Here's an interesting viewpoint on the NO vote

Submitted: Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 16:12
ThreadID: 8721 Views:2125 Replies:14 FollowUps:16
This Thread has been Archived
I was communicating with someone over the email today, and he mentioned he put in a NO vote to our Poll last week - this was his reasoning, which I think shows an interesting viewpoint that deserves consideration:

---- copied from email received ...

I added my 'no' vote to the poll last week - here's my two-bobs worth.

I actually think that without these kinds of ads they would be a lot less 4x4s on the road and that would mean less business for all of us. One of my most memorable 4x4 ads is still the Pajero one from the 80s with the car shifting sideways in the Bungle Bungle (there are separate environmental issues to how these ads are made).

When our Discovery fell apart back in 1998 I had it out with Land Rover then about the conflict between vehicle abuse and their advertising. I have found it actually helps with warranty claims rather than hinders.Further, the ads also don't specifically promote bashing your car around for the long-term and the issue is really about longevity.

I'd say keep the ads, because they sell lots of 4x4s but pressure the manufacturers to make 4x4s tough enough to do what they advertise for extended periods. Then we'd all be better off.

Honda, Subaru and Mitsubishi all do a great job in promoting their product on the back of Rally and F1 successes but most people don't realise that these vehicles are completely different to their off-the-shelf model and a few million dollars more expensive but it is true that racing is a great testing ground for new ideas and engineering.

Maybe ad production is too!
Rob --------------

The idea that the ads may come to back to bite them in terms of warranty claims is worth noting - MichelleExplorOz
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 16:23

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 16:23
"... but pressure the manufacturers to make 4x4s tough enough to do what they advertise for extended periods.
................................

But they arent, they are all becoming plastic.... Lots more issues with computers than there ever were before... bleep ty Diffs, gearboxes, computers, IFS, etc.. its all good for bush travelling? Maybe for what 99% of them end up as - Taxis its all good...

................................
... most people don't realise that these vehicles are completely different to their off-the-shelf model and a few million dollars more expensive...
................................

Sad fact isnt it...
AnswerID: 38270

Follow Up By: Steve - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 23:23

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 23:23
Sorry Truckie but haven't ever seen an ad 4 a Toyota Landcruiser the Bog standard Station wagon... (the ones that are the basic model) ...EVER !!! and they are the ones to beat..IMHO
0
FollowupID: 27944

Reply By: Member - Oskar(Bris) - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 16:35

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 16:35
The point remains that they may well encourage irresponsible driving and then it comes back and bites us all on the bum.
What we don't need is the "do-gooder" lobby getting areas closed off.
Maybe less 4WDs on the road will be good for us in the future. Less crowding off-road as well?? I can't wait for the 4WD fashion to end or at least level out.
Tuckster is probably correct about the "softness" of future 4WDs.
So I vote yes.
Oskar
The real oskar
AnswerID: 38271

Follow Up By: Michelle from ExplorOz - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:06

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:06
Yeah, I have no problem with less 4WDS on the road and don't feel my business is threatened by it.ExplorOz
0
FollowupID: 27819

Reply By: Member - Peter (WA) - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 18:40

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 18:40
Safety first , sorry but I find the statment 'there would be less business for us all'
with less 4x4 on the road shocking is he putting the $ before human life ? why not some kind of warning at least in the add regarding footage shown is under controled conditions and all drivers in ads are trained test drivers I know its not much but it may make someone think before they try some of the stunts shownBorn to drive a 4x4 , not a keyboard
Peter York 4x4
AnswerID: 38278

Follow Up By: Michelle from ExplorOz - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:07

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:07
I like the idea of the warning in the ad Peter - maybe this would clear up the misleading side of the problem at least.ExplorOz
0
FollowupID: 27820

Follow Up By: Robert - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:05

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:05
Perhaps the warning should say something to the effect:
Advertisement only – vehicles being shown driven in such manner is not recommended or endorsed by the manufacturer or the responsible 4x4 owner.
0
FollowupID: 27862

Reply By: Willem - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 19:02

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 19:02
Robs' reasoning for the NO vote is less than 2 bobs worth.

I wonder wether the ads really sell that many more 4x4's?

The main concern here is it the ads portray some kind of recklessness and that this is the way you are a able to drive your vehicle without any repercussions. Like the stupid Nissan X-trail ad. Or the Ford Explorer ad from a while back or for that matter the Mitsubishi ads. Comparing the ads using rally cars in a controlled environment against reckless driving in 4x4's is not an acceptable premise.

Willem

Always going somewhere
AnswerID: 38283

Reply By: diamond(bendigo) - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 20:43

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 20:43
robs excuse would have to be one of the stupidest things ive seen in a while.
its going to be bad for buisness. why dosnt he open a funeral parlor so when people see theese cars doing unreal things and go try it because they seen the happy family doing it on the add then get killed because there car really cant climb up the side of a mountain.i dont think his two bob is worth 2cents.
ps i can get hold of some tyres no speed rating or load rating but i can make $60 profit each instead of $30 for legal ones.
im only joking about the tyres just showing about putting money in front of safety.
any fourby owner that buys maps from hema ect usually know what a vehicle is capable of doing any way and are going to but them maps/bull bars/tow bars ect any way
pretty bad buisness when profit comes before lifes.
can any one recomend another company who make maps
AnswerID: 38297

Follow Up By: Michelle from ExplorOz - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:15

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:15
Yes, the accountability issue is important. The agencies must put lives ahead of selling more cars, and the potential for recklessness being copied as portrayed on TV may sound ridiculous to some, but as we are all learning about people just by our experiences on the Forum, not everything thinks alike, reacts alike or does alike.

I can illustrate this in real terms by the hill climb along the Canning - that for some damn reason entices some people to "conquer" it, just because it has tracks ascending it and descending the other side. Vehicles on the CSR are usually heavily loaded and in a very remote situation - they are not on a club obstacle course where this might otherwise be ok to attempt. Aside from the fact that the hill looks ugly with tracks across it, when it shoudl just be a bit of scenery. No idea why people who are already on a trip, need to add a little bravado into the equation - unless they see images of the ads on TV where it is done and foolishly think they can do it too.ExplorOz
0
FollowupID: 27821

Follow Up By: diamond(bendigo) - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:58

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:58
your follow up is spot on thats what my reply was about the stupidity of the ads and then someone saying but banning 4wd adds is going to be bad for sales.as i said life before profit.thats more stupid than the adds were talking about.but thats my opinion be it right or wrong.back by popular demand
:-)
0
FollowupID: 27826

Reply By: Michelle from ExplorOz - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:05

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:05
Hey guys - don't shoot down everyone that doesn't agree with this. However, keep their reasoning in mind for how differently the same thing is seen by different people and think about constructive ways in which we can suggest to the ad agencies that they should be promoting vehicles.

Don't for a minute think that you can't have your own opinion here - why else do you think I would post Rob's idea here, certainly not to set him up for a flogging.

I thought that in posting this it would show how other people might see it from the NO vote, but don't abuse them or their businesses for their right to an opinion please, else we run the risk of not being able to run fair polls that genuinely get thought stimulation on the FOR/AGAINST debate.ExplorOz
AnswerID: 38299

Follow Up By: diamond(bendigo) - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:45

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 21:45
gday michelle.
isnt a debate about 2 sides trying to put there side across to every body about what they believe to be the right thing as oppsed to the other side.sure rob has all the rights to put his side accross as we have the same right to shoot him to pieces if we dont believe in what he says thats what debating is all about.sure not every one will be as vocal as the few you see and some will agree with him thats also there right.
i personally was only speaking my thoughts and i think its stupidity but thats me.theese are the reason we have for/against debates so every one can have there say be it right and upsetting or wrong thats the greatness about them lets not stress over it back by popular demand
:-)
0
FollowupID: 27824

Reply By: landie - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 22:24

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 22:24
Michelle

Cigarette advertising was designed to attract the widest audience possible by making it cool, despite all the downside of smoking. After all, who said the manufacturer or advertising company had to have a conscience?

This forum appears to attract a very responsible group of four-wheel drivers who are concerned that we are portrayed as such. The poll you conducted shouts that out loud and clear.

These ads do no more than confirm the suspiscions of those dead against for-wheel drivers, and equally attract an element that will know no better that these vehicles should be treated with respect; not run through the surf at speed, seemingly with little regard for the vehicle, environment or others.

Lets not kid ourselves, this advertsing is designed to appeal and bears little resemblance to the reality of four-wheel driving.

I'm dissppointed by the Hema man's viewpoint, as it appears to have been driven by little more than the almighty dollar, but such is his entitlement to make it.

Landie

AnswerID: 38308

Reply By: Slammin - Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 23:43

Monday, Nov 24, 2003 at 23:43
bugger
AnswerID: 38317

Reply By: tessa_51 - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 05:52

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 05:52
It seems to me that the major problem is the fact that the manufacturers who use this form of advertising are mostly selling "soft roaders" and passing them off as legitimate 4x4's. True 4wdrivers know that these vehicles are not designed for the torture that is shown on the ads, but the sucker in the city who buys them thinks he has bought a bomb-proof tank! I don't want to name names, but we have all seen ads with awd's passed off as 4x4's and seen the same vehicles up to their necks in sand or mud, or hanging high and dry on a rocky outcrop because some poor soul has tried to do what he saw on the ad for his "4x4".
I think it's about time the manufacturers were made to differentiate between the soft roaders (north shore holdens) and the legitimate 4x4's.
Perhaps the government could do it for them by only allowing the reduced import duty to apply to legitimate 4x4's instead of anything the manufacturer decided to make all wheel drive. The reduction was introduced to benefit people who needed the additional capacities provided by a legitimate 4x4, but the manufacturers have used it as a back door to get their luxury vehicles into the country cheaply. I wonder what the sales figures would be for the ML320 or the X5 if people had to pay the normal import duty on them! I recently saw the ML320 in a showroom in Paris and the price was dearer than the E320. According to the red book the 4x4 is $50,000 cheaper in Australia!!

Tessa
AnswerID: 38328

Follow Up By: Hatcher - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 08:49

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 08:49
My employer recently came across a Merc ML320 stranded in the Simpson with a broken axle with family on board. Cost them $4000 for the vehicle to be rescued and brought back to Birdsville with a 2 - 3 week wait for a replacement axle to be sent from Mercedes. Add to that the repair cost and your talking a very expensive mistake to take a soft roader through the desert. The power of advertising can be a dangerous thing for the unaware. Luckily they were found, otherwise they could have been a statistic.

But advertising can be done responsibly. Look at the Landrover commercials, where we see a Disco negotiating river crossings and steep accents/descents at sensible speeds. I take a lot more credence in a manufacturer that doesn’t flog their product at the expense of the environment or personal safety.

So IMHO I think its time that we lobby the 4WD manufactures to portray themselves as responsible in the eyes of the public, after all, it’s the manufactures that approve the crap the advertising companies come up with.
0
FollowupID: 27848

Follow Up By: Member - JohnR - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 13:36

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 13:36
Tessa, I was interested in some of your comments particularly comparing softroaders with ""legitimate 4x4s"

I can agree in part as I have a Germerican and suffer in some ways. The space saver spare being the major one. When the Daimler Chrysler heads go out back I can betcha it is not with the standard trim tyres all round. I have talked about the level of risk before that one places them selves at. For Australia, those tyres should not be allowed outside the city. In other ways it is a very tough 4x4 but the sand ridge style of their ads don't give a true picture. I am interested in Hatchers comment too with the ML with the broken axle. Mind you I have seen posts of broken suspensions and drive shafts of the favourites too.

When you compare prices in the Paris showroom, I hope you compared other products too. I hope that you bear in mind the sourcing of the products from the world markets. The M class being the USA and many of the C class being South Africa as I understand it. The E class being, I would have thought Europe. You seldom see an ML in Europe. That seemed to bi in particular part of the US too. Wherever you go it still seems cars are a bit regional. When you also add luxury taxes in Australia to levels above vehicle values distortions ocurr too.

We have protection for the local market at all levels of imports including 4x4s and although there is lower for 4x4s against 2 wheel drives, I find it interesting that Holden and Ford are now out to challenge the imports. We will have to watch that they don't push for higher protection on these models too, against the trucks we are so fond of. Remember that their protection is our cost of vehicles. The difference between the 5% and 10% import duty would be quite small on the actual imported price, but efective for the protection by the time retail margins are added, and any potential luxury car tax too, in trying to influence direction of purchase in the new car landscape
0
FollowupID: 27872

Reply By: jonny knowalittlebit - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 08:06

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 08:06
Careless people in 4 wheel drives, drive carelessly the ads dont drive the cars or make people drive like that. Really how many people see the ad and say im going to go out now and do that i dont know of anyone. Im not saying dumb stuff doesnt get done by the "careless" 4x4 driver it does but its definatly not the blame of the ads. People are to quick to shift the blame maybe they should just accept responsibility for there own actions. Plus they will only do it once and after they get the repair bill for flying over bumps theyll be too broke to go out for the next 6 months.
Thats my less than 2 bobs worth.
Guy
AnswerID: 38332

Follow Up By: Member - Rohan K - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 11:30

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 11:30
Jonny, I'm not sure I agree with you there. Watching some of the dumb things people do in 4x4s, especially on the sand, it appears they are directly emulating the adds that attracted them to a 4x4 in the first place.

Having said that, the damage to us (the genuine 4x4 enthusiasts) is not the reality, its the perception. These adds project, to the non-4x4 and anti-4x4 fraternity, the image that people who drive 4x4s are irresponsible because its that type of person the adds appear to be appealing to.

If the adds depicted responsible use, especially care of the environment, it might help project an image of the target market as responsible, environmentally aware folk and reduce the "bush basher" image the current adds create. Smile, you're on ExplorOz
Rohan (Sydney - on the QLD side of the Harbour Bridge)
0
FollowupID: 27858

Follow Up By: Michelle from ExplorOz - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 16:23

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 16:23
Well said!ExplorOz
0
FollowupID: 27893

Follow Up By: jonny knowalittlebit - Wednesday, Nov 26, 2003 at 17:35

Wednesday, Nov 26, 2003 at 17:35
My experience around the sand is very limited (as in none) however i just think that people flying over dunes through water and things like that (which is what ive seen on ads and am presuming that your talking about) would happen regaurdless if they were on ads or not its just in some peoples nature to do things quicker and quicker and quicker until they come unstuck maybe your right though maybe they should go out and make more image friendly ads. But like i said stupid thing will still happen out there just the same as in fast cars. I know this may sound dumb now but something me and my mate did when he first got his VS was take it to a secluded spot out back of gunnedah on a down hill and go til the speedo went off the clock. I never saw that on an ad, but we just wanted to see what would happen. We only did it once and it scared crap out of us but we done it so. My point is dumb stuff gets done when dumb people get in cars and like i said before instead of shifting blame to "they made me do it" syndrome people should just be responsible for there own actions.
Guy
0
FollowupID: 28553

Follow Up By: Member - Rohan K - Wednesday, Nov 26, 2003 at 17:56

Wednesday, Nov 26, 2003 at 17:56
Jonny, no argument there. Dumb is dumb and we won't change that. But on a practical level that dumbness, if not displayed on national television every 5 mins, would mostly go un-noticed, and therefore do less damage to our group image. Its the fact that the entire nation's television watching public see gun-ho, dumber than dumb, irresponsible behaviour that does the damage.

The advertisers think they are promoting a "fun" image, in a similar way to how the speedway is adverised with only images of accidents. Hey, that's "fun" too, for the few folk that enjoy the speedway. The mainstream populace sits there (as I do when watching the speedway adds) and think "what a bunch of morons".Smile, you're on ExplorOz
Rohan (Sydney - on the QLD side of the Harbour Bridge)
0
FollowupID: 28562

Reply By: Member - Melissa - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:32

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:32
Well at the risk of being the odd one out, I haven't yet voted because I'm still undecided on this issue. Firstly, television advertising has been around so long now that viewers are generally considered to be fairly "sophisticated" and somewhat "innured" to over-the-top claims made by advertisers. This applies not only to TV but other forms of advertising. This is precisely the reason that advertisers make the type of ads that are the subject of this debate...they have to visually exciting to attract our attention.

I mean honestly, how often do you believe an ad that says something like "the best XXX around" etc??? Take Mitsubishi for instance...as pointed out above, many of their Pajero ads have for years revolved around the slogan "X time winner of the Dakar(?) rally" with a bit of footage thrown in. But if you believe my first example about a manufacturer claiming their product is the "best" or you believe that you can buy an off-the-shelf Paj and head outback at rally pace without damaging your vehicle then I'd say you're a bloody idiot. Sure we've all heard stories about someone who got into strife because they DID believe what they've heard so obviously there are a lot of dills out there. But at the end of the day, these folk obviously failed to do their homework. At what point do people begin to take responsibility for themselves and their actions instead of pointing the finger of blame at someone else??? Personally I'm sick to death of this "it's everyone else's fault but mine" mentality that seems to be creeping into our society.

The only issue that I can give credence to against these type of ads is that they do promote the wrong perception of 4WDrivers. Most of us here know that rather than being weekend warrior, bush bashing, environmental vandals, those of us who love the freedom our 4WD's give us to get out into the bush are in fact quite the opposite. We're out there because we truly love and care for the environment and no way would we in anyway damage what we consider to be our backyard.

Having said that though, if you take away the greenies who are anti-anything but completely locking away our natural wonders except maybe to hikers, from what I've seen the average non-4WD owner man on the street's dislike of 4WD's seems to stem from them being used as "shopping trolleys". I personally have been tackled a few times by people making this very accusation. Once I point out that we do actually use our 4WD for getting out bush, most people seem to respect that.

I believe that the real problem lies with 4WD owners who never take their 4WD off the bitumen. If they opted instead for a nice family sedan I suspect the anti-4WD brigade would fade away because the number of 4WD's on the road would drop dramatically. There is no question that 4WD's are big and expensive both to buy and run so why anyone would buy one unless they intended to use it beats the heck out of me but they do. (I personally know 3 people driving 4WD's who have never and have no intention of ever taking them off-the-road! They just drive 'em around the city.)

Since those people I refer to above don't plan on ever going off-road, they obviously aren't purchasing their 4WD's because they believe advertisers claims about climbing mountains or racing across the Simpson...So I sincerely doubt that changing the type of advertising is going to have any effect on the numbers of 4WD's on the road and hence, the anti-4WD feeling out there among many non-4WD owners.

No doubt others will disagree with me but that is my view.

:o) Melissa
Petrol 4.5L GU Patrol &
Camprite TL8 offroad camper
http://members.westnet.com.au/flatdog
AnswerID: 38356

Follow Up By: Member - John (Penrith) - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 14:14

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 14:14
G'day Melissa,

Read your post a couple of times. Could not have said it better. SPOT ON.

John.
0
FollowupID: 27877

Follow Up By: Member - Rohan K - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 17:57

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 17:57
Melissa, I believe there is some merit in your point about the "shopping trolley". However, that alone provides only half the "ammunition" for anti-4x4 lobby. We can provide enough empirical evidence to counter the "dangerous on the road" argument. But, the real emotive support for them comes from the "bush bashing" image, which we cannot counter because not only are there real life examples of it, but almost every 4x4 add suggests that it is a "normal" part of 4WDing. If we can remove/reduce that, we significantly reduce the anti-4x4 argument.Smile, you're on ExplorOz
Rohan (Sydney - on the QLD side of the Harbour Bridge)
0
FollowupID: 27906

Reply By: bruce.h (WA) - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:53

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:53
gday all
just to add more fuel to the fire,what rob say has a small amount of truth in that if you want some thing to last along time you have to give it a $$$ value the bigger the $$ value the harder it is to get rid of (ie Smoking, drugs ect.) so to follow this to its logical conclusion the more people driving 4wd vehicles the harder it will be to send us into extinction, the down side of this is that we must then grab all these people that buy 4wd based on this advertising type campain & re-educate them to the right way of doing it, so the true question should be how do we ballance the benifits of high proflie advertising against the negitive impact they have on peoples behavour. as to accountabilty of the motor companies to them this will only become an issue when the warrenty claims directly atributed to the advertising begin to out strip the sale benifits of the ads or they are held legal responsable for the actions of some nit wit who is hurt trying to copy the ads.

before u ask do i support these ads the answer is no
do they benifit we 4wders at base level yes & no
do i think there are better ways to advertise yes the best ad i have seen for 4wds is the jeep ad with the jeep driving thruogh the bush only to stop at a flower & the vioce over saying at jeep this is a stop sign. did this ad work it didnt last long so maybe not
regards Bruce
AnswerID: 38362

Reply By: michael - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 14:20

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 14:20
Poor Rob, you and people who think like you are sad cases indeed.
With Govt. funded graphic adverts with emphasis on safer driving practices targeting the young in particular, shouldn't responsible community members expect there to be a consistent, responsible safety standard in ALL motor vehicle advertising ?
There are obviously too many in the community who have not witnessed the horror of motor vehicle tragedy and its sad,sad trauma on immediate families, ambulance, firefighters, police and medical staff who unavoidably have to confront this reality.
The glossy advertising depicting morons pushing the safety limits whilst seemingly oblivious to the possibility of something untoward occurring, even another road user, on the road/track , are sending the wrong messages to our young inexperienced and older tryhard adults. Humans using motor vehicles recklessly and unsafely in the pathetic belief their exhuberant , grandstanding performance behind the wheel compensates for low self esteem should not be encouraged.
Motor vehicle tragedy is not glamorous.
AnswerID: 38375

Reply By: Michelle from ExplorOz - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 16:30

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003 at 16:30
How about we create a list of the ads that we feel are inappropriate - with a brief reason why. Can someone start with a specific ad and lets pick em to pieces...
(I note that the ad for a 2wd, can't remember, was jealous so it jumped off the cliff - it has now been remade - it was a shoker, giving the message that an acceptable response to jealousy was to commit suicide, now they just beep horns)...funny how the power of influential advertising with this one was quickly acted upon...

I think we've all aired views and have a good grasp of the issues now lets get to specifics.ExplorOz
AnswerID: 38399

Follow Up By: Wombat - Wednesday, Nov 26, 2003 at 15:37

Wednesday, Nov 26, 2003 at 15:37
Do you think it would be worthwhile creating a new thread for this Michelle?"Live today as if there may be no tomorrow"

Wombat
0
FollowupID: 28531

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)