Honda Goes the Gamer Route Again, But Are They Missing the Mark?

Honda is the online gaming brand of automotive marketing. Their latest effort is part of the Honda CR-Z launch called 3-Mode Mania. The game gets its name from the three different driving modes available on the car: Sport, Normal and Econ. It's an interesting way to showcase the different driving behaviors of the vehicle, unfortunately the game play is so basic one hardly notices any difference when selecting the different modes.

The Tron-like driving path is very simple with thin red lines displaying the track and you drive what looks like a Monopoly piece car; though, there is a choice of colors to personalize the experience. I tried the game a few times and found it a bit dull since it was too simplistic and like I stated earlier the modes really didn't provide much distinction in game play.

I do find it interesting though that Honda went with an online game for a 2-seat hybrid vehicle. The game for the Honda Fit made a bit more sense since the Fit did market to a younger audience, but the CR-Z seems like a third-car for empty-nesters. Unfortunately, it won't attract the former CRX fans as the CR-Z really missed the mark on being a reincarnation of that excellent, sporty 2-seater.

So my bet is the CR-Z is more likely to be bought by an over-50 demographic with a decent amount of disposible income who want a mild hybrid with a bit of a sporty feel. Personally, it was difficult just writing that last sentance because I'm still not sure who will really buy this car since it lacks decent hybrid numbers, missed the CRX reinvented crowd, and only sits 2 people without all the fun of typical topless or fast third car.

I'd also guess the target consumer is not much of a gamer, unless the brand decided to focus on youth; even though, hybrids barely make a dent in the younger age groups. Therefore, the CR-Z buyers are not likely to play the online game 3-Mode Mania. Perhaps Honda should rethink doing a game every time they launch a small car and instead focus on the activities of their likely buyers. Just a thought...

Tiny Products Warding Off Big PR Problems

After $4 became a reality in the summer of 2008, there has been a progressive push to build smaller, fuel-efficient cars for the U.S. market. Advocates, like author Thomas Friedman, have dedicated significant pages to greening the US car industry by raising CAFE standards and promoting more Euro-like auto choices instead of behemoth SUVs.

So it was a bit disheartening yesterday to read about some rather poor crash tests performed by theInsurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). They reported that three popular small cars - SmartForTwo, Honda Fit, and Toyota Yaris - all received a Poor rating when in a front, off-set crash with a midsized sedan.

From Kicking Tires: "What these fresh results from IIHS spell out is that in a frontal collision, physics dictate that the larger vehicle in the test will fare better than the smaller one. Force is distributed unevenly, making the small car lose out in any matchup versus a larger car.

Crash statistics prove this to some degree. In 2007, small-car crashes resulted in a 17% higher fatality rate than midsize-car crashes."

One company was especially irate about the test they criticized saying, "IIHS devised a test that no automaker has designed to and that they claim only represents about one percent of real world accidents."

Safe and Smart is a site Smart car is using to generate user content about their owners real-world experience with the car's safety capabilities. The site is very interesting, for many reasons. First it features real crash photos and stories from owners detailing what happened to them and how they walked away. You can also "Share Your Story". (Yes, I was tempted to write a story of how I was involved in an offset front crash with a Mercedes C class and upload the picture from IIHS.)

The site also provides product details about the safety measure Smart has taken with the car's technology and design. I also found in Smart's press release to the IIHS study that the promoted this site as a more informed response to IIHS's approach.

Toyota ignored the report, from what I can tell; however, their online Toyota Community did not. Someone started a threaded discussion entitled, "What is 'wrong' with these new subcompacts?" where several people shared their thoughts on the topic.

Alicia_at_Honda on Twitter did not comment on the story nor did Honda release any statements on the Honda USA website.

The good news for Toyota and Honda (and Smart too) is that other outlets are responding to the study with contempt. Some reader comments on blogs found it interesting that no American car company cars were featured, like the Chevy Aveo. This lead to comments like this on Edmunds, "I wonder if this is an attempt either by the media or domestic manufacturers to smear foreign automotive manufacturers."

Motor Trend had another theory: "Yes, our highways would be safer if we removed anything smaller than a midsize car, and larger than a half-ton pickup, too. Buses and semis included. Of course, IIHS doesn't expect that to happen -- it doesn't want that to happen. It simply wants to make sure that the money you save by buying a small, fuel-efficient car goes into the pockets of your auto insurance company."

Is Smart the Right Product at the Right Time?

It was just announced today that the new Smart car fortwo surpassed the 15,000 units they expected to sale and not by an insignificant margin in a down market. They sold 25,000 units overall and had 100,000 people send in their $99 checks to reserve a Smart car in 2008.

The reservation approach was part of Smart’s marketing push to get people to pre-order a vehicle prior to the car’s launch in the United States. Smart did no TV and went with an online campaign approach, similar to what Mini did back when it launched its brand in the States. Apparently, if you are a stylish, European, small car you will launch with an online campaign and avoid the expense of TV since word of mouth is bound to drive your sales.

Smart is constantly hailed as a car for the consumer looking for high mpg economy in a world of unstable gas prices. But a lot of cars are being offered for this new shift to fuel economy conscience customers. Toyota has the Yaris. Honda has the Fit. The Yaris and Fit are not attractive cars. They are pure economical choices for a cost driven customer. Meanwhile, Smart and Mini offer high mileage choices but with the added benefit of being stylish and iconic.

After finishing a tumultuous 2008 in automotive sales and crazy up and downs at the fuel pump, it is interesting to see how a car is correlate to the gas pump. The Honda Fit and Toyota Yaris are definitely following the behavior of bouncing gas prices while the Smart and Mini keep a relatively steady, almost predictable, sales stream.

It really makes me wonder two things:

1.) Is stylish and fuel-efficient the perfect combination in today’s market?
2.) Do Mini and Smart simply sell a consistent number of vehicles because they limit supply so much that we do not see the sales swings found in higher production unit vehicles?

What are your thoughts?


Note: The chart's nameplate sales by month come from Automotive News and the gas prices come from the Energy Information Administration. Official Statistics from the US Government. 2008 Data on Average US Retail Gas Prices