[ QUOTE ]
I understand that the Fed kinda has GM by the short & curlys here, but I think it's lost on a lot of folks in management exactly how influential a performance model can be on future same-brand purchases. A perfect example is a local friend of mine here...he knew of strictly nothing other than Chevrolet his entire life, as his family bought & drove nothing new GM's, until he became disenchanted with the lack of development by GM on the F-bodies [he'd owned several over the years], but FoMoCo was still cranking them out year after year, so he decided to try a Mustang...well, not long after that, guess what he got for his wife...yep, a crew cab Ford truck. He completely jumped ship, all because of simple continued support for their *affordable* peformance model...and it's trickled over into his family as well...all because of a single purchase [or lack thereof].
[/ QUOTE ]
Rob,
What bothers me is the fact that some of the same people that stood by at GM while the Camaro failed - are still there- seemingly now attempting to take part of the credit for the "revival" of the car and have created a cult like following around a kind of "keep the faith" myth.
Some history first hand: Jim Perkins was run off the reservation by GM for trying to save the Camaro and Chevy performance in general in the late 1990's when the Camaro "Kill" decision was made. He told me so, "They Killed Camaro to make Trucks" and it is a fact- the SSR soon appeared as the replacement.
Obviously Market forces caused the car's return and simply put the sucess of the Mustang and the Challanger paved the way for Camaro's production approval, but the car is now late coming to market and the timing is not optimal. You are very right...lots of people changed Brand Loyalty after 2002 and purchased other vehicle brands because of that single misguided GM decision.
How true Rob. You nailed it.
