The Puma from GM. As practical as an ashtray on a motorcycle.
The world needs real, highway-capable electric cars to replace their gasoline counterparts. The reasons for this are both ecological and economical. It’s an absolute no-brainer. Or is it?
What year is it? Yes, that’s right, it’s 2010. The human race now knows more about ourselves, our surroundings, and the futures of both than in any other point in history. We know what works and what doesn’t when it comes to carbon reduction and efficiency. For better or worse we’re also an inherently greedy species that knows what sells and what doesn’t in order to amass wealth – which is why I’m stumbling to comprehend what General Motors are thinking with their latest trinket.
Get yourselves ready. Here comes General Motors’ answer to the problems of the human race; carbon reduction, and it’s own financial security. It’s called the Puma, and it’s a guaranteed flop.
The inappropriately named Puma is certifiably ugly (though admittedly beauty is in the eye of the beholder), it’s small, it’s slow, it’s impractical, and it’s ugly. I’m aware I mentioned it’s ugliness twice, but this is only because I want you to thoroughly understand how important appearance is when you’re selling an item. Ugly cars simply do not sell. There’s a reason the Tesla Roadster is the darling of the electric car world: it isn’t just because it’s quick, but it’s because it looks beautiful. In other words, people want to see what they want to see.
When companies sell toilet paper, they know that potential purchasers may be put off if the product is shown being used for it’s intended purpose. That’s why toilet tissue manufacturers advertise their products with puppies and baby chicks. It’s the same story for feminine hygeine products. The closest you get to seeing the product’s intended purpose is by women pouring blue liquid out of test tubes, quickly followed by rounds of tennis in the sunshine. Consumers purchase what they like the look of, and they do not buy what repels them. This is a crucial – yet basic – lesson in marketing, design and sales.
Considering their financial situation, General Motors knows better. They know all too well what works and what doesn’t. They also know from past experience (perhaps better than any other car maker) that the public wants real, highway capable, attractive electric cars. Ignoring their past mistakes is not going to help them to survive.
Of course there must be a minority out there that are rather taken by the Puma’s “quirky” design and can imagine it trundeling along the sidewalk of the future, and that’s all very well. But what about right here and right now? No, I mean it. Stop for a minute and look at the street outside your window. Is your sidewalk big enough for one of these things? Would you mind being stuck behind it in your car as it scuttles along at it’s top speed of 30 miles per hour? No of course not; it’s completely impractical in real-world situations both now and in the future.
Don’t imagine that the 15-years-from-now future will be some sort of utopia, full of people smiling in the endless sunshine as they trundle along in thousands of electric Pumas. In the 1990’s many imagined 2010 would be that same sort of utopia. Of course naturally it didn’t happen, and it won’t happen. This is the real world, and will still be the real world in just another 15 short years.
Be honest to yourselves. No, really I mean it. Would you honestly drive your existing car to a GM dealer and trade it in for a Puma? Of course not. In the real world, the Puma is as practical as an ashtray on a motorcycle. General Motors are in for a rude shock if this ever hits the showroom floor.
