Nissan Leaf Commercial, "facts"

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

adric22

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
2,488
Location
Fort Worth, TX
I saw this on TV today and it took me a while to find it on the internet. I finally found it here:

http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7Izw/2013-nissan-leaf-facts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank God it wasn't trying to sell on environmental issues. Too bad they didn't mention the lease price. With some good advertising, we might actually see an increase in sales this month.
 
I saw it last night (NOT on FOX) and my immediate thought was "Finally!". This is the ad that they should have had three years ago, short, upbeat, techy, driving past gas stations. Wow, it just reminds me how far off base they were with the first polar bear commercials. They thought that their core customer base were only interested in the environment, and they ignored the other, very cool aspects, features and benefits that would appeal to a broader spectrum of buyers.

I saw in a recent news story that Nissan is acknowledging that lack of understanding of their EV customer base as they revamp their EV leadership.
 
very cool commercial. I have seen it every night during the LA Kings game of fox sports west here in LA and last night on Hells Kitchen. I hope it does turn into more sales.
 
With the tone of the commercial and the new 17" wheels rollin' by... the app looks very antiquated for some reason. I know that even if they updated the app it'll still function relatively the same, but still...
 
I understand this is a fact but I think it is "confusing" (and/or possibly misleading) to the average viewer. Not being negative but I think they should have used the EPA range instead.

Zjvz.jpeg
 
EricBayArea said:
^^^
Agreed. Not that its right, but all of the other manufacturers do it too.. I see PiP commercials that say "Plug-in Prius gets 95 MPGe"
Seems like sales folks will now have to explain the "78" miles EPA number because the potential customer came in and expected to buy a LEAF that would go 130. If the sale person is confused as well (see other threads) then the new owner will be in for a surprise.

PIP will still be OK in a sense because they will just continue on gas at 45+ MPG.
 
My grandfather used to say "There's only one thing worst than being wrong: it's being wrong again".

While I can understand that it was wrong trying to cater only to the environment crowd with the polar bear commercial (I actually loved the ad!), I think this new commercial goes way too far in trying to market the car only as an economical, hip, youth-oriented car. I would have liked to have seen at least some mention somewhere of the environmental benefits of driving a Leaf.
 
jswilson said:
While I can understand that it was wrong trying to cater only to the environment crowd with the polar bear commercial (I actually loved the ad!), I think this new commercial goes way too far in trying to market the car only as an economical, hip, youth-oriented car. I would have liked to have seen at least some mention somewhere of the environmental benefits of driving a Leaf.

They did.. They briefly said "No gas ever, so it is good for the world."

All I can say is they've tried advertising to the tree-huggers and we've seen how the sales have been. Now lets give this a chance and see if it works.
 
There's a little bit of "Truth in advertising" missing in the ad.

They show the model "S" price (after Federal Tax Credit) and then proceed to show a NAV screen, a 360 degree camera view, and talk about 6.6kW charging (at least I think that's what they meant when they said it is faster). Of course, all of those things are not available in the base model "S" at the cheap price they tout in the ad.

They need to say something like "price as shown", etc.
 
I don't think there was anything wrong with the Polar Bear ad. It was an awareness campaign and the ad was very memorable, regardless of which side of the eco fence one is on.

The "what if everything ran on gasoline" ad was brilliant.

Then there was unfortunately, a long period of very little outreach.

This new ad does a pretty good job of communicating key points in a very short timeframe.
 
Randy said:
There's a little bit of "Truth in advertising" missing in the ad.

They show the model "S" price (after Federal Tax Credit) and then proceed to show a NAV screen, a 360 degree camera view, and talk about 6.6kW charging (at least I think that's what they meant when they said it is faster). Of course, all of those things are not available in the base model "S" at the cheap price they tout in the ad.

They need to say something like "price as shown", etc.
+1
But if you pause the video, the extremely small text also does give the SL price.
But no way the viewer can read it in the brief time on the screen.
Nissan should be better than this, but unfortunately as LEAF purchasers / leasers have learned, they are not.
 
I've heard two radio ads for the leaf yesterday on separate radio stations here in so cal. Similar to what's in the "facts" commercial but being raddled off by the dj. Most will hear the "never stop at a gas station again" and "fun to drive" bits.

Alright Nissan! We just need more quick chargers! :mrgreen:
 
Maybe you guys have a point about dumping the environmental message. It seems very sad to me, but I just ran across this story about conservatives' aversion to environmental messaging.

A study out Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences examined attitudes about energy efficiency in liberals and conservatives, and found that promoting energy-efficient products and services on the basis of their environmental benefits actually turned conservatives off from picking them. The researchers first quizzed participants on how much they value various benefits of energy efficiency, including reducing carbon emissions, reducing foreign oil dependence, and reducing how much consumers pay for energy; cutting emissions appealed to conservatives the least.

The study then presented participants with a real-world choice: With a fixed amount of money in their wallet, respondents had to “buy” either an old-school lightbulb or an efficient compact florescent bulb (CFL), the same kind Bachmann railed against. Both bulbs were labeled with basic hard data on their energy use, but without a translation of that into climate pros and cons. When the bulbs cost the same, and even when the CFL cost more, conservatives and liberals were equally likely to buy the efficient bulb. But slap a message on the CFL’s packaging that says “Protect the Environment,” and “we saw a significant drop-off in more politically moderates and conservatives choosing that option,” said study author Dena Gromet, a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business.

http://grist.org/climate-energy/why-do-conservatives-like-to-waste-energy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Can you believe it? So long as you don't SAY they're good for the environment, conservatives are willing to buy green products, but once you say it's green, they reject them. I guess they just want to stick to the libs no matter what. As I said, it's sad.
 
Still, inexplicably, no mention of the Leaf's HOV-lane eligibility.

It's the main reason I bought mine, and also two coworkers.
 
Back
Top