How Far Can Irrational Love for Brands Stretch? Apple Vision Pro Might Tell Us

Brands and Irrational Love

Brands love to be loved. Love helps their bottom line. Customers are typically willing to pay a premium for that brand and exhibit a reasonable amount of loyalty. 

But there is another level of brand love--Irrational love.

When brands are loved irrationally, not only does this result in higher transaction prices but it also means that customers are loyal beyond reason. It makes the brand forgivable, should it stumble. It creates instant new product desire--sight unseen. 

Irrational love is what creates the most valuable brands in the world. 

Apple as Irrational Brand

Perhaps the most valuable and irrationally loved brand is Apple.

Over the years, Apple has built irrational brand love through a killer combination of products, services, and experiences:

• Breakthrough products that perfect and simplify existing technologies to make them useful, transforming everyday life
• Extending this experience across their seamlessly crafted eco system
• Creating emotionally compelling advertising that simplifies the product proposition, while vividly bringing the experience to life
• Introducing new products at a regular cadence, with great fanfare and instant demand

Apple iPhone launch used their traditional irrational love formula: simpler, useful, better

Vision Pro-Love or Hate?

Apple's recent announcement of it's new Vision Pro mixed reality glasses met with polarizing reviews. While praised as being the best mixed reality headset ever, two big questions seemed to come out of every review:

• The Price
• $3,499 is at least twice, and sometimes as much as 7 times as expensive as other headsets on the market -- can it be worth it?
• The Purpose
• Harvard Business Review seemed to summarize the over-riding sentiment in one sentence- 'Thus, they have produced a device capable of both [AR and VR] but have not found compelling use cases in either domain.'

Great...'but still searching for a purpose'

And that lack of specific use cases was evident in the way Apple described the Vision Pro. Previous breakthrough Apple products were described from the start with a specific, easy to under stand purpose--'1,000 songs in your pocket' (iPod), 'the internet in your hand' (iPad). The Vision Pro on the other hand was described in a number of ways at its debut, none of which really indicated a specific purpose:

• 'Spacial computing'
• 'Free your desktop, and your apps will follow'
• 'Be in the moment, whenever you want it'
• 'Get on the same page, in the same space'

So, can Apple maintain irrational love without the simplicity and transformative usefulness that has always driven it?

The Science Behind Irrational Love

It turns out, irrational love is measurable, diagnosable, and statistically linked to economic performance. BERA's Brand Explorer tool, with its scale of 0-100 does just that. And Apple's score of 97 is a good indicator of the most intense or, put another way, irrational love that one can have for a brand.

BERA Love Score is computed using a number of inputs including usage and loyalty, 5P's ratings, and purpose and emotional drivers

In looking at some of the key contributors to BERA's overall score that are rated 99 or 100 indicate that purpose, differentiation and relevance are key drivers of Apple's irrational love. (1) 

Thus, it will be incumbent on Apple, perhaps with through collaboration with app developers to define a clear and differentiated purpose behind this breakthrough technology if it is to justify the hefty price tag. Otherwise, Apple might find that it's reached the breaking point of irrational love.

(1) Actual BERA scores: Innovates With Purpose' (100), 'Stands Out' (100), 'Culturally Relevant' (99)  

 

Wanna Win An Effie? What I Learned From Being A Judge

 As someone who believes that craft and business results should reinforce each other, I am a big fan of the Effies and proud to have participated in Innocean's Effie win for Hyundai's 'Smart Park' in 2021.

But winning Effie submissions are hard to write! Wanting to know more, I was honored to be invited to be a judge this year and spent all day yesterday judging the finalist round... and I learned a lot! While I am under a strict NDA regarding any of the 12 individual cases that I reviewed during all-day judging session, I came away with a greater understanding of the process, what to do, and moreover, what not to do when writing an Effie case submission.

Understanding the Judging Context

First of all, it's great to understand how the judging works. The day, including breaks, instruction and judging sessions spanned 9 hours, 6 of which were spent reviewing and judging the actual cases. This adds up to approximately 30 minutes per case. Those 30 minutes were broken into:

• 10-15 minutes to read the actual submission and review the video. 
• 10-15 minutes  discussing the case with the other 17 people in the room, 
• A few minutes were left for scoring the case and providing any feedback. 

Depending upon the time of day, the judges reviewing your submission may have already read 10 + entries that day. 

The 5 Principles of Winning

1) Less is More 

To paraphrase Henry Ford II - Never overexplain, and you'll never complain. Several of the cases went to great, or shall I say too great lengths to explain every minor detail of the thinking that led to the development of the campaign, whether it was relevant to the case you are making or. Just because the Effies are about effectiveness, doesn't mean that irrelevant metrics, charts and graphs will help you win. 

In our session, the simplest, shortest submission received the most positive reception from the judges. This brings me to the second principle:

2) D = A + B = D

While some campaigns can have softer objectives, be sure to tell a linear story in which everything is clearly connected. Clearly stated objectives should see used as the North Star for the articulation of the insight, strategy and corresponding executions. The most brilliant insights and strategies will fall short, if they don't ladder back to the objectives. Similarly, the most amazing executions will not guarantee a win if they don't linearly connect the insight to the results.

In our session, some cases required a big leap in logic to move from what were smart insights to the execution. For others, the greatest results were not tied to the stated objectives. This tended to degrade overall scores.

 .

3) Clarity over Poetry  

One of favorite people, Rob Schwartz always endorsed clarity over poetry, and if ever there was a time to stick to this principle, it's in writing Effie submissions. Remember the context--judges come from a myriad of disciplines and categories. They are clients they are agency people. Their expertise may be strategy, creative, media, or management. They may come from categories as diverse as financial services or breakfast cereal. Your submission may be the last of ~12 that day. Thus, it's important to be succinct; to leave the category jargon on the cutting room floor; to use short, clear bullets rather than long winded, complex sentences. The judges will greatly appreciate it, and it might help you win.

In our session, we reviewed 2 back to back cases. One was extremely efficient with words and charts, and crystal clear to everyone in the room. The other was laden with word, chart and jargon overload. Although the fundamental idea was sound, the story was so mired in detail, and in stark contrast to the previous one, that again, it led to overall lower evaluations.

4) All that Glitters Is Not Gold

Just because your case leverages the latest technology, doesn't mean it's Effie worthy. Why and how the technology is used is the key to winning. Does it reflect the target insight? Does it punctuate the idea? Is it true to the brand? Does it help drive efficacy? If not, it might be a small piece of context, but if that's all the case is about, don't waste your time writing it. 

We reviewed 2 cases that utilized VR/AR. One in which the tech had a very strong purpose for being, while the other was merely tech for tech sake. Needless to say, the latter did not fare well in our group discussions.

And finally, a corollary to point 4...

5) Effies and Cannes are Not the Same

Know your awards and the corresponding audience. Always first filter your cases to ensure they meet the requirements of Effie. Ground breaking creative that didn't drive measurable business results might be better reserved for Cannes. While some campaigns might be both Effie and Cannes worthy, do not try to cut and paste from one submission to the other. Begin each from scratch understanding the rules of the game. 

So my closing advice to any aspiring Effie winners is to spend more time thinking through the submission narrative, and judiciously selecting the relevant support points, and less time writing the case--with the right forethought the case will write itself!

Good Luck!

The Second Automotive Reckoning: When Champion Brands Become Challengers Again

In the 1970's and 1980's the American automotive market went through seismic change. As well documented by David Halberstam in The Reckoning, the Japanese imports disrupted the insular, almost cartel-like power of American car brands in the U.S. They did so by capitalizing on the failure of a complacent industry to react to the convergence of 4 forces--inflation, an oil crisis, global political unrest, and the coming of age of Baby Boomers. In the process, they changed the value equation from styling and performance to MPG and Quality.

Today, not unlike then, there is a confluence of events that have the potential to fundamentally disrupt the current automotive status quo. Inflation, war in Russia, US political turmoil and a host of new automotive competitors are all setting the stage for rapid change. But unlike the '70's and '80's, it's not just about better MPG or quality, it's about new technology, new powertrains, new business models and new customer behaviors. if the previous reckoning was a 5 on the Richter scale, this one could be a 10!

Of course, when thinking about electrification, autonomous and connected vehicles, and new business models, one immediately thinks of Tesla. And while they do have an early advantage in defining the new landscape, early leaders don't always survive. Palm, Tivo, Betamax,  and Atari are part of a long list of innovators that eventually flamed out when their categories went mainstream. 

And the chink in Tesla's armor is beginning to show. Service problems and Musk's erratic behavior are wearing thin. Other start ups like Canoo, Byton, and Faraday Future are all struggling to survive. And even Nissan, a pioneer in electrification has just announced that they will discontinue the first successful mass market vehicle, the LEAF.

The fact is, we are still very early in the adoption curve. Even in the face of astronomical gas prices, year to date, EV's only account for 4.5% of total US vehicle sales. Thus, the playing field is still wide open. 

Everyone brand is a challenger brand

As the category experiences seismic change, both new and long established automotive brands will all become challenger brands. As such, they will need to challenge the ingredients of past success to determine what to keep, and what to leave behind as they redefine the value equation.

Writing the History of the Future 

What will it take to be successful in the electrified, autonomous, connected future? To avoid being the next sad case study, it's going to take new thinking, and new brand behaviors. And those that challenge the status quo will be setting the standards for the Post-Reckoning marketplace.

Eliminate Barriers to Accelerate Adoption

According to McKinsey, 20 times more charging stations will be necessary by 2030. Most automotive manufacturers have begun investing in charging infrastructure, but so much more will be necessary. In addition to charging stations, Hyundai is going beyond the car itself with Hyundai Home, allowing buyers to purchase a complete personal EV ecosystem inclusive of charging station, solar panels and battery storage. 

While these efforts are important, there is so much more potential to make EV's accessible, and accelerate mass adoption of EV's

• Approximately 40 million people in the US live in multiple unit dwelling,s limiting their access to home charging. What about working with property management companies and builders to electrify parking?
• As with any new technology, people are afraid to take the leap. What about offering extended test drives, or even EV weekend get away packages featuring EV friendly road trips, complete with planned rest stops and accommodations at partner hotels with vehicle charging stations?

Repurpose Existing Assets

Full adoption of EV's and connected services will mean less required maintenance and over the air fixes and upgrades that will limit the need for trips to dealerships. And, as fully autonomous vehicles accelerate ride sharing, fleets will need to be managed and maintained. 

• There are 16,000 franchised dealerships in the US. what if those dealerships were repurposed into charging rest stops with special perks available for owners?
• Those same 16,000 stations could also become storage and maintenance hubs for autonomous, ride share vehicles.
• How can brands repurpose connected services like GM's OnStar or Hyundai's Blue Link to become the go to place for for all transportation needs--from ride sharing to trip planning, to loyalty programs and more?
  

Accelerating Change Through Partnerships

Category convergence often results in partnerships to either fast track innovation or to marry complementary offerings. We are already seeing some big automotive-tech partnerships:

• Honda and Sony are partnering to enable a heretofore electric laggard to fast track battery and technology development
• General Motors ride hailing partnership with Cruise in San Francisco is helping them to fast track autonomous, connected services
• Hyundai is fast tracking digital retailing by pioneering a partnership with Amazon that allows customers to browse their local dealer's inventory on Amazon's platform

But there is so much more potential to think big with partnerships and change the value equation.

• How about a charging station/QSR brand partnership, where one can scarf down a free burger and fries while fast charging their vehicle?
• What about a joint venture with a BP, or Shell to repurpose gas stations as charging stations?
• Taking it even further, how about a Google partnership that syncs your calendar with Google Maps to ensure that your car seamlessly gets you everywhere you need to be when you need to be there?
• Or even, forging a partnership with Meta to repurpose vehicles that sit idle for 20+ hours per day to take fantastic, life-sized journeys into the Metaverse?

Tapping into their DNA

Finally, each brand must chart an authentic future that taps into the heart and soul of the brand. Stretching their unique strengths in new ways will help them stand out in the new landscape. Clearly Chevy and Ford are ‘finding new roads’ by bypassing small electrified vehicles and leaning into their truck heritage instead. And Hyundai, is already offering what might be dubbed as ‘America’s Best Battery Warranty’.
 
But will all brands DNA be so easily transferrable? BMW’s electrified vehicles have been advertised using ‘The Ultimate Electric Driving Machine’ as their EV tagline. But what does that really mean for an autonomous future? And Toyota, the leader of the first Reckoning could become the laggard of the second Reckoning if they don’t rethink the definition of quality beyond the sheet metal. 
 
The next few years will set the stage for the next few decades. The brands who behave as true challengers are likely to be the brands who win.

The New Automotive QDR--From Hardware to Software to Experiences

 The Origins of QDR

Anyone who has ever worked in Automotive knows those three simple letters--Q, D and R. Different manufacturers may refer to them in different sequence, DQR, QRD, QDR, etc, but they all stand for the same assumed three gold standards of automotive brand excellence--Quality (fit and finish), Dependability and Reliability (that the car won't break down, that it will start when you need it, etc.)

The power of these magic letters dates back to the 1970's and 80's when cars were, well, not so good. Breaking down on the side of the road was commonplace. So were new cars with sheetmetal gaps big enough to poke several fingers through. Cars were made with planned and unplanned obsolescence. When it wasn't a matter of choice but a matter of need to replace your car every 3-5 years because it was ready for the great junkyard in the sky. As a matter of fact, odometers did not have the capability to record anything over 99,999 miles because cars seldom reached that milestone.

Then the Japanese came and established new quality norms. Robotic assembly and more sophisticated engineering pushed the overall industry standards higher and higher, and the quality gap between brands became smaller and smaller. Today, no one wonders if their car will start when they turn the key. Today, the average car lasts 200,000 miles plus--and odometers can accommodate those miles.

Yet, to this day, QDR is still touted by many industry insiders and experts as the ultimate test of brand value.

The Changing of The Guard?

But there are some indications that the consumer definition of quality might be evolving away from indiscernible differences in sheetmetal and mechanical excellence in ways that are more aligned with the evolution of cars themselves.

• In 2021, Tesla leapfrogged Lexus and Mercedes and closely challenged BMW for the US luxury sales crown. 
• Tesla also had an astounding 184% increase in Interbrand's brand value calculation. An increase that catapulted Tesla's ranking on Interbrand's 100 most valuable brand rankings from unrated in 2019 to 40th place in 2020 to 14th place in 2021! 
• Tesla ranked first in two Consumer Reports consumer surveys -- 'Most Liked Car Brands' and  Model 3 ranked first in their 'Most Satisfying Car' survey. 

All of this despite the fact that Tesla ranks 3 from the bottom in both JD Power's Initial Quality and Vehicle Dependability Surveys. Contrary to its consumer surveys, Consumer Reports itself rates the brand second to last on on reliability. 

How can this be? Could this indicate that there is a real tipping point in category values? Is there a new consumer definition of Automotive Quality? One that is more consistent with the evolution of cars from transportation machines to electronic devices on wheels?

If one Googles 'reasons to purchase a Tesla', some key themes consistently appear across various sources. These are 'charging network/superchargers, safety, autopilot confidence, technological features (eg mobile service, smartphone as key, infotainment, etc), and low operating costs'. The environment seems secondary, or perhaps cost of entry. No one mentions quality, dependability or reliability, like they do for Lexus or Mercedes.

Towards a New Value Equation

Tesla's purchase reasons seem more aligned with key technology quality factors. They're much more about HOW things work than IF they work. No one expects their mobile phone not to start, but they do expect it to offer a seamless experience. They do expect flawless connectivity. They do expect over the air upgrades. And more and more, they expect it to help them navigate through life.

What Does it All Mean? Claiming Leadership For Tomorrow

So what does this mean for legacy car brands? What should they do to ensure that their quality perceptions move one step ahead of the evolution of the category? How can they build a bridge to the electrified, autonomous, service provider future that lies ahead? 

• First, they should stop thinking about product as sheet metal and bells and whistles and start to think more holistically about product as integrated customer experiences.  They should build ecosystems to remove silos between product and services, and between physical and digital environments. They should  develop new services and new infrastructures that enhance user experiences.

• Second, they should lead in shifting their brand narratives to better reflect the changing category values--not by promising the distant future today, but by laying the breadcrumbs to tomorrow. The narrative should highlight active safety to raise comfort levels necessary for impending autonomy. It should demonstrate how in car technology connects them to the rest of their lives. And it should highlight ownership services that go beyond the sheetmetal.

• Finally, they should measure success with a new set of quality KPI's that move away from static quality to better reflect dynamic customer expectations. KPI's should place value on seamlessness across touchpoints, reliability of software, and overall ease of use.

This represents the biggest opportunity in a long time for brands that have traditionally been Tier 2 brands to leapfrog the perennial Tier 1 winners. What starts in luxury trickles down to mainstream. Brands that  embrace this change will deposition the leaders to be the leaders of the future.

Because in the future QDR will stand for Quality of experiences; Reliability for looking out for their users; Dependability because they help customers to navigate seamlessly through all facets of ownership and usage.

What earthquakes, tsunamis and pandemics can teach us about global brand management

Having been a student, teacher and practitioner of global automotive marketing, I've come to believe that 'one size fits all' is never an option for global brands, but neither is 'to each his own'. Like it or not, we live in an interconnected world, and almost everything that happens somewhere, somehow has an effect somewhere else. The challenge global marketers face is to manage that effect across borders. And while it might seem counterintuitive, the secret to staying consistent globally is to be different locally.

While many textbooks have been written on the subject, there are valuable lessons that can be learned by looking way past business to other significant events--like earthquakes, tsunamis and pandemics. 

Lesson #1: Competitive Infrastructure Varies By Market

In March of 2011, I was in Yokohama when the 9.1 magnitude Great Tōhoku Earthquake struck. I was in a 1.5 year-old 22 story building and will never forget watching it twist around itself for almost 5 minutes. Remarkably, when the twisting and shaking was over, it sustained no permanent damage. Relieved, I remember thinking that a building constructed anywhere else in the world would likely have collapsed and thousands of lives would have been lost.

Japan's Strict Building Regulations Prevent Earthquake Damage

Just like the earthquake was no match for the formidable Japanese infrastructure, brands may encounter formidable competitors who can neutralize your biggest assets. As an example, the top 3 automotive sales brands are different in every one of the 8 markets listed below.  

Brands must understand what has driven success for leaders in each market. It's likely to be a some combination of heritage, filling unmet needs, innovative product offerings, market growth, and demographic trends. Brands should strategically weigh key market success factors against their own strengths and equities, and set expectations accordingly.

Even mighty Toyota has never been able to crack the code in Europe, where German brands have rendered Toyota's legendary strength, quality, as cost of entry in their market. As such, Toyota's share in Europe remains less than half that of markets like the US and others, where quality solved an unmet need.

Lesson #2: Home Market Relevance Diminishes With Distance From Home

An hour after the earthquake, I watched in shock as the news reports showed the massive tsunami hitting the coastline with lethal force. Ten hours later, it reached the California Coast, causing moderate damage in a few isolated spots.

Just like the tsunami's force diminished as it traveled further from its point of origin, a brand who is part of the fabric of its home market may have a hard time transferring that relevance to other markets. The further away from the home the the less relevant that story becomes. Thus, to be successful, the brand needs to leverage its DNA in a way that is relevant to the local market, and the state of that brand in that market.  

Take Hyundai. In South Korea, Hyundai is a hometown hero who was instrumental in rebuilding its country after the Korean War. Today, that role continues, as Hyundai Group's business units operate in almost every dimension of South Korean industry and infrastructure. It is because of its ubiquity that the Hyundai car brand commands more than a 50% share of its home market. 

As Hyundai expanded to other markets, it had to rely solely on the merits of its products which, at times did not hold up under scrutiny. Today, Hyundai's products are some of the best in the industry, and Hyundai is establishing local credibility on the merits of these class leading products.

Lesson #3: Understand the Local Culture and Communicate Accordingly

In 2020, we are watching a pandemic sweep across the globe, with some countries  containing it quickly, while others see no end in sight.

The current COVID-19 pandemic provides perhaps the most powerful illustration as to how culture differences manifest themselves in every aspect of life--and why you can't expect to connect with the same message in every market.

Geert Hofstede, a world renowned expert in cultural studies, defined 6 dimensions of culture and their effect on behaviors and communications style. Of these 6 dimensions, 4 seem to have the strongest relationship to success and failure in beating COVID-19--individual vs collective, long-term vs short-term orientation, tolerance for uncertainty, and tolerance for indulgence.

South Korea and Germany share similarities across these dimensions, and both have successfully flattened their curves. Meanwhile, the virus continues to rage out of control in the US. 

South Korea, with a curve that looks more like a needle, rates extremely high on collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation, and restraint.  

While Germany scores higher on individualism, it was still able to lean into its long term orientation, uncertainty avoidance and cultural restraint to flatten the curve relatively fast. 

Conversely, the US is high on individualism, low on uncertainty avoidance, exhibits a very short term orientation, and indulgence is accepted. These dimensions likely explain the 'freedom' argument that seems to be fundamental to the anti-lockdown anti-masker sentiment, as well as the inability to abide by the rules for more than a few weeks.

These same dimensions of culture help to explain the efficacy of communication styles and corresponding messages across cultures. A culture dominated by  short term, individualistic dimensions requires a message that relates specifically to tangible evidence that can be proven today. It needs to be factual and to the point. Cultures with a longer term, collectivist mentality are more likely to respond to more esoteric, futuristic metaphorical stories.

A good example of how those differences manifest themselves in brand communications can be found by comparing Nissan's ads in China, a country that indexes high on long term orientation and collectivism, with the US and Canada, both indexing opposite to China on these dimensions. Where the China ads rely heavily on fantastic, futuristic imagery and metaphors, the US and Canada ads use straightforward everyday product demonstrations wrapped in personal stories, with features prominently highlighted.

Nissan China 

Nissan USA and Canada

It is important to note that while the brand's creative expressions are extremely different, they are both highlighting Nissan's 'Innovation that Excites'--but they are doing so in ways that connect with culture. 

So as brands strive to create global value though alignment, they need to be students of every market in which they compete. They need to evaluate the competitive environment and understand their relative strengths and weaknesses. They need to be cognizant of the fact that their history and heritage may not be relevant across the globe. And they need to understand that, sometimes inconsistency is what it takes to drive unity.

Boom, Bust or Reinvention? Could the Pandemic Create a New Kind of Car Culture?

In 2013, the New York Times declared that car culture was dead. For the next generation, it

seemed that driving had lost its caché. The percentage of young licensed drivers, and miles driven by them were trending down at precipitous rates. Technology had taken the place of cars as coveted objects of desire. Hipsters were fleeing the 'burbs and raising their kids in urban neighborhoods where everything was walkable. And for the occasional trip elsewhere, car sharing services were readily available . 

                            

Even though new vehicle sales rebounded handily after the Great Recession, the idea of cars for fun did not. As congested roads caused average highway speeds to plummet 40% or more, the dream of the open road became a pipe dream. As global warming hit the headlines, cars became a major culprit. 

Thus the type of vehicles that were purchased changed dramatically. Sales of sports cars, primarily purchased for the thrill of the ride plummeted. Instead, SUV's dominated the landscape as a means to an end--the destination had overshadowed the journey. Even the Porsche line up was dominated by SUV's

Now, the specter of COVID-19 is likely to change life in ways not seen in 100 years. Just like the Great Depression forever shaped the values and behaviors of an entire generation, COVID-19 is likely to do the same for those coming of age today. 

As we are work, learn and socialize remotely, and our vehicles sit idly in garages, it makes one wonder if this new 'do everything from home' mentality will make people question whether they need cars at all?

                                 

                      

Or could it actually do just the opposite -- could it create a new kind of car culture? 

Some things to consider: Will people ever feel safe using ride sharing vehicles or public transportation again? Will they continue to avoid public places like theaters, malls and restaurants, even after a vaccine is found? Will they choose not to fly? Will they eschew the denseness and consequent threat of urban living, and flee to the suburbs? If you  can work from anywhere, couldn't you live just about anywhere--even in the most remote places in the world?

If life change this way, the car might once again become central to life. If that is the case, is it possible that we could have a 'Back to the Future' car culture that looks oh so familiar but with a decidedly modern twist?  

Cars as a means to escape from 'the office' and 'school'?

• With roads free of congestion, and people confined to one place, will sport cars make a resurgence as the symbol of freedom and means for escape? The new breed of electric sports cars with the performance of the past and environmental friendliness of the future could handily fill the bill. 

• As designers of autonomous vehicles push the envelope on new interior configurations, could the car become a sanctuary, even when stationary? It could double as an extra room to relax and wind down. And unlike additions to your existing home, it could literally transport you, and be easily refreshed and remodeled every few years, so that your home never gets boring.

Cars as a reliable, safe haven in public places?

• Could drive in theaters make a comeback? There would by definition enable social distancing, while simultaneously eliminating the annoyance of intrusive cell phones and noisy audience members. Imagine driving up to a huge Jumbotron, and listening to the audio on your ultra premium in vehicle sound systems.
• Speaking of ultra premium audio, could outdoor live concerts also become drive in events?
• Will robotic car hops serve food at drive-in restaurants? Better yet, could robots serve at fine dining venues-- in the comfort of your luxury appointed autonomous dining room.

These are just a few of the possibilities. While we don't know what will happen, automakers should be looking beyond the current sales decline and begin to think of the post COVID-19 era as an opportunity to innovate in a way that regains the revered place in culture that cars once held.

Time for a Musk-ectomy? Why Tesla Needs Its Own Brand Narrative

Since its inception, the Tesla brand has been an extension of the Elon Musk brand. And for a long time. that served Tesla well. After all, with virtually zero marketing Tesla is a well known brand that has captured a large share of the premium automotive market. But, as Bob Dylan once wrote, things have changed. Thus, long before the recent SEC deal, a separation of brands was warranted.

Initially, Musk's audacity helped propel Tesla to the spotlight. Today, Musk's recklessness at best is an unnecessary distraction, at worst, could bring the Tesla brand down. Unfortunately, Tesla has been so dependent on the Musk brand that it has never established a brand, let alone a narrative of its own.

One only need look at online presence to discover this. The website is an e commerce shopping site, and nothing more. The YouTube channel features mostly dry 'how to', technical videos. The experience is as emotionless as picking out a new toaster. And due to Musk's impulsive response to a personal challenge, Tesla has no Facebook page, and no Twitter account, limiting the amount of potential fan engagement. There is no brand story, no sense of a bigger mission or brand experience. And that's a shame, because Tesla has a compelling story to tell.

Tesla fundamentally changed the game by obviating any and all objections one might have for buying an electric car, by making every aspect of the vehicle experience not just as good as, but better than internal combustion competitors. So, instead of electric being the reason to buy, it became the icing on the cake -- with a stellar execution in styling, performance, range, retail experience and charging infrastructure. Simply put, Tesla became the 'it' brand at the high end of the market. This is where early adopters who look to set the standards dominate. 

But as Tesla reaches down to higher volume segments, it is now at a critical inflection point, both internally and externally.

In August, at 17,000 units, the Tesla model 3 was the fifth best selling car in the US in volume, and first in revenue. In September, Tesla sold ~22,000 Model 3's. Currently, the Model 3 is likely fulfilling a couple of years of pent-up demand. Sustaining that volume over time will mean reaching beyond early adopters, and, instead serving a risk averse mass market buyer.

And over the next couple of years, those buyers will have a plethora of low risk EV choices from well known brands at every price point in the market, from the $20,000 VW compact ID to the $75,000 Porsche Taycan, to the $255,000 Aston Martin RapidE.

That's why it's critical that Tesla start telling a coherent, cohesive story that focuses not on Elon Musk, but on the entire Tesla brand experience. On what really sets Tesla apart from every other car brand. From the dealer free purchase experience to the performance, to the well established quick charging infrastructure, to the availability of solar panels that guarantee a true zero carbon footprint. No one else can tell this story. They haven't just invented a better car. Rather, they have reinvented car ownership to be an emotionally satisfying, purposeful experience every step of the way.

This is the story that needs to be told. It needs to be told clearly, without any interruption from Mr. Musk. It needs to be told in a way that inspires. It needs to be told in a way that will make a broader audience seek out, contribute to, and share the story. And it needs to be told now, or Tesla will wind up with Tucker, DeLorean, and the likes, as another 'what could have been' story in automotive history.