What's In a Brand Name?

Would Lindsay Lohan be more popular if she changed her name to Oprah? Or would things be even worse if she opted to go by Osama, instead?

Just how important is a name in obtaining acceptance and avoiding failure?

According to a new study by CNW Marketing Research, a name is vital, and to prove the point, CNW did some moniker-switching to learn whether consumers held a vehicle in high or low regard based on its brand name.

It held a variety of consumer clinics using the Chevy Cobalt and Scion xB as examples. In addition to showing the cars with their true names, it switched badges to see what, if any effect, brands had on consumer perceptions about quality and reliability and if the name had any impact on whether they held the car in high or low esteem.

The conclusion: name matters.

CNW found that when Cobalt carried its original Chevy badge, it rated 6.9 out of a possible 10 ranking. But when it carried a Toyota badge, the rating rose to 8.6. If, rather than Chevy, the Cobalt was labeled a Ford, the rating fell to 6.2 and if called a Chrysler to 6.1. Those who favor a return of Fiat to the U.S., take note. When a Fiat badge was put on Cobalt the approval rating sunk to 4.8.

When a Scion xB was rolled out carrying its Toyota badge, the rating was 8.4, but when replaced with a Chevy badge, the rating slipped to 6.3. Chevy shouldn't feel too bad: when a Ford badge was added on the xB to gauge reaction, the rating fell to 5.9 and Chrysler to 5.2. And Fiat fared poorest, with a 4.2.

One can only wonder what the outcome would have been if CNW tested a Yugo badge.

There are, obviously, explanations for this phenomenon. Poor quality among the domestic automakers in the '70s and '80s along with outstanding quality among the imports in the '90s, especially among Japanese brands like Toyota, has created a perception among consumers that if a car carries a Toyota nameplate, it is infallible.

While recent quality surveys among companies like J.D. Power and Associates have proved that domestic quality has made solid gains, and is comparable to that in most imports, it is difficult to change consumer perceptions.

"The problem for some brands can be traced to long memories and the lack of attention to detail in the past," said CNW general manager Art Spinella. "Squeeks or rattles in the '60s or poor paint in the '90s still haunts certain brands to this day. It took Toyota 15 years to establish its credentials."

Comments

[M3]

Similarly, Hyundais and Kias still suffer very high depreciation due to quality issues from long ago, even though they currently build cars every bit as good as current Japanese cars.

[Lil'Tom]

They should have run the tests with automotive journalists :-)

[IFCAR]

I would have been interested to see how both cars fared with no badging at all.

[Octavian]

Another issue worth considering is the number of times that American brands have re-invented themselves. Ain't your daddy's olds, German-engineered Chrysler, new this and new that, but in spite of considerable improvements the end product still fell short of expectations.

[J]

Apparently I was not in the sampling group. :P

And someone really have no interest in cars at all. Because they can't tell the difference between the 2 of them.

[Juan Carlos]

consumer reports said that the fusion has as good of a record as the camry and the accord and a friend didn't wnatto believe me. the saturn aurora is as good as any, but many won't even hear it.

[Ken L.]

It looks like there are lots of people still traumatized by the years of disappointment by the brands that failed them time after time again.

[Infosaur]

This is nothing new, look at the resale value of the Matrix vs the Vibe. Same plant and same platform, but CR says the Vibe had more problems?!?

[Aman]

I'm sorry to say it but that xB with the chevy badge gave me a scare

[Amuro Ray]

Infosaur,

"CR says the Vibe had more problems?!?"

Don't be surprised! The problem isn't any bias, but 1 thg that many of you DON'T know - yes, although both cars share the same "everything," there is 1 thg that's not being shared: final QA. It is in this final QA that, well, very possibly, Toyota has done a whole lot more than Pontiac! I can't say for sure on the Matrix VS Vibe, but that happened to the FordNissan's Quest (93-2002). The Mercury Villagers had this engine problem - it's with the valves problem on the Villagers much more often than the Quests prematurely. Reason? Ford doesn't do the same QA job as Nissan. When Nissan received the Quest from Ford (Ford built the Quest), there was actually a final OA step @ Nissan prior to shipping to the dealers, and this problem was caught at the final QA. Since Ford never had the same final QA check, it existed predominatly in Ford, and not Nissan.

[Juan Carlos]

who knows how is going and how is being done, but the aurora/malibu vs camry vs accord thing will say alot.

[andrew]

The person stating that the Vibe has more problems reported in CR than the Matrix is pulling thing out their a$!. Actually the current online version shows the Vibe(#1 wagon) slightly higher than the Matrix(#2 wagon in reliability). The spread in #'s is not meaningful according to their footnote.

[andrew]

I would never buy a current Kia or Hyundai brand new. I still have memories of the old ones falling apart at the seams. They still scream cheap or frugal and look like knock offs of anything else.

However Kia/Hyundai if you need a cheap car get one used and let some other poor soul eat the high depreciation. They are bargains used if you can get past the brand image.

[Laura]

Hello Jim,

Today we linked to your July 31st blog post, What’s in a Brand Name, in our blog post, Naming is Everything.

I enjoyed reading your blog and thought you might be interested in what we as a naming company think of the subject of naming, as well as other topical naming and branding subjects.

If you’re interested, you may want to check out our blog: http://www.namedevelopment.com/blog.

Perhaps you’d find our blog of interest to your readers or may want to link back.

Thank you, Jim, and continued success with your writing for Kicking Tires. It is an interesting and well written blog.

[Hitman1970]

After fifteen years of drinking the foreign cars are better kool-aid (and owning, Mitsubishi, BMW, Mercedes, and Hyundai), I bought a Buick and am very pleased with it. I did a lot of research and test drove a few vehicles before making my purchase.

Getting over perceptions can get you into a great reliable vehicle at a great price. I am 36 by the way.

If my car had a silver L instead of a tri-shield on the front, I am sure the reviewers would gush all over it.

[Brian]

When the Matrix/Vibe came out I help my brother was in the market for a new car and I help him do some research. While the Matrix and Vibe share many of the major components, they are not built in the same plant. The Vibe is built in the NUMI plant in Fremont CA where as the Matrix is built in Cananda. (http://www.carlislemediasite.com/content.asp?ArticleID=128)

So it's quite possible that there will be differences in quality.

[Infosaur]

I guess if I'm supposed to have any credibility around here I should post to admit I'm wrong. I thought the Vib-trix was built at the same plant.

But as for andrew, I didn't pull the numbers out of my backside, I recalled them from a CR news stand issue a few years back.

[Joey1]

No.. Actually, the NUMMI plant in California builds Vibes, Corollas, and Tacoma's... The Matrix is built in Ontario.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUMMI

On topic now- why would anyone think that the rebadged xB was actually a Chevy?! They must not read auto blogs that often....

[DJ_Quaaludes]

Uhhh...because the general American populace knows very little about cars? Why do you think camrys and accords are so popular? Most people just want something to reliably and comfortably get them from point A to point B.

Shows people are morons and can't research things themselves.

[Everett Rupert]

When we remember, or at least when I remember, the quality control of cars in the '60s and'70s, none of them, including the froeign cars, were so great. One expected to reappear at the Ford showrooms just like they did at the Sabb shop for niggling little things that are not tolerated on used cars nowdays. Besides, the quality control problems that have recently befell MB and Toyota have been underreported in the press of late.

[Ed]

This is exactly the outcome I would have expected. Brand loyalty is real and perception is very important. The '60s Toyotas and Datsuns were every bit as troublesome as the Fords and Chevys of that era, and (if possible) even more prone to rust.

[A-man]

It's not the name that gives the perception, but rather, what the name represents, and that is not always correct. For example, Hyundai still reminds me of the crap cars of yore, but they are now actually decent cars, with the one good thing about old Hyundais, the price. Same goes for GM. GM cars are known for being cheap, but impossible to kill, with crappy interiors, exteriors, and engine. But recent GMs are really improving, and they still are unkillable. Now, Toyota has a reputation that says, we build quality, reliable cars. So everybody buys them, right? Now, to keep up with demand, Toyota has lost some of its quality, and people still buy them, as though they think that that is what quality is, when now, Chevy and Hyundai can match or even beat Toyota in quality, but people still buy toyotas because of the reputation. So the brand name has a very big effect.

[Kevin Stella]

If you were looking for a used car on line and found two that were similar and would fit your needs would you only visit the one that was at a dealership in which you recognized the name or would you consider them both?