Chevrolet and Porsche, the companies.

[Zeke]

If GM pursued the non-use of the name Chevy as Porsche and VW do with their respective trademarks, due to the huge Chevy aftermarket industry in this country alone, we would absolutely see hard times in our economy. In fact, in the lastest issue of Autoweek, GM was lauded for leading the way from economic disaster stemming from the events of 9/11/01 by offering 0 percent interest on new cars and was the first to do so. Self serving? Maybe. But it worked. One in seven American workers is somehow involved in the auto industry.

While the pursuit of the Porsche pleasure in all its forms as hobby, sport and investment is compelling, Porsche AG is far from our friend. The aftermarket industry attending to the preservation and continued enjoyment of the marque's early examples is apparently not supported by the factory. I know this was pointed out recently here on this BBS.

If it weren't for GM's recongnition of its legacy, or Ford's involvement in the specialty market with its SVT program, or Chrysler's Mopar outreach (I dare not say who owns Chrysler), one or more of those companies might not be here today.

Porsche AG might want to review its policies regarding the use of its name. There is no certainty that they will be here forever either. Afterall, they recently lost 300 million for three years running before the introduction of the Boxster which is said to have saved the company. Think the Cayene will do more of the same? 914s were said to be a step to the ownership of a 911. Boxsters today might offer that same opportunity, but starting at $45,000, are they cultivating a market within the young buying sector? Or is Honda, Toyota and Nissan doing a better job of that and nurturing future buyers for high digit purchases?

A couple of days ago, many attended the German Autofest, which was clearly intended to be the Porschefest. Couldn't use the name to promote a commercial activity. This is not going to get any better until the parent corporation realizes the extrodinary value in loyalty and interest in its past models.

Thanks for reading.

[Z-man]

Milt:
Thanks! Interesting opinions: I agree with most of what you say (except that part about "Let's not talk about who owns Chrysler!" )

As an employee of Mercedes-Benz (USA home office), I can understand Porsche AG's reasoning behind protecting it's name. A company's brand name is closely associated to it's image; it's reputation. Similarly, Mercedes Benz has legally requested many independant shops to refrain from using it's three pointed star.

The reason companies like Mercedes Benz and Porsche do such things is because they cannot guarantee the quality of services and products that are produced by independant organizations, since they have no control over what an independant shop does.

To a consumer, Porsche (or Mercedes-Benz) means the same thing: often, they do not realize where they go is NOT directly affiliated with the 'parent company.' So such a consumer would feel Porsche AG is responsible for soddy work at an indie shop.

Just my $0.42.
-Zoltan .

[Zeke]

Even though GM owns the rights to the name Chevy (I'm real certain aout this, but I can't prove it), they have let the name slip into the public domain. Lots of repro parts are advertised as fiitting older Chevys. For better of for worse, these parts have helped the Chevy spirit more than hurt, IMHO. IF there was a nickname for the Porsche line (other than P-car) and Porsche AG would let it slide, I think things might be better.

In the VW community there is quite a bit of negative sentment about VoA and the factory because of their pusuit of people using their name(s) and logo. I can understand that this is necessary to a point. BUT, VW tried unsuceefully to trademark the name "beatle." Ridiculous, idea and didn't do them any good.

I'm sorry to disagree about the independent shop thing, but if one says "Authorized MB Repair Facility," and the other says "Independent MB Repair Facility," then anyone who can't distinguish between the dealers and the indies has got some serious problems beyond needing to get their automobile fixed.

In conclusion, I don't think or advocate that anyone may use a logo belonging to someone else. Nor, do I think they should be able to copy the trademarked name, which means in the design in which it is trademarked. But if one were to refer to the brand of car in writing, advertising related services and promoting recreational events, etc., all without copying directly from the logo or trademark(s), then I see no harm done. Quite the contrary, which is my thesis.