New Technologies Will Force Automakers to Rethink Their Whole Lineup
Adapting to the new times might require more than fitting electric motors and autonomous driving to existing models
Establishing a successful nameplate in the market is interesting because the company ends up founding a new brand. People learn to trust that the car model will give them a certain set of qualities, so they become more favorable to buy it — that’s specially desirable in moments like entering a new region or giving the model a new generation. But this relation doesn’t only have perks.
As the nameplate builds a reputation, responsibilities grow. People also come to demand not only some quality standards, but also the design guidelines the model used to attract them back in its early years. That’s specially undesirable when the company wants and/or has to execute a drastic change because cars like those act like anchors. Apparently, we’re currently living a time like that.
What’s happening, exactly?
It’s easy to adapt to the rise of a new body style because the maker can simply add new models and phase out those which start losing sales. However, things are different now because electric propulsion and autonomous driving require rather complex changes; we’re talking about reinventing cars. That requires a lot of money, of course: each move can cost billions, like GM’s all-new factory.
Since companies can’t work around that, they’re looking for ways to maximize their potential profit: they’re taking this scenario of novelty and reinvention to drastically change some of those anchor car models or even replace them with others that result more suitable to the upcoming times. They expect people to become less resistant and, as a result, to generate as little backlash as possible.
The best possibility
Let’s start by getting the easiest case out of the way. The Fiat 500, for instance, was developed with a retro image and became a very strong seller around the world precisely because of that. After thirteen years, the Italians gave it a new generation exclusively with electric propulsion and gave the old one a hybrid system so as to keep it around as a more affordable option for a couple years.
In cases like that, the model developed an invariable image on purpose and is doing well because of it, so the automaker doesn’t want to change that. Fiat’s solution was simply to adapt the image people came to appreciate to the new technologies. Keeping the old one for a while was a nice touch to avoid losing buyers either for the new 500’s price or simply for not wanting to drive an EV.
Unify to conquer
Niro and Seltos compete among compact crossovers with two totally different concepts, including their energy sources. While diversity is always great to see in the market, it’s always costly to produce. The problem is that their segment is so competitive that keeping both in line over the years would require either decreasing their quality standards or having both dominate the global market.
Since the first solution would drive people away and the second is too hard to happen, the most likely outcome is that Kia makes them a single model in the future, probably by the time to give them another generation. In this case, the task becomes easy because their images are still weak; what attracts people is being made by Kia. The same Kia can simply come up with a cheaper solution.
When the EV becomes a threat
The Renault Zoe was created with the same purpose as the Toyota Prius years earlier: to showcase the respective electric technology separately from the ICE lineup. In the uncertain times of previous decades, if the electric motors failed to prosper for any reason, the companies could simply remove their dedicated models and move on with the proven ones until any new possibility emerged.
Then again, no company would ever release a product hoping for it to fail, so Renault and Toyota did their best to help theirs… and it paid off! The thing is, they’ve become successful enough to be compared to the Clio and the Corolla, respectively. The sensible long-term decision is, once again, to unify them, but it becomes much harder here because both cars have already built an image.
Leaving the comfort zone
If you consider those cases tough, check out Volkswagen’s: the Golf is still very strong in the market, but its rivals have become just as good — even better, one could say, if we factor in the rigid design rules that make the Golf less and less impressive over the years. Parallel to that, the Germans are investing so much in the ID family that they’ll surely want it to take up as many sales as possible.
The goal is to make people move from an established product to a new one but in a way that loses as few of them as possible. The thing is, if they focus on the ID, conservative buyers might go away. Focusing on the Golf would render the new car pointless. And giving them different profiles, like sportier for the Golf and rational for the ID, would split the public rather than giving it all to one.
What can we expect?
As previously mentioned, the best solution for the two most complicated cases is to have strong image and electric propulsion in a single model. The problem is figuring how to remove one of those models with little harm, since it means stripping people of a familiar purchase. Until they get accustomed to the new times, they’ll cling to any company which takes longer to execute that change.
On the other hand, the car industry has gone through many divisive moments like that; they’re a byproduct of technological innovation. The new cars won’t be perfect and there will be resistance for a while. What the industry is trying to do is overcome that with the new plan’s potential advantages. Which other cars do you expect to drastically change in the short term? Leave a comment!
