bzcat Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) Least we forget... the best selling Cadillac (SRX) is also a FWD based product. What constitute a luxury car depends on who you ask of course... But this much is clear - it has to be an authentic product. Authentic product doesn't mean RWD... it means the car is not a cynical marketing exercise. It has to have the right combination of luxury, design, engineering, performance, dealership experience, lifestyle. It's somewhat intangible quality that I once describe as the same way the US Supreme Court once defined pornography: you can't really say what it is but you know it when you see it... Mercedes kind of invented it. BMW took a while to learn this but has it down pat. Lexus has it figured out for the most part. Audi aced it during its renaissance in the early 2000s. Cadillac is where Audi was 15 years ago. Lincoln had it in the 1960s but lost it over the years but Ford is going to figure it out again now that it doesn't have any English patient to revive. Edited January 15, 2015 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probowler Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) Is it just me or does it seem like every other day GM makes an announcement about pouring billions into Cadillac? And sheesh, I forgot about that terrible naming scheme.... I still don't see why the old system was that confusing How is that any worse than the MK......C.......X....... BS? Unless you're some kind of Lincoln Nerd nobody knows what an MKC is vs an MKS. At best you might find someone on the street who answers: "Yeah isn't that a Lincoln?" Though I really doubt an average person would even know that much... Lincoln should get back to car names that actually bring an image into people minds... Not a fuzzy, generic memory of grandpas old Continental. Edited January 16, 2015 by probowler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 How is that any worse than the MK......C.......X....... BS? Unless you're some kind of Lincoln Nerd nobody knows what an MKC is vs an MKS. At best you might find someone on the street who answers: "Yeah isn't that a Lincoln?" Though I really doubt an average person would even know that much... Lincoln should get back to car names that actually bring an image into people minds... Not a fuzzy, generic memory of grandpas old Continental. I never said Lincoln's naming scheme was the best either....I think we'll see a combination of traditional names and alphanumerics going forward - names for the top-end products (Navigator, Aviator, Continental), while lower products (MKZ, MKC, MKX) will retain alphanumerics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 At best you might find someone on the street who answers: "Yeah isn't that a Lincoln?" Though I really doubt an average person would even know that much... Lincoln should get back to car names that actually bring an image into people minds... Not a fuzzy, generic memory of grandpas old Continental. Names mean nothing...I've never heard anyone say I have a BMW 325, 525, etc...its always BMW. Escalade is known by just its name from Rap music/videos, not because its a Caddy. Audi is the same way....it has wacko 2 digit Alphanumeric designations. What it boils down to is branding the company name, not that product name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Names mean nothing...I've never heard anyone say I have a BMW 325, 525, etc...its always BMW. Escalade is known by just its name from Rap music/videos, not because its a Caddy. Audi is the same way....it has wacko 2 digit Alphanumeric designations. What it boils down to is branding the company name, not that product name. And having an identity, not trying to be your competition 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) That's like saying the Lacrosse and Impala reputation is bad because the Malibu sales are poor, can't have it both ways they have to make a mainstreamer version . i see the concept of exclusivity escapes you. But didn't Caddy cut prices?. It's always the Cadillac get the latest "toys" but that doesn't mean platform sharing is out plus some non-Cadillacs can price well into Cadillac territory (check the the usd price on a GMC Denali, Vette and others ..). Prices were not cut, mid level model options were re packaged to reduce the cost, base model prices were unaffected. The base 2.0T CTS still starts above $46K, that's well above a high series Regal or LaCrosse at $39K It's not like GM haven't done it before but again they did it while fiscally bleeding red. Really? As I recall, the government set GM up with reduced debt level, funding for its product cycles and a $12 billion escrow fund to pay down the rest of its debts that couldn't be wiped in BK. Edited January 16, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Prices were not cut, mid level model options were re packaged to reduce the cost, base model prices were unaffected. They bundled in one of the $2300 packages into the base cost at no extra charge but they also cut base prices $2K - $3K but maybe on certain models only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Least we forget... the best selling Cadillac (SRX) is also a FWD based product. What constitute a luxury car depends on who you ask of course... But this much is clear - it has to be an authentic product. Authentic product doesn't mean RWD... it means the car is not a cynical marketing exercise. It has to have the right combination of luxury, design, engineering, performance, dealership experience, lifestyle. It's somewhat intangible quality that I once describe as the same way the US Supreme Court once defined pornography: you can't really say what it is but you know it when you see it... Mercedes kind of invented it. BMW took a while to learn this but has it down pat. Lexus has it figured out for the most part. Audi aced it during its renaissance in the early 2000s. Cadillac is where Audi was 15 years ago. Lincoln had it in the 1960s but lost it over the years but Ford is going to figure it out again now that it doesn't have any English patient to revive. Nobody implying or saying Cadillac needs and all rwd lineup but just key models for potential customers that want to have. You can have the bread n butter models selling as well as your showcase models for people to look up to, Toyota figured that part out. Acura have a great dealer experience but still lackluster sales, dealer experience alone don't sale cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) OK, once the sigma based CTS-V goes away, what V8 RWD Cadillac car can you buy for under $64 K Hint: you can't in ATS or CTS.... A CTS without an accessible V8 like LT1 is pretty pointless wouldn't you say? That's a huge oversight by a company that prides itself on performance sedans. Edited January 16, 2015 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 i see the concept of exclusivity escapes you. How?.Many fwd mainstreams sell luxury counterparts all the time Prices were not cut, mid level model options were re packaged to reduce the cost, base model prices were unaffected. The base 2.0T CTS still starts above $46K, that's well above a high series Regal or LaCrosse at $39K Ok, but many people won't still buy a Buick and won't buy a Cadillac over each other because of this. Really? As I recall, the government set GM up with reduced debt level, funding for its product cycles and a $12 billion escrow fund to pay down the rest of its debts that couldn't be wiped in BK. The $12b is coming out of GMs pocket. As I said I think this plan is risky but imo most likely GM will spin off other non-Caddy models with this plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Ok, but many people won't still buy a Buick and won't buy a Cadillac over each other because of this. They will if the Buick has a V8 and there's none available in CTS unless you buy the CTS-V Can you imagine the effect a couple of well designed V8 RWD luxury Buicks would do to Cadillac's sales. Dealers are already telling GM buyers are complaining about price hikes between $9K and $15 k on new CTS. The average incentives last year oon CTS to keep sales was $9,000.... Edited January 17, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 They will if the Buick has a V8 and there's none available in CTS unless you buy the CTS-V Can you imagine the effect a couple of well designed V8 RWD luxury Buicks would do to Cadillac's sales. Dealers are already telling GM buyers are complaining about price hikes between $9K and $15 k on new CTS. The average incentives last year oon CTS to keep sales was $9,000.... People still buy an Escalade over a Denali despite having the same engine and some features. The CTS is a midsize v6 not a fullsize v8 presumably as the Buick concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) People still buy an Escalade over a Denali despite having the same engine and some features. The CTS is a midsize v6 not a fullsize v8 presumably as the Buick concept. The difference is that there's no resistance to buying the Escalade or the Denali, buyers are choking on the prices GM is asking for ATS and CTS. Adding more affordability/perceived added value from below with Buick will arguably underscore the issue with Cadillac's current premium pricing. A full sized RWD Buick in the line up under Cadillac is less threatening but does nothing for the Alpha's scales of economy. GM must chose either scales of economy through mufti-channeling and risk internal competition from below or suffer the consequences of not doing that and wear the cost of Alpha's exclusivity and higher prices. So what is it to be? I know GM will be using Alpha for Camaro, the question will be whether Camaro pricing twill increase as well. It will be interesting to see how GM aligns prices of its next Alpha product Vs Zeta Camaro and 2015 Mustang. Bottom line, the more you increase price, the fewer you buyers become - the trick is balancing sales, ATP and profit. I don't have issue with Cadillac asking premium pricing, the concern is with significant amount of buyers refusing to pay. Edited January 17, 2015 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 The difference is that there's no resistance to buying the Escalade or the Denali, buyers are choking on the prices GM is asking for ATS and CTS. That's an excellent point---there's tremendous buyer resistance to a midsize Cadillac at those prices. Imagine that I'm leaning toward the dominant entry in the midsize/midprice luxury segment--the Mercedes E-Class. Sell me on the CTS. Why should I buy the CTS instead of the Benz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Sell me on the CTS. Why should I buy the CTS instead of the Benz? Are you buying or leasing, specifically? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-S Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 That's an excellent point---there's tremendous buyer resistance to a midsize Cadillac at those prices. Imagine that I'm leaning toward the dominant entry in the midsize/midprice luxury segment--the Mercedes E-Class. Sell me on the CTS. Why should I buy the CTS instead of the Benz? You should be buying a 5 Series BMW................forget those other two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) The word GM is getting back from it's dealers and CTS buyers is that the cars seem to be between $9,000 and $15,000 too expensive. The only way GM can bury that criticism is through leasing that's attractive to buyers and subvene the problem for several years until the market begins to accept Cadillac's higher pricing. I see this going a similar way as the Volt, a vehicle with great expectation that still doesn't sell worth a damn unless it had huge incentives and low cost leasing. GM's buyers arguably know GM better than GM knows itself, they wait until inventory piles up and GM folds on pricing. Edited January 17, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.