Are Ford Motor Company (F) and General Motors Company (GM) Using the Right Strategy?

How many brands is the perfect number? It’s a delicate balance for management and is more of an art than a science. If you expand too much, it’s costly for the additional marketing and attention needed. If you don’t have enough brands, you miss opportunities to gain market share and incremental revenue. This is where the line in the sand is drawn between automotive giants.

Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F) and General Motors Company (NYSE:GM) have drastically cut their number of brands since the recession, helping them return to profitability. On the other side, Volkswagen and Chrysler have drastically increased the amount of brands under their respective umbrellas. Which strategy will position the companies for future success? I’ll explain two key topics — brand portfolio and architecture — and show you why companies on one side of the strategy could be in trouble.

General Motors Company (NYSE:GM)

Portfolio and architecture
With my background in marketing, I’ll take a quick second to brief you on the difference of these two factors. A brand portfolio, as you probably guessed, is how many brands are under a company’s umbrella. Think how Coca-Cola (NYSE:KO) also owns Sprite, a different name brand. The problem with having numerous brands is creating an efficient architecture. If Coca-Cola has five spinoffs of coke — Vanilla Coke and Coke Zero, to name two — and only regular Sprite, it is competing more with itself rather than expanding its market share. At some point, the cost in creating additional spinoffs outweighs the revenue that it can generate. Crossing that line in the sand would hurt Coca-Cola’s ability to generate maximum profits.

Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F) and General Motors Company (NYSE:GM) are taking the opposite strategy. because they learned a valuable lesson during the recession. They found that their brands were too costly and inefficient and lacked compelling marketing to stay profitable. It wasn’t until then, when sales practically disappeared, that they were forced to cut slacking brands and refocus on their core to rebuild a strong portfolio. Let’s dig into the details and see the change in brand numbers.

By the numbers
General Motors Company (NYSE:GM) went from nine brands in the U.S. market 10 years ago down to four currently. It killed off Pontiac, Saturn, and Hummer in 2010. It also sold off Saab, which has since been killed. Before the recession, it closed the doors on Oldsmobile. Ford has made similar moves to cut five of its brands, now sitting at only two — Ford and Lincoln.

With the opposite strategy, Volkswagen is up to 12 distinct brands after adding Porsche last year. Chrysler has increased its brand count up to nine, including the Alfa Romeo, which has been absent since the mid-’90s.

“We’re going against the grain,” Chrysler-Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne said. “Ford has decided to go with an oval strategy across the whole range, and we’re the only ones that keep on carving up or have carved up our brand-name portfolio into more distinct pieces.”

More complicated
The soda analogy was nice and simple. However, it’s much more complicated in the automotive industry — not to mention that the costs and risks are amplified greatly. I asked my old chief marketing officer– from an automotive aftermarket company — for some insight on costs associated with maintaining multiple brands. These three stood out to me.

Tooling. The capital required to design, engineer, and tool product parts for different brand appearances would add up quickly, reducing margins. Ford is able to share platforms between models more easily, with fewer brands to differentiate between one another. By the end of 2013, it plans on having 85% of global sales from nine platforms. Volkswagen can share some pieces, but no matter how hard it tries, a frame for an Audi won’t work for a Beetle.

Marketing. The costs incurred to create different themes, logos, and awareness add up quickly per brand. On top of that, with each brand representing a different segment, it would require research and information to target a specific consumer. It can get expensive for VW to target such different consumers between the Beetle, Audi, and high-end Porsche.

Complexity. More brands, more problems? It isn’t always the case, but the complexity of juggling numerous models and inventory does become more difficult. It also increases the dealer network needed to support in sales and advertising.

These are all very real factors that come into play with numerous brands. If not juggled properly, you can get into an unprofitable mess similar to Detroit’s Big Three before the recession. With the additional costs, why do VW and Chrysler continue to create brands?

Fewer brands, less share
The argument I hear the most is that if you have fewer brands, you inevitably lose market share. People then point out that Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F) and GM have indeed lost market share since cutting their number of brands. But I think General Motors Company (NYSE:GM) in particular has lost market share because it has the oldest vehicle portfolio in the world. That’s a weakness it’s addressing this year, with the busiest redesign schedule in its history.

Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F), meanwhile, speaks for itself. In 2007 — a time when Ford still owned Volvo, Jaguar, Land Rover, and Aston Martin — its market share was 15.8%. Now after removing those brands, and shutting down Mercury, its share is at 15.5%. That’s a small price to pay when that portfolio trimming has allowed Ford to bounce back to its best financial shape in more than a decade.

For the fewer brands/less share argument to hold some weight, adding multiple brands as Chrysler and VW have done should increase market share. In 2007, Chrysler’s market share stood at 12.9%, but in 2012 it was down to 11.4%. Volkswagen has had more success, moving from 2% to 4.2%, but I’m still not convinced that it’s all from expanding its number of brands.

Bottom line
In my opinion, for both Ford and General Motors Company (NYSE:GM), less is more. I think you’d be shocked at how few brands you actually need to get all the revenue you want. If you like extra costs, complexity, and juggling inventory — then more power to you. VW and Chrysler would be the option you would prefer. Volkswagen has proved to be a valid investment, but it has extra risks with so many brands going forward. I prefer lean operations, focused marketing, and brand portfolios that produce impressive profits. That’s the strategy Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F) and GM chose, and that’s where I’m placing my bet for the future.

The article Are Ford and GM Using the Right Strategy? originally appeared on Fool.com.

Fool contributor Daniel Miller owns shares of Ford. The Motley Fool recommends Coca-Cola, Ford, and General Motors and owns shares of Ford.

Copyright © 1995 – 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Insider Monkey Headlines
Insider Monkey Small Cap Strategy
Insider Monkey Small Cap Strategy

Insider Monkey beat the market by 44 percentage points in 21 months Learn how!

Lists

The Top 10 States With Fastest Internet Speeds

10 Best Places to Visit in USA in August

Top 10 Cities to Visit Before You Die

Top 10 Genetically Modified Food In the US

15 Highest Grossing Movies Opening Weekend

5 Best Poker Books For Beginners

10 Strategies Hedge Funds Use to Make Huge Returns

Top 10 Fast Food Franchises to Buy

10 Best Places to Visit in Canada

Best Summer Jobs for Teachers

10 Youngest Hedge Fund Billionaires

Top 10 One Hit Wonders of the 90s

Fastest Growing Cities In America

Top 10 U.S. Cities for Freelancers

Top 9 Most Popular Free iPhone Apps

Top 10 Least Expensive Private Business Schools in the US

Top 15 Most Expensive Countries in the World – 2014

Top Businesses to Invest In

Top 5 Things You Might Be Doing Wrong With Your Business

Top 5 Strategic Technology Trends in 2014

Top Rags to Riches Stories

Parenting Behavior That Promotes Future Leaders

Top 5 Mistakes Made by Small Businesses

Top 5 Most Common and Potentially Devastating Financial Blunders

Top 5 Highest Paying Jobs for Web Designers

Top 6 Most Respected Professions that Also Pay Well

Top 5 Pitfalls Investors Should Avoid

Top 6 Lawyers and Policy Makers Under 30

Top 6 New Year’s Resolutions for Entrepreneurs

Top 7 Locations to Check in on Facebook

Top 5 Mistakes made by Rookie eBay Sellers

Top 7 eBook Publishers in 2013

Top 6 Health Industry Trends in 2014

5 Lessons for Entrepreneurs from Seth Godin

Top 5 Success Tips from Jordan Belfort – the Wolf of Wall Street

Best Master’s in Finance Degree Programs

Top 6 Earning Celebrities Over 50

The most expensive sports to play

Top 7 Earning Celebrities Under 25

Best 7 Online Courses to Take: Free Finance MOOCs

Top 6 Bad Habits that Promote Failure

20 Most Valuable Soccer Teams in the World in 2013

12 Most Expensive Countries for Foreign Students

Top 30 Most Influential Women in the World

Top 20 Most Expensive New Year Eve Shows

Top 5 Best Vocational Careers

Top 10 Jobs for 2014 by Salary Gain (Predictions)

Top 5 Digital Trends for 2014

Top 6 Things You Can Do To Increase Your Productivity

Top 9 Trending Smartphones in 2013

Subscribe

Enter your email:

Delivered by FeedBurner

X

Thanks! An email with instructions is sent to !

Your email already exists in our database. Click here to go to your subscriptions

Insider Monkey returned 47.6% in its first year! Wondering How?

Download a complete edition of our newsletter for free!