in the garage, before they get sold in a yard sale to someone who will then put them in a new garage. And all of the information indicates that occasional riders number between 5 and 10% of the population. It is unlikely many of those occasional riders would be offended by the GM campaign, since they too likely only view bikes as "recreation". Now those who get offended are likely only those who view bicycles as a means of transportation--in the US that is roughly 0.5%... And a half percent that also show a strong correlation to being lower income... hence not much of the market for new cars...

Oh, and gun owners are routinely the but of jokes/ads much like the GM one... All one has to do is turn on the TV... Don't you know that those that own guns are macho, paranoid rednecks?

yada, yada ole buddy, GM obviously gets my point and takes our numbers more seriously than you do. ;)

GM pulls advertisement that offended cyclists (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/10/gm-pulls-advertisment-that-offended-cyclists-.html)

This is a good object lesson for not only those who underestimate the power of pissed off cyclists, but also for those who underestimate the power of pissed off people in general and feel their voice can't help change anything. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. :thumb:

Oh, and gun owners are routinely the but of jokes/ads much like the GM one... All one has to do is turn on the TV... Don't you know that those that own guns are macho, paranoid rednecks?

show me one from, say, a defense contractor...which would be about the same relationship to gun owners as GM is to cyclists.

Then, go to DC and try to pass some new gun law...lemme know how it works out for ya. ;)

Cars don't necessarily suck, just GM.

show me one from, say, a defense contractor...which would be about the same relationship to gun owners as GM is to cyclists.

Then, go to DC and try to pass some new gun law...lemme know how it works out for ya. ;)

Defense contractors don't sell guns to civilians. But if they did they wouldn't make fun of their target audience. That is what your missing. GM wasn't making fun of their TARGET AUDIENCE either...

yada, yada ole buddy, GM obviously gets my point and takes our numbers more seriously than you do. ;)

GM pulls advertisement that offended cyclists (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/10/gm-pulls-advertisment-that-offended-cyclists-.html)

This is a good object lesson for not only those who underestimate the power of pissed off cyclistsot li, but also for those who underestimate the power of pissed off people in general and feel their voice can't help change anything. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. :thumb:

Not likely. It is more probable that the "appology" was part of the ad plan in the first place to drum up more press. Despite your assertions, those that seem offended are a very small minority of the potential customer base.

Not likely. It is more probable that the "appology" was part of the ad plan in the first place to drum up more press. Despite your assertions, those that seem offended are a very small minority of the potential customer base.

you gotta linky that delves into GM's strategy and supports your crystal ball that read their minds? I didn't think so. I think I'll let actual events speak for themselves, thank you, and leave the spinning to you. :thumb:

Defense contractors don't sell guns to civilians. But if they did they wouldn't make fun of their target audience. That is what your missing. GM wasn't making fun of their TARGET AUDIENCE either...

What you're missing is that way more cyclists are part of their target market than you...and apparently they...thought.

Keep trying to spin it your way tho, it's quite entertaining. ;)

And now, ladies and gentlemen, a few words from http://gmcbike.net/

"GMC Bike
Riding bike is an activity which is not only fun but also healthy. As kids, we used to ride our bike all around the neighborhood on weekends with friends and family for fun or on weekdays back and forth to school. As adults now, we already know the health and environmental benefits we can gain from bike riding. If you are one of those persons who want to start biking for whatever reason you may have, health or green living, a GMC bike is the best bike to start your cycling experience with.

GMC bikes are made by the same great manufacturer company which makes GMC trucks. Therefore, it can be guaranteed that GMC bikes are made with the same technology and precision of GMC trucks. This is also an assurance that GMC bikes are delivered in the same fine quality of their truck counterparts. Although being part of General Motor Corporation, the distribution sales of GMC bike is handled by one of the biggest American bicycle importer company, the Kent International, Inc. "

And now, ladies and gentlemen, a few words from http://gmcbike.net/

"GMC Bike
Riding bike is an activity which is not only fun but also healthy. As kids, we used to ride our bike all around the neighborhood on weekends with friends and family for fun or on weekdays back and forth to school. As adults now, we already know the health and environmental benefits we can gain from bike riding. If you are one of those persons who want to start biking for whatever reason you may have, health or green living, a GMC bike is the best bike to start your cycling experience with.

GMC bikes are made by the same great manufacturer company which makes GMC trucks. Therefore, it can be guaranteed that GMC bikes are made with the same technology and precision of GMC trucks. This is also an assurance that GMC bikes are delivered in the same fine quality of their truck counterparts. Although being part of General Motor Corporation, the distribution sales of GMC bike is handled by one of the biggest American bicycle importer company, the Kent International, Inc. "

Add to that:
http://i00.i.aliimg.com/photo/v0/319518106/Cadillac_Short_Sleeve_Cycling_Jerseys.jpg
http://www.bikerumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/rockracing1.jpg

yada, yada ole buddy, GM obviously gets my point and takes our numbers more seriously than you do. ;)

GM pulls advertisement that offended cyclists (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/10/gm-pulls-advertisment-that-offended-cyclists-.html)

This is a good object lesson for not only those who underestimate the power of pissed off cyclists, but also for those who underestimate the power of pissed off people in general and feel their voice can't help change anything. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. :thumb:

+1...

It was not as bad as the short-lived QuikTrip "Bike Boy" commercial, but still very annoying.

"GMC bikes are made by the same great manufacturer company which makes GMC trucks. Therefore, it can be guaranteed that GMC bikes are made with the same technology and precision of GMC trucks. This is also an assurance that GMC bikes are delivered in the same fine quality of their truck counterparts. Although being part of General Motor Corporation, the distribution sales of GMC bike is handled by one of the biggest American bicycle importer company, the Kent International, Inc. "

So, GMC trucks are also imported from China?

As a driver, I know I'd be greatly offended if Trek or Specialized put out an ad that said, "Stop driving and start pedaling." etc...

as a driver, i know i'd be greatly offended if trek or specialized put out an ad that said, "stop driving and start pedaling." etc...

rotflmao

As a driver, I know I'd be greatly offended if Trek or Specialized put out an ad that said, "Stop driving and start pedaling." etc...

What about Giant?
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa150/99johnny/bike/giant.jpg

^ :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

that's one of the best response ads i've ever seen.

What about Giant?

:lol:

I am GM target audience and I am offended

Something we seem to have forgotten in this land of the perpetually offended. That aint noo ****!

It will be a cold day in hell before I buy another American car, the unions are one sided and they aint on my side. Besides the Germans & the Japanese build a much better vehicle. If I won a Vette in a raffle i'd drive it, ok, that's about it,

Worried about cycling cutting into sales are they? They should be. I know I drive a lot less since I started cycling.

+1...

It was not as bad as the short-lived QuikTrip "Bike Boy" commercial, but still very annoying.

Do we remember?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zm4lwCxyjY&noredirect=1

This anti cheap transit policy is a trillion dollar skeleton in GM's closet. This is not the first time GM has attacked non-automotive means of transportation.

Link doesn't work, but I hope you aren't trying to bring up the discredited Bradford-Snell "Roger Rabbit" conspiracy theory with GM "buying up trains to tear them down and put in buses". GM is no angel in this, and they were buying up transit agencies and putting their buses on them, but the transit agencies they were buying up were, by and large, bus companies at that point.

As it turns out, most of the rail infrastructure hit end of life at about the same time. At that point, rail was "old fashioned" and buses were new and trendy. The main thing rail had going for it in the eyes of most people was the nickle fare, which as it turns out, they often couldn't raise by law. Buses ran on socialist subsidized infrastructure, and they were new and shiny.

The rail companies did try to raise funds to keep the rail lines running. But to do so, they had to get all sorts of suburbs to tax themself to pay for a major railway rebuild; most of those suburbs did not even have a rail line serving them, and the ones who did thought all the things mentioned above. Needless to say, those rail lines didn't get their repair funding.. so the transit companies went shopping for buses. This is usually the point where GM would enter the picture - AFTER the decision to phase out the trains was already made, and often after the buses were purchased and had been running for awhile.

I'm no GM fan, but lets give credit where credit is due. They were conspiring, and they did a couple of other things that have come back to bite us, but on that specific charge they're relatively innocent.

If you want to say "Auto makers built all the urban planning schools of the day and wrote the curriculum to tell students to tell cities to build highways and sprawl" on the other hand, you may have a good case.