Corvair marketing, was: <VV> cheapest corvair ever made?

[airvair]

I think you're right, Bob. They should have had a clue when the Monza's 
sales took off when it was introduced (and continued strong throughout 
its run). And certainly I regretted seeing so many 500's built 
(especially) in '67-9. But they were stuck on the notion that the 
Corvair was supposed to be ONLY an economy car. GM has trouble 
recognizing when a car shifts its market position, and instead of 
"playing the ball where it lies", they'd rather fight an uphill battle 
and then wonder why it isn't working.

Something that always made me laugh was that Consumer's Reports always 
tested the 500 model solely on the basis of the notion that consumers 
would prefer a bench seat. Then they complained about the car being 
cheap and noisy. Duh! Had GM dumped the 500 (and 700) models and only 
offered the upgrade Monza trim, they could have easily made a bench seat 
"optional" (like they did in '61-2.) It wouldn't have been too 
difficult, and would have fixed CU's wagon. (G)

As far as their "market research", yes they DO do (dodoo? LOL!) market 
research. But it's never been totally effective as far as I'm concerned. 
I once told the then Prez of GM Lloyd Reuss that they ought to fire at 
least half their marketing staff. After thinking for a moment, he (with 
a note of chagrin) agreed with me.

-Mark

vairtec at optonline.net wrote:

> Corvairs were still being marketed as economy cars in 1967, and the 
> advertising tagline for the '67 500 coupe was "America's lowest-priced 
> hardtop."
>
> Which I am convinced was part of GM's error with the Corvair.  When 
> the Chevy II was brought to market, the Corvair should have been 
> kicked up the line, positioned above, not below, the Chevy II.  The 
> 500 -- a model which I love, I own two right now -- should have been 
> dumped instead of the Corsa.  And the car should have been marketed as 
> the family man's sports car, instead of as an economy car, and priced 
> accordingly.
>
> But Chevy never did any market research back in those days, and to 
> judge by today's products, they still don't.
>
> --Bob
> Robert W. Marlow
> Vairtec at optonline.net