atomcat68 Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Go where my parents live and they're as common as Ford, Chevy and Toyota. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Go where my parents live and they're as common as Ford, Chevy and Toyota. Yup, same here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 In the North Atlanta suburbs we have Porsches, Ferraris, Maseratis and Aston Martins, but I can only remember seeing one Bentley/Rolls/Bugatti in the last few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Guy who owns a Continental GT near me has always washed it himself at the cheapie DIY place in town. I saw one going through the Burger King drive through years ago where I used to live. I think the local landscaper was leasing it as a "business expense". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I finally saw an ELR on the road yesterday FWIW. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 The last time I saw one, if memory serves, it was on the way to one of the Corvette rallies that they have here in the summer--might have been the big one out in the Hills. At any rate, I remember thinking, 'well, that's got to be awkward for everyone involved.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 That's GM for you, cover a mistake with an even bigger one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 I finally saw an ELR on the road yesterday FWIW. The last time I saw one, if memory serves, it was on the way to one of the Corvette rallies that they have here in the summer--might have been the big one out in the Hills. At any rate, I remember thinking, 'well, that's got to be awkward for everyone involved.' Richard, did you mean XLR? (Vette) I saw both an ELR and an XLR over the weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Oh, yeah. I thought he said XLR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 For all the billions spent, luxury buyers still treat Cadillac little better than Lincoln... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 For all the billions spent, luxury buyers still treat Cadillac little better than Lincoln... Luxury buyers who aren't employed by limousine and livery companies ignore Lincoln altogether, so the "little better" treatment Cadillac receives from the luxury automobile customer segment is actually significant despite Cadillac's recent state of flux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Luxury buyers who aren't employed by limousine and livery companies ignore Lincoln altogether, so the "little better" treatment Cadillac receives from the luxury automobile customer segment is actually significant despite Cadillac's recent state of flux. Is it, though? If the idea behind a luxury brand is to have a higher net, then what is the value of a luxury brand on which you have to spend copious amounts of money? Cadillac these days, and Jaguar/Land Rover ever since they were bought out remind me of nothing so much as Santayana's definition of a fanatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) Luxury buyers who aren't employed by limousine and livery companies ignore Lincoln altogether, so the "little better" treatment Cadillac receives from the luxury automobile customer segment is actually significant despite Cadillac's recent state of flux. Please, you're desperately sifting through the ashes of over priced Alphas to find anything to salvage. Cadillac has blown billions on ATS and CTS believing that many more sales would occur than actually did. Cadillac could not convert a tidal wave of awards and good will from the press, anything like expected sales, last year's colossal build up in inventory underscored GM's predicament as buyers voted with their wallets. Lincoln may sell a good portion of its vehicles to Liveries but that is worlds different to daily rentals It's the billions you don't spend up front on luxury cars that makes the difference..... Edited March 25, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 Please, you're desperately sifting through the ashes of over priced Alphas to find anything to salvage. Cadillac has blown billions on ATS and CTS believing that many more sales would occur than actually did. Cadillac could not convert a tidal wave of awards and good will from the press, anything like expected sales, last year's colossal build up in inventory underscored GM's predicament as buyers voted with their wallets. Lincoln may sell a good portion of its vehicles to Liveries but that is worlds different to daily rentals It's the billions you don't spend up front on luxury cars that makes the difference..... The platform is shared with other divisions. If spending billions on a multi-division platform is a problem just shut down Lincoln now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 They weren't developed as multi-division shared platforms - that came later. Camaro is 2 years behind ATS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 They weren't developed as multi-division shared platforms - that came later. Camaro is 2 years behind ATS. And ATS was delayed nearly 2 years itself... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 And ATS was delayed nearly 2 years itself... Wasn't it originally planned to be a Pontiac? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Wasn't it originally planned to be a Pontiac? It's a bit fuzzy, but yes, the initial Alpha program was 2 different versions under the same umbrella: A "lower" version that was to underpin a sedan, coupe, and possibly utility for Pontiac, and a "premium" version that would spawn a Cadillac sedan, coupe, convertible, and wagon. Pontiac gets the axe, so the "cheaper" version of Alpha dies. Convertible and Wagon versions of the now "premium" only platform were put on hold before being scrapped, and the coupe was delayed. It was another little while, once Alpha's development cost started ballooning and it's anticipated volume started shrinking, before Camaro was shoehorned into the program. Even later, the utility variant once slotted for Pontiac was dusted off and put back into development, this time for Cadillac. There were several other blue sky concepts along the way, including sedans for Buick and Chevrolet, but those were nonstarters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 It's a bit fuzzy, but yes, the initial Alpha program was 2 different versions under the same umbrella: A "lower" version that was to underpin a sedan, coupe, and possibly utility for Pontiac, and a "premium" version that would spawn a Cadillac sedan, coupe, convertible, and wagon. Pontiac gets the axe, so the "cheaper" version of Alpha dies. Convertible and Wagon versions of the now "premium" only platform were put on hold before being scrapped, and the coupe was delayed. It was another little while, once Alpha's development cost started ballooning and it's anticipated volume started shrinking, before Camaro was shoehorned into the program. Even later, the utility variant once slotted for Pontiac was dusted off and put back into development, this time for Cadillac. There were several other blue sky concepts along the way, including sedans for Buick and Chevrolet, but those were nonstarters. Thank you for the information. What amazes me is that Cadillac wasn't slated to receive the utility variant from day one. Strong sales of luxury crossovers and SUVs aren't a recent phenomenon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Thank you for the information. What amazes me is that Cadillac wasn't slated to receive the utility variant from day one. Strong sales of luxury crossovers and SUVs aren't a recent phenomenon. At the time, the Cadillac Lambda had just been killed (for the first time... it was briefly placed back in development and killed again) because of a strong sentiment within the division that Cadillac needed to stay strictly focused on "drivers cars" ... of course, all the while conveniently ignoring the Escalade (which keeps the lights on for the whole damn division) and the XTS (a stopgap that was forced on them against their will). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 GM needs some serious focus on platform development...seems like they are applying the same ideas they had when they 5-6 different nameplates. There is zero need for a Premium/Low cost verison of the same platform....The Japanese/Europeans have been doing it for years and Ford is finally getting to that point with its line up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) The original Alpha was begun under Holden and intended as a Pontiac G6, it had a fair bit of kappa platform, mostly suspension which was changed when GM NA took over the project after 2007. I smile when reference is made to Pontiac as some of us remember what was actually on offer GMNA did not take up the Alpha project until after Pontiac was killed. what you has sitting there was Holden's Alpha plan for a Torana to be shared with Pontiac G6 that shelved when GM went BK. The platform is shared with other divisions. If spending billions on a multi-division platform is a problem just shut down Lincoln now. Camaro is an Alpha in name only, it was begun as a brownfield project to justify dumping Zeta but when you look at how many parts were changed compared to ATS and CTS, nothing apart from power train, electricals and basic suspension design and even that's heavily modified. The same thing happened with Zeta, so much was changed, it was a Zeta in name only. This is why I laugh when comparisons are drawn with Ford platform sharing, highly amortized Ford platforms are used to keep development costs down with Lincoln derivatives - relatively low cost with good ROI across more modest sales. Alpha begian as a bespoke Cadillac platform that gradually blows out budgets and when this becomes apparent, more products are drawn into the mix but the cost of true differentiation is then so high because of so many unique parts across multiple vehicles. Bottom line, these vehicles need high ATPs to get good ROI. Not saying that's a bad thing, just an awful constraint when Cadillac was expecting a lot more sales. Edited March 25, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The original Alpha was begun under Holden and intended as a Pontiac G6, it had a fair bit of kappa platform, mostly suspension which was changed when GM NA took over the project after 2007. I smile when reference is made to Pontiac as some of us remember what was actually on offer GMNA did not take up the Alpha project until after Pontiac was killed. what you has sitting there was Holden's Alpha plan for a Torana to be shared with Pontiac G6 that shelved when GM went BK. Camaro is an Alpha in name only, it was begun as a brownfield project to justify dumping Zeta but when you look at how many parts were changed compared to ATS and CTS, nothing apart from power train, electricals and basic suspension design and even that's heavily modified. The same thing happened with Zeta, so much was changed, it was a Zeta in name only. This is why I laugh when comparisons are drawn with Ford platform sharing, highly amortized Ford platforms are used to keep development costs down with Lincoln derivatives - relatively low cost with good ROI across more modest sales. Alpha begian as a bespoke Cadillac platform that gradually blows out budgets and when this becomes apparent, more products are drawn into the mix but the cost of true differentiation is then so high because of so many unique parts across multiple vehicles. Bottom line, these vehicles need high ATPs to get good ROI. Not saying that's a bad thing, just an awful constraint when Cadillac was expecting a lot more sales. I know at one point the Holden program and Cadillac program overlapped and were considered under the same umbrella, referred to interlally as 2 variations of the same program. As we can expect from GM, the 2 shared very little. At least, that's what the sources say on this side of the ocean. The guys down under likely have a different take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 At the time, the Cadillac Lambda had just been killed (for the first time... it was briefly placed back in development and killed again) because of a strong sentiment within the division that Cadillac needed to stay strictly focused on "drivers cars" ... of course, all the while conveniently ignoring the Escalade (which keeps the lights on for the whole damn division) and the XTS (a stopgap that was forced on them against their will). Wait, the Caddy Lambda isn't happening? Didn't they just say they were going to make another couple crossovers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 (edited) I know at one point the Holden program and Cadillac program overlapped and were considered under the same umbrella, referred to interlally as 2 variations of the same program. As we can expect from GM, the 2 shared very little. At least, that's what the sources say on this side of the ocean. The guys down under likely have a different take. That's right there were two Alpha plans, the first by Holden used a lot of Kappa and was intended for them and Pontiac. That plan was offered to GMNA but I think the story goes it was purely a benchmark and the cost cutting use of kappa actually showed GM where all the changes needed to be done to make the platform truly suitable for premium products. That's when the cost effective Alpha went out the window and GM committed to the high series Cadillacs on Alpha. Edited March 26, 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.