Chrysler Thank You Ads Make America Cringe with Anger

Chrysler Thank You America ad

By Thami Masemola
December 31, 2008 5:14 PM
Filed Under: American, Chrysler, Corporate/Financial, Industry

Chrysler's gesture of goodwill appears to have backfired on the US carmaker. For about a week Chrysler took out advertisements in some of America's highest circulating newspapers, thanking Americans for their ‘investment' in the company through the US government's multi-billion-dollar bailout plan.

"On behalf of the 1 million people who depend on Chrysler for their livelihoods, thank you for investing in Chrysler, and America," says the statement, signed by CEO Bob Nardelli on behalf of Chrysler.

Ads were taken out in newspapers like USA Today and The Wall Street Journal where prices for placement of a full-page ad can range between USD $206,000 - $264,000 and $112,000 and $217,000 respectively. Unfortunately a backlash has ensued.

"It's quite ridiculous to be spending that kind of money," says Princella Smith, national spokeswoman for American Solutions, an organisation headed by former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich. "Those ads are just a precise example of the fact that they do not get it ... and it's just in our faces."

Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist told FOXNews.com that the company should return all that money. He said: "Years ago there was a robber who was really polite. He said please and thank you while he was robbing people. At the end of the day, people had their money stolen. Saying thank you doesn't make it OK. They should give the money back."

Some reactions on Chrysler's blog: click here

Source: foxnews.com via autoblog.com

email print digg facebook fark reddit delicious myspace

Chrysler gets first $4 billion of federal loan (2 comments

Comments

NISMO

December 31, 2008 5:31 PM

"We're sorry" was probably more in order.

FOXHOUND

December 31, 2008 5:35 PM

maybe they should have taken out a tiny classified ad instead lol.

Motor_Yakuza

December 31, 2008 5:46 PM

Hmmm, not to smart, but it's a nice thing to do.

xLumino

December 31, 2008 6:09 PM

Jeep whould call it "Patriot" I whould call it "bring wood in the forrest"

RS5

December 31, 2008 6:20 PM

I don't understand why this gesture of kindness would make people mad. Just shows how shallow some Americans tend to be.

carcrazy1234

December 31, 2008 6:57 PM

are you serious... here i'll explain it to you. its stupid because that bailout money was given to bring the company back to life by producing efficient models rather than gas guzzling behemoths (did i spell that right?? w/e)... ok. and it WASN'T given to spend on pointless ad's and stuff, that stuff should come later when they actually have money on their own. Also, considering those ad's "range between USD $206,000 - $264,000 and $112,000 and $217,000 respectively.", it's quite stupid. They could spend that kind of money elsewhere and put it to good use.

Bremen_Koenigsegg

December 31, 2008 11:51 PM

I think he was serious, and I agree with him. Thanking the American people for a bailout the majority of them did not want is a good gesture. What is the point of advertising? Ultimately, the goal is to sell a product. Chrysler wants to advertise the fact they are not going about business as usual, sustained as they are by this government bailout -- they want to tell the people how important that money is to them. It doesn't surprise me in the least this story was covered exclusively by Fox News. This is so typical of the ridiculous, ill-conceived fallacies that pass as "news" on that network. What is $500k to a company like Chrysler? A failed model launch could cost ten times that much (a blatantly made up statistic, but plausible) or the difference between an ineffective advertising campaign and a successful one. I do no believe Chrysler overstepped their rights in this case. I also believe people should simply stop watching Fox News for any reason other than mocking how ridiculous that network is.

RobERob

January 1, 2009 12:35 AM

@ Bremen_Koenigsegg Thank you!

I was just about to jump on the angry bandwagon until I read your post. I stand corrected, or at least somewhere in between.

carcrazy1234

January 1, 2009 2:51 AM

hahaha wow. ok there dude. "that stuff should come later when they actually have money on their own"... key point here is, that the money given to them wasn't THEIR money, more like the taxpayers, and governments money. This money was given to bring the company back to life. I'm not saying that this ad is a BAD idea... all i'm saying is that they should put their company ahead, which in the long run helps the economy, and people in the economy. and u said... what's 500,000 dollars to a company like chrysler??? its really like gold for them cuz their on the verge of bankruptcy hahaha wow. yea that's a small amount for "them" considering how large the company is, but seriously, that money can be put to better use. Strange how people think on here.

Ajamin24

January 2, 2009 7:58 PM

A list of other Advertising outlets that could have costed less then an "Thank you Ad in the WSJ": 1: Internet - Thank You Ad on Yahoo and Google. More people go to these sites then read the WSJ. 2: Press Conference Thanking the American people - Low overhead, the PRESS and other Media outlets will print the story in more Newspapers including the WSJ and NY Times. 3: Live American Tribute at the NAIAS in Detroit at the meet the press opener - Again low overhead, they are already planning on attending the event. 4: Added 10sec Thank you on existing TV ads....

All in all, I am more upset that they released this add in Print; in the WSJ and New York Times... Most Americans do not read these 2 media outlets. They should have tried to increase their saturation to the American people.

hata0101

December 31, 2008 7:09 PM

wow...who's shallow? don't thank me, Chryster, i wasn't for the bailout, i believe bankrupt is the correct way to go thou... this is classic, stupid decision by stupid company. the money they spent on this stupid ads could do lots more in productivity & efficiency.

Joe_Limon

December 31, 2008 7:26 PM

could be worse... the money could be going just to the unions... hahaha

Iconic

December 31, 2008 9:09 PM

I just love how the unions are the scape goat in this mess.

Joe_Limon

January 1, 2009 3:52 AM

why? do you beleive that it's the salaries of the employers? is that $1 a year to much? maybe they should cut it down to 50cents. Or wait, could it be the reliable, cheap, nice looking, fuel efficient cars that they make? hmm no that couldn't be it either.

howe2002

December 31, 2008 8:00 PM

It was done to build back brand loyalty. No harm done, but what people don't realize is that the money is owed back to the Federal Reserve Corporation who prints the money. The same group of guys who own the papers and mass media funnel that money right back into their own pockets. Unfortunately it's the public tax payer who always ends up with the bill anyway, designed to keep us all in a circle of debt. The bailout money will not help. Millions of auto workers will be slaves to the government that will own them.

Bremen_Koenigsegg

December 31, 2008 11:32 PM

Does all your understanding of the capitalist economic system come from internet viral videos? Economics does not work like that, no matter how much conspiracy theorists would like it to.

ck314

January 1, 2009 9:17 PM

When someone calls facts "conspiracy theories" you know which side they're on. You are actually saying the Federal Reserve isn't a private corporation owned by a pack of criminal crooks that in turn own the government, or that the latest three economic cracks weren't engineered by those same subjects? Unnecessary complexity is what allows white collar gangsters to get away with crime.

mmr66

December 31, 2008 10:22 PM

i can understand why they are angry if i payed tax and then my government went and gave it to an iresponsible car maker i would be furios.

BabyMilo

January 1, 2009 12:42 AM

i agree with the american public, i think it was stupid of chrysler to spend their BAILOUT money on ads it was given to them to make cars and then when they had made some money from their cars they could then put an ad in the newspaper

carcrazy1234

January 1, 2009 2:52 AM

thanks you!!! someone see's the light... quote: "bailout money".... NOT "advertisement money" hahaha YES!

James2911

January 1, 2009 4:46 AM

I'm personally in opposition to the bailout package offered to Chrysler AG - there is very little value in the company at this stage, and they are using the money of millions of Americans, many of them struggling to put bread on the table - but at least they recognise how the US Govt. has helped them, although in an unnecassarily outlandish and costly fashion.

PotatoEater

January 1, 2009 6:27 AM

I like the 300C. Makes a for a great lazy drive to work and the boot space is good for the supermarket. Long live Chrysler!

hata0101

January 1, 2009 6:45 AM

forget it...the so-called big 3 wouldn't change. it's their culture, it's the way they manage, it's the way they out-of-reach, detach to the market. no matter how many bailout package they'll get, won't save them if they're not gonna change. it's their roots are rotten. oh, btw, what's a big deal for that $1 salary per year statement? it's a stunt to fool general people. think about how much money they've earned in years, plus all the larger-than-life bonus & benefits, stock options. they're set for life already, $1/ year won't even feel the different in their life.

AG4

January 1, 2009 9:32 AM

They should have just put up a webpage, and advertised the url online, I believe this would have been cheaper.

Xanavi23

January 1, 2009 5:44 PM

I smell alot of horse**** here. If they WEREN'T BAILED OUT, 1/10 jobs in all of america would have been lost, not counting jobs by way of supply companies. That would have tanked the US economy even further destroying the country. Also if they weren't bailed out, more jobs would have been lost world wide throwing the global economy further into the shitter.

Some of you fail to realise just how bad things would be if the companies failed. They said thanks, people should STFU.

hata0101

January 3, 2009 3:57 PM

in the free world, the market determine what company could survive or sink. yep, economy is bad, in recession. but, in a way, it's a good thing. now all company are looking into their budget, realize lots of money were WASTED due to their bad management or stupid decision. they realize their company have lots of "fat", like, a 1 person job but hire 10 people for it. for example, how much time people spend on surfing the web @ work which is NOT job related? more time than work maybe! that's mean the company NOT at their highest efficiency! yes, if any one of the big 3 fell, big wave to the bad economy. but it doesn't mean the government has to use tapayer money to save hem, it doesn' mean they'll change EVEN they get bailout, it doesn't mean they'll stop making all these stupid decision, it doesn't mean it can urn things around! then why save a rotten tomatoe? it's a waste of money!

Xenicide

January 1, 2009 10:39 PM

You people just don't get it. It's called advertisement for a reason. Building a car is probably 1/3 of the battle while marketing is the rest. That was a sign of acknowledgement, but the liberals have taken yet another thing out of context.

BabyMilo

January 2, 2009 1:05 AM

i undertsand that advertisment is part of selling a car, but that ad had nothing to do with advertising a car

carcrazy1234

January 2, 2009 1:55 AM

exactly... and also the money was given to the company to finally try and start making PROPER vehicles that are far more fuel efficient than their current models and to pursue further research in building fuel efficient models. as well.... that money wasn't given as advertisement money. acknowledgment's and thank you's and gift basket's can come later when they actually get out of the mess their in :D

ccrispy

January 2, 2009 1:34 AM

Is this a joke? LMAO WTF

politz

January 2, 2009 5:50 AM

now let's wait for a tv spot on superbowl night saying "i'm sorry"

radmeister

January 2, 2009 7:56 PM

Ok let me get this straight. 2 months ago AIG got a bailout and their execs went on a business trip that cost 400,000$ and the public had a huge uproar. Then these big 3 goofballs go to Washington in their private jets to ask for a bailout, big public uproar over that. And now they do this, like i mean seriously how stupid can you be, ok you didn't learn from AIG's mistakes, but what is their excuse for not learning from their own mistakes?? I mean how can there be any hope for these companies to make a comeback if they are blatantly this idiotic???

FreudeClub

January 2, 2009 9:24 PM

Maybe the CEO and his management team should be kicked out.. clearly they do not know how to manage a company in the first place. A good company would have provided for down times like these, not only is the company in their hands, the well being of so many people are in their hands too.

It is an absolute joke that the CEO's mentioned that they will take $1 salary of they get the bailout... well maybe they are not even worth that $1. They clearly have no shame!

hata0101

January 4, 2009 8:49 PM

$1 annual salary is just a PR works to calm down general public. the truth is, think about how much money they've ALREADY earn in years, including their salaries, plus stock options, larger-than-life benefits, too-much-to-imagine bonus (yes, even the company had net-loss). those a-hole already set for life! remember, i bet their daily life don't even have to spend a dime, 'coz they can write all the expenses off as "buisiness expenses"!

WildMaverick1200

January 4, 2009 1:29 AM

"Sorry America, for firing your employees, worsening the crisis, raising gas prices, wasting your money on jets, crying in Uncle Sam's lap for money, spending it on hypocrite ads, for being SELFISH ENOUGH not to even lend a Challenger to a British guy called Hammond..."

Seriously, Nardelli's got crap in his head.....

View Comment Rules