Hacker News Reader

Comment by bigtones | Hacker News Reader

This is not going to end well. They YouTube video comments are brutal. At least they're 'copying nothing' from other car brands I guess.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMnYpL0GQfA

View on HN

I guess on the flip side, how many of those comments are from anyone in Jaguar’s market? Jaguar is a luxury brand. It doesn’t seem dismissibly stupid for it to act like other luxury brands as opposed to Toyota.

> Jaguar is a luxury brand.

Jaguar is not a luxury brand

It's a brand for expensive products.

No one poor buys a new Jaguar. People who buy used jaguars do so in part for status.

Being a luxury brand isn’t anything to do with quality. Cadillac is a luxury brand and also not very good.

Jaguar was a luxury brand. They lost their A-list status years ago.

Do they still position themselves as a luxury product? I know two people who own Jaguars, and they certainly treat them like luxury objects. (They were also probably buying high-end lines, if those existed at the time.)

If it's copying anything it's the United Colours Of Benneton series of ads from the nineties.

I don't understand. It's a colorful extremely short Ad. What are people upset about? Car manufacturers made weird branding since forever, what's special about this one? Are people being upset about a car ad featuring people in "odd" clothing? Or that it doesn't feature a car in it? Does that somehow break their expectation about what a car branding ad should be?

I think the disconnect here is that I'm European and cad ads at least in northern/western Europe has for decades been about branding, not cars. A car ad could be 30 seconds long and feature a car for 1 second, the remaining time focusing on a girl playing with a cat (or whatever), the ad could often be featuring only women etc. As soon as I traveled to the US or southern/central/eastern Europe though, car ad videos were more obviously directly targeted at men, featuring the car for 90% of the video, if someone is driving in the ad it's a man, and having a deep male voice describe how great the car is. I think this is basically a northern European car ad, discovered by people in the US or elsewhere...

I wonder though what "what a stupid company" or "you just killed the brand" etc means? Literally, what are they implying? That someone would see an ad like this and NOT buy the car because of it because it smells too woke?

Its about selling out a whole society model and the brewing backlash to that going for lightning rods of "intelligent business behaviour damaging the emotional brand" .

I don't understand the society model thing. What model? And does that model exist in reality? I guess my question put more simply is: is this about a car brand being perceived as being "woke" or not?

I assume many are US people, used to half-assed tanks depicted as dark and manly road killers, being upset that a "car" can mean in other places something colorful and able to park on a small town street without blocking it.

Most people simply have an expectation of cars, and specifically an attempt at better cars than the mediocre ones that motivated such a renewal and rebranding initiative.

The fairly strange brand image that this home page projects can be all over the spectrum from "bold" and a good fit for memorable advertisements to worse than New Coke; without cars it is impossible to tell, and this blindness is itself a very serious problem that adds to the lack of announcements of new products.

But this is the equivalent of showing a picture of a car under a black cloth and the text "coming soon". It has the date 2dec 2024. It's a teaser. Obviously there will be cars.

I somehow don't think all those angry youtube comments would have been equally angry if it was a video with trees. Or wild jaguars. I think they're upset about it being people with slightly norm-breaking woke-ish appearance. But I'm not sure, that's why I'm asking.

>They YouTube video comments are brutal.

Why do you think Youtube removed the dislike counter?

Have you considered the possibility that the ad is deliberately intended to stir up controversy, putting the brand in people's minds and priming people to pay more attention when they actually launch the new car range?

their website looks shady too, like eu bag scam websites

Mass shootings also stir up controversies. That doesn't mean brands being associated with them would make for better sales.

Oh no, not the YouTube comments. If you ever need to sell a $70k car you have to satisfy the 16 year olds with a $50/week allowance. Otherwise you’ll never sell anything.

True. No one with money ever uses YouTube. Or posts on YouTube. Or makes car buying moneyfrom YouTube.

I've also never seen any car ads on YouTube because why would you bother advertising your brand to 16 year olds? They're just going to stay young and poor forever, we need to focus on marketing to wealthy adults who idolised our brand since they were kids...

Oh we’re trying to sell to one of the 100 influencers who make enough money to buy a car from YouTube, eh?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com