美国车市的红蓝之争

    等到一月份的销量数据下周出炉后，底特律的三大汽车厂商就可以开始盘算该给2013销售季颁发多少年终奖了。2013年1月，美国的经季节调整后按年率计算的汽车销量预计将超过1,500万台——这个数字历来是区分好坏的分水岭。通用（General Motors）、福特（Ford）和克莱斯勒（Chrysler）在各自保住市场份额的同时，总体销量也都有望实现大的飞跃。

    但是在这些脆弱的好消息之下，也掩盖着一个令人担忧的事实。美国三大汽车品牌如今面临着日益区域化的风险，它们的品牌吸引力在某些州比较强，在其它州则比较弱。更重要的是，人口统计趋势和人口增长数据显示，随着时间的推移，品牌区域化的倾向会越来越严重。这些品牌可能会扎根于各自的核心市场，在其它地区却很难获得突破性的进展。

    这是一种危险的现象，因为它限制了美国厂商保持现有市场份额的能力——更不用说在现有市场占有率的基础上有所突破了。同时，它也为进口品牌提供了更多的机会。虽说通用、福特和克莱斯勒赚的钱大部分都留在了美国，但进口品牌也在为美国创造工作岗位，只是他们的企业利润都流向了海外。

    通过汽车网站Edmunds.com近日提供给我的分析数据可以看出，如果把汽车的销量情况按州划分，则底特律三巨头所生产的汽车可以称作“红州”车，红色也就是共和党的代表色。他们的拥护群体也是同一群人，支持美国本地车的粉丝很多集中在美国的中部地区，他们在最近的总统选举中基本都把选票投给了共和党。

    而进口车在“蓝州”——也就是民主党的地盘表现得更抢眼，那儿的居民大多把总统选票投给了民主党。

    从地缘分布来看，情况对美国国产车不利。“红州”一般更荒凉，人口更稀少，而且增长速度也不及美国其它地区。而“蓝州”一般更城市化，更有活力，而且涌向“蓝州”的新人口也更多。

    这可不是个好消息。如果品牌影响力被限制在“红州”，就会减缓汽车销量，使厂商难以吸引年轻买家。同时它也为产品开发人员带来了问题，因为他们设计的新车型必须能够征服新顾客，同时又不得罪老顾客。这也解释了为什么进口品牌在油电混合动力等新技术上一直走在前头，而美国本土品牌大部分时间都在追赶。

    早在十几年前，美国本土品牌就想打破笼罩在他们头上多年的“红州”魔咒了，比如隔三岔五就会有美国厂商力图在加利福尼亚州发力，希望打开市场，然而始终没有尝试成功。底特律一位资深内幕人士告诉我：“我们对此极为担心。”

    我们不妨看一下美国车占市场比重最大的十个州是哪些。据Edmunds.com的数据，它们的排名是：密歇根、北达科他、南达科他、爱荷华、怀俄明、蒙大拿、内布拉斯加、俄克拉荷马、阿肯色、印第安那。这十个州的共同特征是，它们的人口都比较稳定，而且越来越少，导致这些州经常被全国性媒体忽略，而且它们对广域社会趋势所产生的影响也相对较小。

    When January car sales are announced next week, Detroit automakers can start sizing up their year-end bonuses for 2013. The seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) for the month is forecast to exceed 15 million cars and trucks -- the traditional dividing line that separates good times from bad. General Motors(GM, Fortune 500), Ford (F, Fortune 500), and Chrysler are all expected to post big jumps in overall sales, as well as hold their own in market share.

    But underneath the gauzy good news lies an unpleasant fact. The brands of the Big Three are in danger of becoming regionalized, their appeal strong in some parts of the country and weak in others. What's more, demographic trends and population growth suggest they will grow only more regionalized over time, rooted in their core markets but unable to meaningfully expand beyond them over time.

    That's dangerous because it limits Detroit automakers' ability to hold on to their current levels of market share -- much less build on them -- as it creates more opportunities for import brands. And while every dollar made by GM, Ford, or Chrysler largely remains in the U.S., import brands provide jobs here too, but their corporate profits go overseas.

    State-by-state sales data, analyzed and provided to me by Edmunds.com, strongly indicates that cars made by the Detroit Three are largely red state cars, popular with the same people, many in the heartland, who voted Republican in the last presidential election.

    Imports, by contrast, perform far more strongly in the blue states, where the majority of votes were cast by the Democrats.

    This geographic division does not favor the domestics. Red states tend to be more rural, less populated, and slower-growing than the rest of the country. Blue states, on the other hand, are more urban, more dynamic, and benefit from a greater influx of new population.

    That's not good. Being confined to red states slows sales growth and makes it difficult to attract younger buyers. It also creates problems for product planners, because they have to come up with designs that can help conquest new customers without alienating older buyers. That helps explain why import brands have been leaders in new technologies like hybrid gas-electric powertrains, and new product segments like compact crossovers, while domestics have been largely fast-followers.

    The domestics have been trying to break out of their red state box for a decade or more, sporadically trying, for instance, to boost sales in California. Their inability to do so has become a subject of frustration. One well-placed Detroit insider told me, "We are terribly concerned about it."

    Take a look at the 10 states that have the highest proportion of domestic sales, according to Edmunds.com data. They are, in order: Michigan, North and South Dakota, Iowa, Wyoming, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Indiana. The common characteristics they share are stable or declining populations, being mostly ignored by the national media, and having relatively little impact on broader societal trends.