Can a car have too much technology?

I'm a gadget fan and love my in-car audio or 'infotainment' systems, especially when they have a decent user interface.

However, the new Audi TT comes with some of the most impressive and also unnecessary computer technology I've seen... including a virtual cockpit that changes between views of dials to a full screen Google maps overlay.

It does therefore beg the question of whether a motorcar can actually have too much technology.

A broken Mercedes website speaks volumes

Would you buy a new car from a website that didn't work?

How about one that, no matter what browser you used, still wouldn't let you view and configure a vehicle online?

No, me neither!

But in my search for a new car tonight (and on the recommendation of a friend) I tried mercedes.co.uk to check-out the latest range. And lo and behold, it didn't work. It literally gave me a grey screen and no content, no matter how often I tried.

Needless to say, I'm no longer in the mood for Stuttgart's finest. A shame really.....

Will telematics save us from aggregators?

If you read my earlier postings on telematics (otherwise known as 'black box' or GPS car insurance) and the recent post on the new insurance aggregation service provided by Google, you may have combined these two things. You may have then, like me, asked how motor insurance comparison will work for those who opt for a little electronic box in the boot of their car.

In theory, telematics should give more personalised insurance premiums, as more data is collected and more relevant policies are created for each driver. The technology is used already in Brazil, South Africa and now also Australia, which have all apparently seen reductions in road deaths as a consequence.

UK insurers are starting to get more interested in telematics and so is Go Compare, one of the UK's leading aggregators. Go Compare initially approached telematics provider Wunelli to work on a 'black box comparison site' to understand more about telematics products. This led to Wunelli spending six months developing Compare the Box's price and product comparison facility.
http://www.comparethebox.com/

So far each insurer is compared using a number of a number of factors, including the location of the car and time driven (some charge extra for late night driving), but also other more detailed information such as acceleration, braking & cornering.

Back in April 2012, Compare the Box was the only telematics insurance aggregation website. But if the history of the web has told us anything, it is that when something unique and successful is developed..... a number of other similar services rush into this space very quickly.

How many auto brands do you need?

Now, most of us recognise, buy and have affinity with some brands. They are crafted to appeal to specific factors (e.g. demographic, attitudinal, aspirational, etc.). We're probably all aware to some extent that a lot of brands out there are owned by the same parent company. In fact in some markets these brands even compete for your attention and £'s.

Some examples:

1. Banking: NatWest & RBS:
   Different banks, different branches, one owner (RBS)
2. Auto insurance: Direct Line, Churchill, Privilege:
   Differently targetted customers, different pricing and one owner (RBS again)
3. Car manufacturers: Fiat, Alpha Romeo, Ferrari
   Different products, different country prominence and one owner (Fiat)

Note: Apparently you can still buy a new Alpha in the UK!

But what happens when you start cutting back your brands?.... What impact does that have? Well this is now happening in the USA with General Motors, who have announced in their 'viability plans' for long-term success to the US Government, these include:

• No longer making any new Saturn cars from 2011
• 'Considering the options' for Pontiac (e.g. cutting models and/or merging with another division of GM)

This is already in addition to its efforts to try and sell SAAB and Hummer (Which incidentally doesn't seem to have done so well recently. Isn't it suprising that in a time when fuel costs have shot up and there is a general acceptance that the 'War On Terror' may have been a bit of a rouse...that nobody wants to buy a huge gas-guzzling military-styles vehicle right now?). Expect GM execs to decide whether to turn of Hummer's life support machine by the end of March 2009.

So... what does it mean when large car companies start killing off their auto brands?

Well.... not a lot perhaps. From what I understand about the Saturn brand, its not the most highly regarded automobile in the USA. It was originally developed in response to the encroaching Japanese offering and seen as a 'new approach'. Now they make also-ran SUV's and Euro-shelled eastern copies, so that obviously worked well . A look at their web presence will tell you how much they like their customers:
http://www.saturn.com/saturn/SaturnIndex.jsp

In Europe (and especially the UK) we've steadily killed off a lot of auto brands, such as:

• Ghia - was once an Italian design studio and sports car maker, now its used as a trim specification on the occasional Ford saloon or MPV.
• Triumph - once split from the motocycle division in the mid-1900's, they made cars of diminishing quality until its demise at the hands of British Leyland, created in 1969 and once the 5th largest car maker in the World.
• Rover - once the maker of decent and fast saloon cars (especially if you ever got chased by one of these 'jam sandwiches' as a younger driver ), now the company is 'resting' in the drawer of an Indian accountant somewhere.

So what's the moral of this story?

Well, as the British motor industry has proved, you don't need many auto brands. But then, we don't really have a British car industry any more. Could GM be heading in the same direction?