"Shift To Neutral" Green Ad Stoush: Saab Australia Red-Faced

[JoeT]

Green Ad Stoush: Saab Red-Faced

Joshua Dowling
26 January 2008

Saab Australia may settle a landmark case with Australia's consumer watchdog before it goes the Federal Court. Representatives from both parties are due to meet next week to discuss further action.

Last August the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission wrote to Saab Australia, a division of General Motors Holden, raising concerns about a tagline in its advertisements which said: "shift to neutral".

The tagline was a reference to offsetting a vehicle's emissions in the first year of ownership by planting 17 trees but the commission believed the tagline could lead buyers to believe "the net amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by any Saab vehicle, over the life of that vehicle, would be zero".

Saab says it removed the tagline last September to comply with the watchdog's initial request but received notice of further action late last week.

Click here to continue article

[FenwickHockey65]

This has to be the absolute dumbest case of twisted words I've ever heard.

[Quickening]

This has been discussed greatly over at Trollhattan Saab blog. It is ridiculous that Saab is getting slammed like this.

The idea that the trees only offset carbon for one year from the car, is just stupid. Wouldn't the trees continue take in more carbon as they grew larger.

And the whole idea of going after a company that is attempting to be environmentally free, is counter-productive. So they would rather Saab plant zero trees than 17...its stupid.

[tgagneguam]

I see that useless bureaucratic endeavor is alive and well around the globe; it's not simply the domain of the US government.

[Tequilujan]

All I can say is that I'm surprised this isn't happening here in the States.

[skylark68]

I love government at work.

[RedVee8]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

I see that useless bureaucratic endeavor is alive and well around the globe; it's not simply the domain of the US government.

We've learnt well.

Utter crap - typically bureaucracy.

[F14CRAZY]

The judge that lets this through, if there is one, deserves to be slapped, fired, and shunned

[bone]

I always thought Australian politicians and bureacrats were quite sensible. How wrong I was.

[nota]

Originally Posted by Quickening

And the whole idea of going after a company that is attempting to be environmentally free, is counter-productive.

Careful, a claim like that might get the legislators after you

For a heavy industry manufacturer like SAAB to claim it is "attempting to be environmentally free" rates about as insincere and meaningless as that old and purposively vague product-claim of 'helps fight colesterol'

[poncho1982]

Whats cracking me up is that SAAB is "a division of General Motors Holden"

I wonder when Holden became so important to get it's name put in the corporate logo?

[Randiglio]

It's this kind of sToOpeEDiTee that makes me sorry I'm part of the human race. You evil car companies better do something about helping the environment, but don't you dare use hyperbole in advertising. As a species are we so F'ING stupid we need this pointed out? Advertising might exaggerate a claim to make a point? Stunning. Global warming isn't the danger to humanity, ignorance gone to seed is.

[Zulehan]

Originally Posted by Quickening

The idea that the trees only offset carbon for one year from the car, is just stupid. Wouldn't the trees continue take in more carbon as they grew larger.

Actually, the way the plan goes, the 17 trees will absorb, in their lifetime, the amount of carbon that your typical Saab will emit in its first year. Just to clarify.

I still agree it's ridiculous though. The watchdog group first told them to remove the ad, then went after them anyway after it was removed.

[RedVee8]

Originally Posted by poncho1982

Whats cracking me up is that SAAB is "a division of General Motors Holden"

I wonder when Holden became so important to get it's name put in the corporate logo?

Actually the quote is "Saab Australia is a division of General Motors Holden".

Which probably is correct. As Holden took over distribution of Saab in Australia a year or so back. Created a department to look after them as well I believe.
As far as getting the name in the corporate logo point, I assume you been the difference between GM and GMH. Holden has been General Motors Holden (sometimes with a hyphen) since the merger in around 1931. A few years excepted when the Toyota joint venture was in play.

In Australia, Holden IS GM, 100%. There is no division between the two concepts.

[poncho1982]

Originally Posted by RedVee8

Actually the quote is "Saab Australia is a division of General Motors Holden".

Which probably is correct. As Holden took over distribution of Saab in Australia a year or so back. Created a department to look after them as well I believe.
As far as getting the name in the corporate logo point, I assume you been the difference between GM and GMH. Holden has been General Motors Holden (sometimes with a hyphen) since the merger in around 1931. A few years excepted when the Toyota joint venture was in play.

In Australia, Holden IS GM, 100%. There is no division between the two concepts.

I was being sarcastic, but I didn't honestly know that GMH was Holdens official name. I always just thought of them as Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick, Caddy, etc. Another division, just not sold here. But, Pontiac used to have PMD (Pontiac Motor Division) on their hubcaps, years ago, so I guess it's kinda the same with GMH.