"New" GM sales up 20%

[akirby]

So why doesn't Ford offer any similar such vehicles elsewhere in the world so they can do the same thing? Oh wait. They do. Falcon anybody?

 

Australia is not Europe or Asia

 

Falcon is not built on a luxury car platform.

 

I believe this is a market Ford will go after but not until everything else is in order.

[RichardJensen]

Why can the other guys successfully do it with their luxury brands and Ford cannot?

BMW, and Mercedes sell over a million luxury cars per year. That's how they can do it successfully.

 

Cadillac, arguably, is not successful (they are abandoning Sigma and retrenching on shared platforms)

 

Acura, Jaguar and Volvo sell fewer cars per year in the US than Lincoln. Infiniti and Audi have outsold Lincoln by about a thousand vehicles, year to date (c. 250 vehicles per month)--I don't see how it makes sense for Ford to imitate companies that don't outsell or barely outsell Lincoln.

 

Which, when it comes down to cases, leaves us with the Lexus IS, a vehicle which is probably most comparable to a Lincoln variant of the Ford Falcon, as it is based on a limited volume JDM product.

 

That's the -one- vehicle sold by a more successful luxury marque that Ford could reasonably imitate.

 

If you think that building a car equivalent to the Lexus IS will dramatically alters the brand's perception, well, you're free to do so. I don't agree. If you think Ford should invest in its luxury cars to the same extent that BMW and Mercedes do, I don't think that's feasible.

Edited May 5, 2010 by RichardJensen

[NickF1011]

BMW, and Mercedes sell over a million luxury cars per year. That's how they can do it successfully.

 

Cadillac, arguably, is not successful (they are abandoning Sigma and retrenching on shared platforms)

 

Acura, Jaguar and Volvo sell fewer cars per year in the US than Lincoln. Infiniti and Audi have outsold Lincoln by about a thousand vehicles, year to date (c. 250 vehicles per month)--I don't see how it makes sense for Ford to imitate companies that don't outsell or barely outsell Lincoln.

 

Which, when it comes down to cases, leaves us with the Lexus IS, a vehicle which is probably most comparable to a Lincoln variant of the Ford Falcon, as it is based on a limited volume JDM product.

 

That's the -one- vehicle sold by a more successful luxury marque that Ford could reasonably imitate.

 

If you think that building a car equivalent to the Lexus IS will dramatically alters the brand's perception, well, you're free to do so. I don't agree. If you think Ford should invest in its luxury cars to the same extent that BMW and Mercedes do, I don't think that's feasible.

 

You forgot about the Lexus GS, LS, SC and Infiniti G and M. Why is Nissan, a company markedly smaller than Ford, able to offer vehicles like the G and M sedans in their luxury lineups?

 

And you can argue whether or not Cadillac is successful or not. I believe they are. The CTS and SRX are still outselling anything Lincoln has offered in the past decade. The Escalade is still the choice for fullsize luxury SUV's since Lincoln seems to have given up on the Navigator. That really only leaves the DTS/STS, which are being replaced shortly by the XTS, which by my estimation will be quite the sales success also.

 

Could Cadillac have been just as successful without spending as much money? Probably. And that's what Lincoln should try to do. But by offering a staid (read: boring) lineup of drab looking vehicles with ho-hum performance Lincoln isn't going to bring enough new customers through the doors. On this path, they will be the next Mercury. And for all intents and purposes, it's looking more and more every day like Mercury is dead (where's the Tracer??).

[PREMiERdrum]

You forgot about the Lexus GS, LS, SC and Infiniti G and M. Why is Nissan, a company markedly smaller than Ford, able to offer vehicles like the G and M sedans in their luxury lineups?

 

And you can argue whether or not Cadillac is successful or not. I believe they are. The CTS and SRX are still outselling anything Lincoln has offered in the past decade. The Escalade is still the choice for fullsize luxury SUV's since Lincoln seems to have given up on the Navigator. That really only leaves the DTS/STS, which are being replaced shortly by the XTS, which by my estimation will be quite the sales success also.

 

Could Cadillac have been just as successful without spending as much money? Probably. And that's what Lincoln should try to do. But by offering a staid (read: boring) lineup of drab looking vehicles with ho-hum performance Lincoln isn't going to bring enough new customers through the doors. On this path, they will be the next Mercury. And for all intents and purposes, it's looking more and more every day like Mercury is dead (where's the Tracer??).

Again in April, Mercury was the higher volume brand in the Lincoln-Mercury showroom. They've publicly committed to the "Tracer" (name not officially announced), and Wescoent says that there is a new Mariner in the works alongside the next Escape. If the new Merc C-segment doesn't ever come to market, I'll buy you a beer. :beerchug:

[NickF1011]

Again in April, Mercury was the higher volume brand in the Lincoln-Mercury showroom. They've publicly committed to the "Tracer" (name not officially announced), and Wescoent says that there is a new Mariner in the works alongside the next Escape. If the new Merc C-segment doesn't ever come to market, I'll buy you a beer. :beerchug:

 

Hey, I hope it does come around. I'm just not holding my breath, as I would have suffocated months ago.

 

I just see it being a soft launch and nobody will even know the new Tracer exists. All of the attention has been put on the Fiesta and Focus.

Edited May 5, 2010 by NickF1011

[akirby]

Why is Nissan, a company markedly smaller than Ford, able to offer vehicles like the G and M sedans in their luxury lineups?

 

Simple - they never stopped developing modern car platforms. That's where Ford screwed up big time the last decade. Ford WANTS to make vehicles like the G and M sedans, but they simply don't have an existing platform to do it with and they can't afford to go build one from scratch right now. GRWD was going to fix some of that - but again they didn't have the resources to devote to it with more pressing needs in the core business.

[NickF1011]

Simple - they never stopped developing modern car platforms. That's where Ford screwed up big time the last decade. Ford WANTS to make vehicles like the G and M sedans, but they simply don't have an existing platform to do it with and they can't afford to go build one from scratch right now. GRWD was going to fix some of that - but again they didn't have the resources to devote to it with more pressing needs in the core business.

 

Well, most of those pressing issues are now resolved. Time for GRWD.

[akirby]

Well, most of those pressing issues are now resolved. Time for GRWD.

 

Almost. Still have to get Focus and Explorer out the door and start on the next gen Fusion and Edge plus the smaller Ecoboost engines. But they should be real close - and that nice 1Q profit sure doesn't hurt either.

[Deanh]

Well, most of those pressing issues are now resolved. Time for GRWD.

and that is something else I beleive will be adressed when markets stabilize and profitability returns to sponsor said platform....AND I beleive it enough for a friendly wager....course i have no idea on timeframes....

[NickF1011]

and that is something else I beleive will be adressed when markets stabilize and profitability returns to sponsor said platform....AND I beleive it enough for a friendly wager....course i have no idea on timeframes....

 

I hope by then too that Lincoln has abandoned this disasterous "Mmmkay?" naming convention.

[Deanh]

I hope by then too that Lincoln has abandoned this disasterous "Mmmkay?" naming convention.

HUGE +1 there....time for some CATCHY names, screw the current Capitol letter cop outs....

[RichardJensen]

You forgot about the Lexus GS, LS, SC

No, I didn't.

 

The GS sold all of 514 copies last month, the SC 32, and the LS outsold the MKS by 12 units.

 

I'm not going to discuss them because they either titanically irrelevant (SC) or hardly successful (the MKS does not come off too shabby if compared against the GS--or the LS).

and Infiniti G and M.

I did mention them, dismissively. There have been about a thousand more Infinitis sold this year than Lincolns. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of Nissan's strategy as opposed to Ford's.

I believe they are.

Cadillac? Considering the billions that they dumped into Sigma--a platform that is being phased out--did not generate marked gains in either market share or consideration among the segment they targeted--considering that they're on their third marketing director since they launched that Led Zeppelin ad campaign--considering the overall state of GM--considering that Cadillac is also on its third ad agency since the Led Zep campaign, I'm going to go with the circumstantial evidence and say that the Caddy bet hasn't paid off.

Edited May 5, 2010 by RichardJensen

[NickF1011]

No, I didn't.

 

The GS sold all of 514 copies last month, the SC 32, and the LS outsold the MKS by 12 units.

 

I'm not going to discuss them because they either titanically irrelevant (SC) or hardly successful (the MKS does not come off too shabby if compared against the GS--or the LS).

 

The SC I will give you. The GS is older than sin and due for a replacement. The LS is heads and tales above the MKS in every regard. The fact that it outsells the significantly cheaper MKS says enough.

 

Cadillac? Considering the billions that they dumped into Sigma--a platform that is being phased out--did not generate marked gains in either market share or consideration among the segment they targeted--considering that they're on their third marketing director since they launched that Led Zeppelin ad campaign--considering the overall state of GM--considering that Cadillac is also on its third ad agency since the Led Zep campaign, I'm going to go with the circumstantial evidence and say that the Caddy bet hasn't paid off.

 

They used their investment poorly when it came to Sigma. Had Sigma and Zeta been a merged program from the start (as I assume something similar would be at Ford) then the investment would have been far better. And what segment were they "targeting" with Sigma? What I see is Cadillac getting 3000-4000 CTS sales per month that used to be going to other automakers. They certainly aren't former DTS and Catera owners. As for the advertising, what does that have to do with product?

Edited May 5, 2010 by NickF1011

[RichardJensen]

The SC I will give you. The GS is older than sin and due for a replacement. The LS is heads and tales above the MKS in every regard. The fact that it outsells the significantly cheaper MKS says enough.

Wait. You take me to task for overlooking the GS, and then -you- disparage it?

 

I think I should get a few points for that :D

 

The LS represents .5% of Lexus volume for CY 2010; the GS only .3%.

 

By comparison, the MKS accounts for 17% of all Lincoln sales. In terms of percentages, Lincoln derives a far greater portion of its revenue from true luxury sedans than Lexus.

 

And when you're comparing 29,687 sales to 67,882, it's a mistake not to play the percentages.

 

what segment were they "targeting" with Sigma?

30-somethings, yuppies. Didn't work. That's why they brought Liz Vanzura onboard from Hummer & Saturn a few years back, and switched agencies to the one that did the "Happy Jack" commercial for Hummer.

As for the advertising, what does that have to do with product?

It's an old adage in business that 'when the product fails blame the advertising.' GM has practiced that for years.

 

Cadillac's products have not performed to their ROI assumptions, which, in the end, is all that matters.

Edited May 5, 2010 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

What I see is Cadillac getting 3000-4000 CTS sales per month that used to be going to other automakers.

And I might ask here, separately, at what cost?

 

Customer acquisition costs: In my business it's the sales cycle. How much do you charge to setup a website in order to recoup the costs of obtaining the customer--the hours of meetings, the cold calls, the time invested in clients that don't pan out? If I don't charge enough, I'll starve, regardless of how many websites I build.

 

It's similar in the car industry. If you spend too much acquiring customers, your business model fails.

 

GM spent too much to obtain those sales.

Edited May 5, 2010 by RichardJensen

[NickF1011]

Wait. You take me to task for overlooking the GS, and then -you- disparage it?

 

I think I should get a few points for that :D

 

I disparage it for needing to be updated. Not for existing.

 

The LS represents .5% of Lexus volume for CY 2010; the GS only .3%.

 

By comparison, the MKS accounts for 17% of all Lincoln sales. In terms of percentages, Lincoln derives a far greater portion of its revenue from true luxury sedans than Lexus.

 

And when you're comparing 29,687 sales to 67,882, it's a mistake not to play the percentages.

 

And Mustang sales make up what percentage of Ford sales? Ford should just ignore it obviously. It's not what the sales themselves do. It's what the vehicles do for the entire brand's image. Ford isn't Ford without the Mustang, just as Lexus isn't Lexus without the LS flagship. Lincoln wouldn't be Lincoln without the...hmmm. Nothing is coming to mind. They have no identity.

 

30-somethings, yuppies. Didn't work.

 

Hmmm. I guess I would consider myself Cadillac's target audience then. Guess what? I find the CTS quite desirable. I have a neighbor a few years older than me. He owns a CTS. It connects with the 30-something crowd a heck of a lot more than anything Lincoln has produced...well...ever.

 

 

And I might ask here, separately, at what cost?

 

GM spent too much to obtain those sales.

 

Which is something Ford would need to (and likely could) do better than Cadillac. It was a marketing issue with Cadillac, not a product one. I consider Lincoln's problem to be pretty much the reverse. The marketing is present and ready to turn Lincoln into something special again, but the product isn't there to make it happen.

[akirby]

Which is something Ford would need to (and likely could) do better than Cadillac. It was a marketing issue with Cadillac, not a product one. I consider Lincoln's problem to be pretty much the reverse. The marketing is present and ready to turn Lincoln into something special again, but the product isn't there to make it happen.

 

You must have forgotten the first gen CTS (only slightly better than the Catera and light years behind the current model) and SRX.

 

And how do you know the 4000 CTS sales are conquests? I bet most are still loyal cadillac or at least other GM buyers. I give them props for the current CTS and SRX but I think the upcoming MKX will match or exceed the SRX and Lincoln has 2 decent cars to take on the CTS (MKZ and MKS).

 

Other than having a RWD platform, what does Cadillac have that Lincoln doesn't? And how much did it cost to get just slightly ahead of Lincoln?

[RichardJensen]

Mustang sales make up what percentage of Ford sales? Ford should just ignore it obviously.

About 4%. In a down year.

 

Proportionally eight times more volume than the Lexus LS to all Lexus sales.

I find the CTS quite desirable. I have a neighbor a few years older than me. He owns a CTS. It connects with the 30-something crowd a heck of a lot more than anything Lincoln has produced...well...ever.

But not well enough.

 

There was an Ad Week article that explained this quite clearly when Liz Vanzura was brought on board. It's now available only to subscribers, but I covered the article in my blog. I'm well aware that GM viewed Cadillac's inroads with our age group as a failure. They would know.

It was a marketing issue with Cadillac, not a product one.

Marketing IS product.

 

Market research tells you whether your product will work, and at what cost. Cadillac botched the market research, and therefore botched the product.

 

The product is good, in a vacuum. It is not, in the real world, good. Not when measured against its costs or its targets.

Edited May 5, 2010 by RichardJensen

[Deanh]

About 4%. In a down year.

 

Proportionally eight times more volume than the Lexus LS to all Lexus sales.

 

But not well enough.

 

There was an Ad Week article that explained this quite clearly when Liz Vanzura was brought on board. It's now available only to subscribers, but I covered the article in my blog. I'm well aware that GM viewed Cadillac's inroads with our age group as a failure. They would know.

 

Marketing IS product.

 

Market research tells you whether your product will work, and at what cost. Cadillac botched the market research, and therefore botched the product.

 

The product is good, in a vacuum. It is not, in the real world, good. Not when measured against its costs or its targets.

but hey, they have the CTS-V wagon that will solve EVERYTHING when it arrives....ahem.

[jpd80]

 

Market research tells you whether your product will work, and at what cost. Cadillac botched the market research, and therefore botched the product.

 

The product is good, in a vacuum. It is not, in the real world, good. Not when measured against its costs or its targets.

 

CTS always looked like a premeditated product to me, a car guy chose to do it and convinced marketing people it was a good idea.

 

It's not the FWD vs RWD thing - I think it's even more basic than that, GM just assumes that they know what Cadillac buyers want and that's very dangerous - no, stupid in today's market place.

[BrewfanGRB]

I'm the 30-something Cadillac probably coverts. I'm not exactly high-income, but given my life situation, I can commit a fairly high percentage of my net pay to a car. I like the current-gen CTS. If I weren't a committed Ford guy, I'd be in the market for one as my next car. (I've said this before).

 

Nick is sort of on-point with his assessment of Lincoln's problems. A Fusion is bigger competitor to the MKZ than the 3-series or the CTS is. You can get a Fusion Sport pretty comparably equipped for10k (ish) less than the Z. Are cooled seats, HIDs and a bigger sound system worth 10k? Ehhh. Lincoln really needs to kick it up a notch and hold the line on pricing to pull away from the Ford versions. Is that doable? I can't see how without sacrificing profit. That's where Richard is spot-on. Lincoln is probably never going to do Benz or BMW type volume anyway, so why not take the profit Ford gets from Lincoln already for little to no additional cost?

 

You have to ask are potential Lincoln buyers not buying Lincoln because they don't offer a car that's BMW-ish enough? Meaning, there's people out there that would have bought a Lincoln if there was a true 3-series competitor? I am of the opinion there are not. People buy the 3-series BECAUSE it's the 3-series. People buy a Benz BECAUSE it's a Benz. I don't care what if you make the best BMW-beater ever, you aren't going to conquest a lot of sales, because people want the Bimmer. Lincoln needs to make people WANT a Lincoln. I reject the notion to need to make BMW/Infiniti/Lexus type vehicles to do that.

Edited May 6, 2010 by BrewfanGRB

[RichardJensen]

Ford's original positioning statement for Lincoln was that it was to be, at all levels, an 'achievement' car, that the typical Lincoln buyer will only buy domestic, that he/she has already bought and paid for 4-5 new cars--though I'll be danged if I can find a reference for that now.

 

As such, Lincoln definitely needs more differentiation than the MKZ/Fusion, but when you consider that there are things in Ford products that you can't get in BMWs (parking assist, MyFord Touch), it's not just a question of differentiation in substance, it's a question of differentiation in less tangible measures such as style, image, etc.

[NickF1011]

You must have forgotten the first gen CTS (only slightly better than the Catera and light years behind the current model) and SRX.

 

And how do you know the 4000 CTS sales are conquests? I bet most are still loyal cadillac or at least other GM buyers. I give them props for the current CTS and SRX but I think the upcoming MKX will match or exceed the SRX and Lincoln has 2 decent cars to take on the CTS (MKZ and MKS).

 

Other than having a RWD platform, what does Cadillac have that Lincoln doesn't? And how much did it cost to get just slightly ahead of Lincoln?

 

Most "loyal" Cadillac buyers are dead. :lol: GM buyers perhaps. But there's nothing wrong with that. Without Cadillac, those GM buyers would be leaving the company to get a luxury car.

[akirby]

Most "loyal" Cadillac buyers are dead. :lol: GM buyers perhaps. But there's nothing wrong with that. Without Cadillac, those GM buyers would be leaving the company to get a luxury car.

 

I agree but that's a LOT of money to spend just to keep your current buyers. Cadillac had to be expecting a lot of conquests.

 

BTW - how did the XLR work out?

[NickF1011]

BTW - how did the XLR work out?

 

 

XLR probably would have done better if it wasn't launched and abandoned and if it used the same powertrains as the Corvette instead of the woefully outdated Northstar. Curious decision, as it most definitely would have been cheaper to use the Corvette mills.

Edited May 6, 2010 by NickF1011