It's always good to be first with a new idea right?
Well sometimes things can be a dual edged sword and sometimes pioneers get the arrows.
For example, let's look at the case of the self park feature for the new Lexus LS.
The first time we heard it would have a self parking feature, it sounded amazing.
NOBODY, has ever done that before on a luxury car and it seemed like a natural feature for the person who wanted 'luxury'.
Or probably so it seemed when the product managers made the decision to green light the feature in the planning stages.
But when it was finally shown, A LOT of people were 'WOWed' but a whole other set of people were insulted.
"I know how to park my own car, I'm not 90!"
"How does it do that? Amazing!"
Those were the two prevailing camps statements.
Story headlines like this then surfaced:
"Gadgets: Even CNBC's Old Man LeBeau Can Self-Park The Lexus"
Then Audi, makes a commercial that pokes fun at the feature implying if you drive a Lexus, you can't drive.
And for the first time ever for Lexus, they succumbed to the natural fighting instinct we all have inside and made a response commercial showing a Lexus can be driven like a wreckless sportscar, you just shouldn't.
So in the end their intentions were good.
They wanted to show that they not only build the best quality cars in the world, they also want the world to know that they intend on being the leaders technologically as well.
But the question is- Did this feature backfire for them and stigmatize the LS as a car for old fogies’?
Will it futher alienate the chasm between a person who likes BMW's let's say and hinder the chances of Lexus conquesting them over to their side?
Can a company show technological leadership with something and end up shooting themselves in the foot at the same time?
Or did they get SO much PR, even though the feature has not caught on, it was worth the buzz?
Let us hear your comments on the subject.