Radio Shack, which has a history of image problems has just added another to its list. Recently launching "The Shack"  at a time they needed to revive their 88-year-old business has resulted in one more failure for their brand image. A company spokesperson was recently quoted that "our friends call us the Shack." Uh — perhaps their management team should re-evaluate their friends because with friends like this who needs enemies. Radio Shack's problems go much deeper than what any $200 million marketing campaign can help drive traffic to their store or Web site. Many people including myself associate them as old fashion, very expensive and lacking any technical expertise on their retail floors.

There's a generation of people who as kids had a fascination with Radio Shack's transistor radio kits and remote control cars. They created a lot of fond memories for fathers and their sons/daughters. As a kid I can remember Radio Shack as the cool place where you could find the latest gadget, but somewhere along the way they lost their competitive edge. One could blame Walmart, Circuit City or Best Buy for their struggles but Radio Shack can really blame themselves for losing their marketshare. Today when I think of Radio Shack I associate them with Walkman's, phone cord extensions (at least 500 ft.) and over-sized cell phones used by Tubbs & Crockett on an episode of Miami Vice. To create a campaign calling themselves "The Shack" simply reinforces them as old and dowdy.

Radio Shack's focus should be with better product alignments, knowledgeable service, reasonable prices and mobile technology, which represents 33% of "The Shack's" sales. Once they rebuild these core opportunities is when they can re-examine their branding. These improvements would come with a great story to tell consumers.

 In the meantime, let's leave "The Shack (Shaq)" to one of the NBA's stars.

I got a shock (or lack of) when the 230 campaign was finally revealed as an introduction of GM's new product Volt. The Chevrolet electric car claims to achieve a city fuel mileage of 230 miles per gallon. I won't dig through the fuel economy methodology leaving that examination for the environmental and automotive Bloggers. What I have found interesting was the timing of the campaign launch, the price point and who they may be targeting.

Fritz Henderson, CEO of General Motors, announced that they are going after a new generation of buyers — people between 16 and 30. Really? I'm struggling with how someone within this demographic can afford a $40,000 vehicle — in a good or bad economy. While I stand on my feet and applaud the innovative effort it seems that Fritz is missing the opportunity here purely on price point.

And the big unveil was done in traditional BIG television fashion with a media blitz made for evening news. For a "Millenial" generation target GM made attempts to reach their audience with an initial "What is 230?" hype on Facebook (only 1,700 fans), Twitter and their own Web site. But at a time when people want transparency from the auto industry I have to challenge GM on their decision to take one from the "Marketing Playbook" and go viral with their cryptic introduction campaign. Many commented they didn't understand the happy faced plug was representing a zero. At this point I'm curious to hear what more GM is doing to create awareness among their target audience and how they will get financing for these cars.

 The timing of the launch was drowned out by the growing concerns of our healthcare debate, which President Obama's town hall meeting in New Hampshire took center stage — not the smiling electric plug. Timing is a component in viral strategies and at a time America's headlines are on healthcare you have to wonder if this launch could have waited a few more weeks. It will be interesting to see if the defibrillator paddles will have to be used to keep Volt's care sales alive.