The Downfall of Hummer
GM announced today that it will be shutting down the Hummer brand. This is sad news for the brand, but it does raise a few questions of brand management, especially in light of the fact that Pontiac and Saturn are also being phased out.
One thing that has always bugged me about car manufacturers is duplicating cars across different brands. Ford and Mercury come to mind. Pontiac/Dodge/Chrysler have done it as well. Toyota/Lexus to some extent and Nissan/Infiniti.
Hummer obviously was a unique brand, but GM itself seems overstretched. Economic woes aside, would their business have fared better had they adopted a more conservative approach to branding and brand extension? For example, if I saw myself as the CEO, I would have tried to consolidate the brands as much as possible. Hummer represents a unique car/experience, and would have stayed as such. For example, companies like Chrysler/Dodge could stay separate – but I would have personally removed overlapping vehicles thus allowing each independent brand to have a stronger identity.
I’m not saying this was the reason of their downfall, but in terms of long term benefits/disadvantages I think it would help them fare better, what do you think?


Jason Hanley
I agree completely that the US car manufacturers’ “sub-brands” are a complete mess.
However — I’m pretty sure that Hummer, Pontiac, and Saturn are (were) all GM brands.
Chrysler has Dodge and Jeep.
OA
good catch, jumbled the companies – have corrected the article
MK
The thing is the reason Toyota have Lexus and Nissan have Infiniti is to distinguish their premiere brands from their average brands. It was to compete with BMW, Mercedes, etc.
So in this case I think it would make sense to distinguish between the two types of business.
Lessons Learned from the Hummer Demise – Business is Pleasure
[...] talked about the Hummer demise previously by lightly exploring the issue of brand extension. Andrew Winston has a great article [...]