Somehow, the democrats got it right in 1992 with James Carville’s campaign directive:

  1. Change vs. more of the same
  2. The economy, stupid
  3. Don’t forget health care.

Well, Dr. Z and Daimler-Chrysler…. Its retail, stupid. Or more precisely, it’s…

  1. Make cars people want to buy
  2. Create TV advertising that drives sales
  3. Don’t forget a compelling retail message that drives people to the dealer

The Dr. Z campaign (that’s Dr. Zetsche) has been on my mind because a couple of people have asked me if I thought it was as lame as they did. I do.

Furthermore, I interviewed Ian Beavis of Kia Motors recently (I’ll post this two part interview in a couple of weeks) and he, with a bit of political correctness, also thinks that these spots are strategically unsound. The spots are decent (OK, a bit goofy), but the strategy is WHAT? Help me here.

So, do these spots work in any way? Not if you consider that July’s sales are down 17% at Chrysler Group vs. last year.

Now, one of the key questions for me is, did the agency recommend this dismal (get this!) $225 million campaign or did Chrysler make them do it? I can imagine two scenarios:

“Well, Mr. Chrysler Client, have we got a great (kiss, kiss) idea for you and it will star your German chairman and will show how tight Daimler and Chrysler really are – we’ll even try to toss in some consumer benefits.”

Or,

“Agency, I am the client and make the damn shots. I don’t want your opinion. Just write and shoot them.”

Which was it?