Then we recruited her to the EV1 program. After graduating from Princeton, she worked for Saturn for a few years. She came to Buick for the summer and brought a very interesting and insightful perspective to advertising. I first met the ad manager while we were interviewing at Princeton for a summer intern. I am reluctant to cite names because I am not sure who wants to stay in the background. One of the first controversies was selection of the manager for advertising. Robert Frost brochure (full 19 page gallery below)Ĭontroversial advertising for the EV1 started early on. Plus, the fact people are still taking about it more than 15 years later is an indication the commercial had an impact…pun intended. I will share another EV1 marketing gem. John Dabels: I wish I could take credit for it, but I can’t. ECD seemed to be working very hard to become the standard battery for hybrids and EV’s. Plus, Stempel is a great supporter of and great spokesmen for EV’s. With Bob Stempel, the company has significantly more credibility and begins to migrate the nickel-metal-hydride technology from the lab to higher-volume production with more quality control. The founder of ECD, Stan Ovshinsky was a brilliant engineer but not what you would call a great businessman. ( If you have read Part I &II your brain is engaged now) From the points of view of an investor in ECD and the EV industry, having Stempel as chairman is a great asset. After resigning from GM, Bob Stempel became an advisor to Energy Conversion Devices (aka Ovonics). But there is additional information that rounds out the story, and most of it public. John Dabels: As for the sale, I can’t answer that. Mark Hovis: There were many questions about Ovonics and why it was sold to Chevron(Texaco). So we have 170,000 EVs instead of maybe 2,000,000, but every auto has a catalytic converter and other low emission standards. Obviously I can’t speak for CARB but seems to me they did what the people of California charged them to do. People are elected to office or appointed to positions in government to solve problems. From a government policy standpoint, I think it was a good decision. I suppose the loser might be EV’s but CARB’s mandate is improving air quality, not introducing EV’s. The auto proposal improves air quality more than the ZEV mandate. CARB is charged with improving air quality in California. But the proposal by the auto companies improves air quality more. Exactly what the percentage differences were in air quality, I don’t know.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |