Buick Cascada Dead After 2019

As excited as I was when this car came out, I was totally disappointed in it when I saw it at the Seattle Auto show and just not myself but average size people had a hard time fitting in it and the amount of questions all focused on why just a black interior and why just all hard plastic, why does it feel and look so cheap was pretty much a doom from the beginning.

This was a great idea, but poorly executed car that will always fail to live up to what was expected.

I sort of like this little rig.  May be a nice used car find in a couple years, if you have spare dough and want a 3rd vehicle for top down summer cruising.  

I can see Buick as an all crossover brand (at least in the US) come 2021 model year.  Without Opel to source cars why bother selling a fancy Malibu when sedans aren’t big sellers anyway.

37 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

I can see Buick as an all crossover brand (at least in the US) come 2021 model year.  Without Opel to source cars why bother selling a fancy Malibu when sedans aren’t big sellers anyway.

Without cars, Buick would  be completely redundant w/ GMC and pointless...

27 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Without cars, Buick would  be completely redundant w/ GMC and pointless...

Envision and Terrain are the same size but Encore is smaller than both and Acadia is smaller than Enclave and Yukon is biggest.  So they have enough size spacing.  Cadillac is about to overlap all those vehicles too, I am sure dealers want an XT3.  I don’t hink GM cares, SUVs equal profit.  Chevy and GMC overlapped for decades and they don’t care.

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

Without cars, Buick would  be completely redundant w/ GMC and pointless...

Makes me wonder if GM would not take the smart Business sense of killing off Buick in the US. Leave it GMC, Chevrolet and Cadillac which would make more sense to me than wasting dollars on Buick name plate.

I thought Buick was unto something just before the bankruptcy with the Buick Enclave and then right after the bankruptcy when Buick had a great car in the new Lacrosse and then the little Verano and Encore. I thought Buick was gonna push through and BE something.

But I forgot to acknowledge that Buick, really had no brand identity to make me believe that they would succeed.

What is Buick's brand identity?

What has Buick's brand identity been since the 1980s?  They produced the Grand National and the GNX which were awesome cool rides. but why did they even do that?  Those GNs did not fit with anything they had.  It did put them on the map, I guess, but Buick never followed through with anything remotely close to being sporty after that. They had the Reatta, which was cool, but it took another 25 years to get another convertible in their stable. And both convertibles lasted 3 years each...

What were they producing in the 1990s that gave them a brand identity?

NOTHING!

When Oldsmobile died, Saturn kinda took they place, but not really.  Saturn's initial brand identity was scrapped in favour of imitating Oldsmobile's new found resurgence in being a foreign brand fighter, which was technically Saturn's thing too, but Oldsmobile was the one that had any real steam going forward and GM just killed them.

Screwing up Saturn in the process too.

But Buick? What WAS Buick's brand identity.

Oldsmobile and Saturn went away and it seems like GM tried to get Buick to start where Oldsmobile left off.

But with NO clear direction...

Saturn got Opel's in the end, so Buick peddled Opels unto Buick when Saturn went away...

OK...but Buick NEVER had a CLEAR AND CONCISE direction to follow. 

So I ask again. What is Buick's raison d'etre in North America?

Why should I buy a Buick anything over its competition? And THAT competition INCLUDES Chevrolet and Cadillac and GMC... 

PS:  If Buick goes away in North America, and it just might as Buick is not distinguished enough to stand out as a brand that someone might be proud of owning...what a sad state of affairs for the conglomerate that is called "General" Motors.

General Motors used to mean something. 

It meant Chevrolet.  (visions of Bel Airs, Impalas and Corvettes) 

It meant Pontiac. (visions of Bonnevilles and Grand Prixs and GTOs and Trans Ams)

It meant Oldsmobile (visions of the Rocket 88 and Cutlass) 

it meant Buick ( Doctor's cars. THE Roadmaster. The Rat Pack Riviera)

it meant Cadillac (THE STANDARD OF THE WORLD)

We are now gonna be reduced to Chevy and Cadillac...

Nah, I dont include GMC in this as I get visions of Chevrolet rebranded trucks. In other words, I think of Chevrolet when I think of GMC...

ITS PITIFUL!!!

^ The irony is, during those years of your visions, there was just as much 'redundancy' as in recent times. More actually.

5 minutes ago, balthazar said:

^ The irony is, during those years of your visions, there was just as much 'redundancy' as in recent times. More actually.

Yeah! No kidding! 

But it somehow worked. But Buick had mojo.  The engineers built Buick motors that were beasts. The stylists gave Buick some pizzazz.  Ditto for Pontiac.   

What happened? Why did it go all to hell? 

HOW did they let it all go to hell? 

WHY did they let it all go to hell? 

The problem started back in the late 70s / early 80s when every single division decided they had to be a full line auto retailer and that meant that (at GM anyway) they needed every vehicle from a J-Body up to a full B-Body plus a few extras in between.  Ford did the same thing... Mercury got a cohort to every Ford car except Festiva (Tracer/Lynx, Topaz, Sable, Marquis, Zephyr, Grand Marquis, Cougar, Capri (Fox body)).  Chrysler just made everything a K-Car or M-Body for all their brands.

And it's all being repeated today with crossovers. 

Aside: I went to the Pittsburgh Auto Show today with friends.  As much as I don't really care for the interior of the Regal Tour X, the exterior of that car is very striking in todays world. It looks very European.  It'll be a sad day when that one goes too. 

The only things that keep Buick from becoming a China-only brand are the Enclave and the Encore (maybe the Envision).  The Lacrosse is dying, and so is the Cascada.  I would not be surprised if the Regal and Verano disappear within the next two years while we are at it.

Sadly, GM in the last 40 years has found ways to destroy brand equity by making virtually all cars the same with few real differences.  "Make it cheaper; make it common" killed Oldsmobile and Saturn and Pontiac.  Only China keeps Buick afloat.  For every Buick sold here, Buick sells four vehicles in China.

Solve those issues and Buick might be salvageable here in the land where it was born and raised.

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The problem started back in the late 70s / early 80s when ever single division decided they had to be a full line auto retailer and that meant that (at GM anyway) they needed every vehicle from a J-Body up to a full B-Body plus a few extras in between.  Ford did the same thing... Mercury got a cohort to every Ford car except Festiva (Tracer/Lynx, Topaz, Sable, Marquis, Zephyr, Grand Marquis, Cougar, Capri (Fox body)).  Chrysler just made everything a K-Car or M-Body for all their brands.

And it's all being repeated today with crossovers. 

And this mindset is still going on with many critics. 'When is Cadillac going to build a 1-Series comeptitor?' It's unsustainable and it's NOT for every brand. I'm sure most brands out there have money-losing lines; nearly everyone is overextended. The idea that one needs a sedan/crossover for every half foot of overall length is ludicrous.

"Make it cheaper; make it common" killed Oldsmobile and Saturn and Pontiac. 

Only China keeps Buick afloat.  For every Buick sold here, Buick sells four vehicles in China.

4 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

Without cars, Buick would  be completely redundant w/ GMC and pointless...

Buick does make more sense as a ‘trim package’ for a brand, at least much more so than having Cadillac be a trim package. 

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The problem started back in the late 70s / early 80s when ever single division decided they had to be a full line auto retailer and that meant that (at GM anyway) they needed every vehicle from a J-Body up to a full B-Body plus a few extras in between.  Ford did the same thing... Mercury got a cohort to every Ford car except Festiva (Tracer/Lynx, Topaz, Sable, Marquis, Zephyr, Grand Marquis, Cougar, Capri (Fox body)).  Chrysler just made everything a K-Car or M-Body for all their brands.

And it's all being repeated today with crossovers. 

Aside: I went to the Pittsburgh Auto Show today with friends.  As much as I don't really care for the interior of the Regal Tour X, the exterior of that car is very striking in todays world. It looks very European.  It'll be a sad day when that one goes too. 

I am looking towards the tourx as my next ride. I agree, interior could be nicer, but I think when it goes away as a choice, if I don’t have one (I especially want the big moonroof) I’ll have missed an opportunity. 

12 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

The only things that keep Buick from becoming a China-only brand are the Enclave and the Encore (maybe the Envision).  The Lacrosse is dying, and so is the Cascada.  I would not be surprised if the Regal and Verano disappear within the next two years while we are at it.

Sadly, GM in the last 40 years has found ways to destroy brand equity by making virtually all cars the same with few real differences.  "Make it cheaper; make it common" killed Oldsmobile and Saturn and Pontiac.  Only China keeps Buick afloat.  For every Buick sold here, Buick sells four vehicles in China.

Solve those issues and Buick might be salvageable here in the land where it was born and raised.

Verano is gone already.

I can totally see Buick becoming a China only brand. GMC can pick up the Encore sales with an equivalent Granite. Slap an Envoy badge on the back of an Enclave and that is solved too.  Envision just goes away. 

What would the 'cost' be to keep all 3 Buick CUVs as Buicks in the US, with no cars? Buick is unilaterally paired with GMC as it is.

Just now, balthazar said:

What would the 'cost' be to keep all 3 Buick CUVs as Buicks in the US, with no cars? Buick is unilaterally paired with GMC as it is.

All of the costs associated with advertising and maintaining a brand. Separate badging, different designs.  Doing what I propose gets cheaper when they don't have to paint the airwaves with "That's not a Buick!" commercials just to convince people that Buicks aren't for old people. 

GMC doesn't have that kind of baggage.  I would be shocked if Barra isn't considering closing Buick already. 

Have yet to see one of these in person, never sold up here.

Demographic changes will make the point moot. Other than the rough adventure types... Or posh sentimentals no in my circles care about domestic brands, especially the non-main line ones.

I would consider Cadillac here main-line because it has more pedigree. Buick does not get lumped into that. Chevy is seen as all manners of bad acronyms associated with 'GM'. 

GMC and Denali seem immune. No one can kill that one. Professional grade. Thought every time I see a Terrain, its in SLT trim. I have yet to see anything Denali that isn't a pickup truck or Yukon 

53 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

All of the costs associated with advertising and maintaining a brand. Separate badging, different designs.  Doing what I propose gets cheaper when they don't have to paint the airwaves with "That's not a Buick!" commercials just to convince people that Buicks aren't for old people. 

GMC doesn't have that kind of baggage.  I would be shocked if Barra isn't considering closing Buick already. 

RE : advertising- it costs exactly the same to market a 'GMC Enclave' as it would a 'Buick Enclave' (broadcast & print). Hardly any print brochures anymore. Same with badges. Same with stamping a 'Buick' nose as stamping a 'GMC' nose. I'm not seeing a cost savings moving the Buivk CUVs over to GMC unless it meant eliminating the same platform CUV. Off hand, not sure which of those currently out are on the same platform- GMC doesn't have a same platform Enclave or Encore, correct? What is the current overlap?

2 minutes ago, balthazar said:

RE : advertising- it costs exactly the same to market a 'GMC Enclave' as it would a 'Buick Enclave' (broadcast & print). Hardly any print brochures anymore. Same with badges. Same with stamping a 'Buick' nose as stamping a 'GMC' nose. I'm not seeing a cost savings moving the Buivk CUVs over to GMC unless it meant eliminating the same platform CUV. Off hand, not sure which of those currently out are on the same platform- GMC doesn't have a same platform Enclave or Encore, correct? What is the current overlap?

All things being equal, you are correct... but things aren't equal.  Like it or not, Buick has baggage with the general population that takes a lot of "We're not just for old people" type advertising to overcome.  GMC doesn't have any of that... it's a lot easier to convince someone to buy a Denali than it is to convince someone to buy a Buick.  Rappers rap about Denali.

There is supposed to be a GMC version of the Encore coming next time the platform gets redesign (soon).  The Enclave is on the same platform, though different wheelbase, as the Acadia.  Envision is on the same platform as the Terrain.   

Simply put, without the cars, there isn't much reason for Buick to continue to exist. 

4 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Yeah! No kidding! 

But it somehow worked. But Buick had mojo.  The engineers built Buick motors that were beasts. The stylists gave Buick some pizzazz.  Ditto for Pontiac.   

What happened? Why did it go all to hell? 

HOW did they let it all go to hell? 

WHY did they let it all go to hell? 

It worked in the 50s and 60s because the Germans and Japanese cars weren’t here.  When competition arrived GM crapped the bed.  How?  Bad management and laziness and arrogance. 

Of course they were. Mercedes were sold out of Studebaker dealers since the early 50s, and toyota came here in '57.
But the bulk of 'when it worked' was the 1960s and 1970s, when multiple germans & japanese makes were sold here nation-wide.
 

The imports didn’t really hit the market big until the 70s, mainly due to gas crisis.  Cadillac sold 350,000 cars in 1978 and 150,000 last year.  

Mad far as the brands go, GMC has the most consistent and focused marketing and brand image, they have been constant with it for a long time.  GMC is their best managed brand, Cadillac is probably their most mismanaged but Buick has a lot of baggage and a small line that was mostly made up of stuff from other brands.  I would say Buick is the weakest brand so if they had to kill one that would be it.  I don’t think GM will kill Buick in the USA though.

a more plausible option down the road would be Cadillac + GMC retail stores.  Rather than just folding Buick.  I think if Buick can ever equip their vehicles as truly a half step up over Chevy, it's fine as a niche brand co-existing to help justify a GMC trucks retail outlet.  GMC and Chevy can never universally share a showroom because it would ding both their truck lines.

15 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The imports didn’t really hit the market big until the 70s, mainly due to gas crisis.  Cadillac sold 350,000 cars in 1978 and 150,000 last year. 

Japanese imports grew notably with the gas crisis, but it took the germans a few decades longer because they weren't competitive for so long.
And Cadillac sold 395,000 vehicles last year.

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

All of the costs associated with advertising and maintaining a brand. Separate badging, different designs.  Doing what I propose gets cheaper when they don't have to paint the airwaves with "That's not a Buick!" commercials just to convince people that Buicks aren't for old people. 

GMC doesn't have that kind of baggage.  I would be shocked if Barra isn't considering closing Buick already. 

I would think she would have to be.

Watching what GM is doing now, it starts to make sense that Buick simply becomes a china brand and caddy simply just goes away. In a future where electric cars and scooters become your main focal point- there’s no point in keeping the shiny things around......

I keep preaching that the car is dead....and at some point-the SUV as well. Trucks live on due to work demands. But between the cost and the lack of interest in vehicles in general- Uber, electric and public transportation is your future.........

30 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Japanese imports grew notably with the gas crisis, but it took the germans a few decades longer because they weren't competitive for so long.
And Cadillac sold 395,000 vehicles last year.

Worldwide they sold that.  Mercedes sold 2,310,185.  They got some catching up to do.

1 minute ago, smk4565 said:

Worldwide they sold that.  Mercedes sold 2,310,185.  They got some catching up to do.

Cadillac should get into the Taxi market? If not, why not?

33 minutes ago, regfootball said:

a more plausible option down the road would be Cadillac + GMC retail stores.  Rather than just folding Buick.  I think if Buick can ever equip their vehicles as truly a half step up over Chevy, it's fine as a niche brand co-existing to help justify a GMC trucks retail outlet.  GMC and Chevy can never universally share a showroom because it would ding both their truck lines.

In adding to my “dark: comment above, I would love to see a few “niche” models for Caddy, Buick, and maybe even Pontiac. Each model/models could offer the comsumer something different, whether it be sporty or even stately.

But the GM/caddy idea is good....

14 minutes ago, daves87rs said:

Watching what GM is doing now, it starts to make sense that Buick simply becomes a china brand and caddy simply just goes away. In a future where electric cars and scooters become your main focal point- there’s no point in keeping the shiny things around......

 

I keep preaching that the car is dead....and at some point-the SUV as well. Trucks live on due to work demands. But between the cost and the lack of interest in vehicles in general- Uber, electric and public transportation is your future.........

Cadillac is dying now too?!?!  

I actually think in a world of self driving pods and mass transit, a car becomes a luxury item.  Thus Cadillac is the brand that makes the most sense if mainstream car ownership disappears.

1 minute ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac is dying now too?!?!  

I actually think in a world of self driving pods and mass transit, a car becomes a luxury item.  Thus Cadillac is the brand that makes the most sense if mainstream cars disappear.

Could make sense if folks didn’t want to spend a grand or more on a phone-that is today’s “luxury”.....

3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Cadillac should get into the Taxi market? If not, why not?

They couldn’t build a more reliable or more fuel efficient taxi than Mercedes.  The E-class is the best mid size sedan in the world, regardless of intended use.

1 minute ago, daves87rs said:

Could make sense if folks didn’t want to spend a grand or more on a phone-that is today’s “luxury”.....

When the autonomous pods arrive that get you from point A to point B while you can sleep or play on your $1,000 phone for a price of a $300 a month subscription then the masses won’t buy cars.

 The majority of people buy a car to get from point A to point B (school, work, grocery store, etc). They don’t want to pay $400 for a payment, $200 in gas, $100 in maintenance, $100 in insurance, yadda yadda yadda.  Most will take the autonomous pod.  The enthusiast and the wealthy that have too much disposable income will still buy a car, which is where Cadillac makes sense. 

1 minute ago, smk4565 said:

When the autonomous pods arrive that get you from point A to point B while you can sleep or play on your $1,000 phone for a price of a $300 a month subscription then the masses won’t buy cars.

 The majority of people buy a car to get from point A to point B (school, work, grocery store, etc). They don’t want to pay $400 for a payment, $200 in gas, $100 in maintenance, $100 in insurance, yadda yadda yadda.  Most will take the autonomous pod.  The enthusiast and the wealthy that have too much disposable income will still buy a car, which is where Cadillac makes sense. 

Depends on what profit level it will be- if GM makes more money on scooters, Wall Street may not take kindly to them wasting money on niche products.......

28 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Worldwide they sold that.  Mercedes sold 2,310,185.  They got some catching up to do.

Cadillac is not a mainstream, full-line/taxi/fleet/cargo van brand. They're not trying to "catch up".

49 minutes ago, daves87rs said:

...between the cost and the lack of interest in vehicles in general- Uber, electric and public transportation is your future.

Not my future. Feel pretty safe in saying not the majority of any of our futures, either.
Just price checked a ride from an old address into town to the shopping area- 26 miles round trip, $56-70 dollars (plus tip) via Uber. My truck costs me on average $7/day for insurance & fuel. Add ownership cost WRT depreciation, and it's $7.11. I'm saving money hand-over-fist owning my own vehicle.

27 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Not my future. Feel pretty safe in saying not the majority of any of our futures, either.
Just price checked a ride from an old address into town to the shopping area- 26 miles round trip, $56-70 dollars (plus tip) via Uber. My truck costs me on average $7/day for insurance & fuel. Add ownership cost WRT depreciation, and it's $7.11. I'm saving money hand-over-fist owning my own vehicle.

Oh trust me, I believe you. ? And I agree! But not everybody is in the same boat as you and I, or even care about cars like us. That is also saying if they are using common sense too.... ? 

Owning a car makes more sense now.  But one day when cars and Uber can function with no driver it will be cheaper to have a robot pod shuttle you around.

I don't think I have 75 years left in me to see that happen.

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They couldn’t build a more reliable or more fuel efficient taxi than Mercedes.  The E-class is the best mid size sedan in the world, regardless of intended use.

The E class is indeed fantastic.

6 hours ago, balthazar said:

I don't think I have 75 years left in me to see that happen.

Me niether.

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Worldwide they sold that.  Mercedes sold 2,310,185.  They got some catching up to do.

And how many did GM sell?  Mercedes as a whole is not analogous to just a single GM brand. 

57 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

And how many did GM sell?  Mercedes as a whole is not analogous to just a single GM brand. 

They are to Cadillac if you take away Vans and the pick up.  Mercedes isn’t selling Chevy priced product which is the vast majority of GM sales.  They wisely set up their luxury brand to have a car for all needs, while GM set up their luxury brand for people that want mid size sedans and midsize crossovers.   Mercedes owners have no reason to look at another brand because Mercedes has a car for every need.  Cadillac owners if they want a convertible or coupe after this year or a performance SUV or sports car, etc have to go look at another brand.  Then if they find that brand better, when they neee a new sedan they probably aren’t going back to Cadillac.

This is also why most niche brands don’t make it l, outside of novelty stuff like Ferrari  or Lamborghini.

2 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

They are to Cadillac if you take away Vans and the pick up.  Mercedes isn’t selling Chevy priced product which is the vast majority of GM sales.  They wisely set up their luxury brand to have a car for all needs, while GM set up their luxury brand for people that want mid size sedans and midsize crossovers.   Mercedes owners have no reason to look at another brand because Mercedes has a car for every need.  Cadillac owners if they want a convertible or coupe after this year or a performance SUV or sports car, etc have to go look at another brand.  Then if they find that brand better, when they neee a new sedan they probably aren’t going back to Cadillac.

This is also why most niche brands don’t make it l, outside of novelty stuff like Ferrari  or Lamborghini.

Mercedes sells the A-Class, B-Class, and SMART.  They certainly do play in "Chevy" markets even if they're priced outrageously for the content. And don't try to tell me the A-Class is "worth it" either. 

9 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

They wisely set up their luxury brand to have a car for all needs

You know that "entry level" luxury is an oxymoron, right?

You know that is not a thing, right? Like...even if the word "luxury" is in the phrase "entry level luxury", you know that is not real luxury, right?  What Mercedes sells is zircon to folk. So a better way of putting that is Mercedes Benz has fooled millions into buying zircon.

I hope you also know and understand that Chevy also sells a ton of "entry level" price tagged vehicles.  Or as you put it...luxury priced...

Because if you tally up all the HD Silverados and Tahoes and Suburbans, Chevy actually  sells MORE of those 3 than what all of Mercedes sells...

I wouldnt be tooting that too loudly, buddy.  That Mercedes sells lots and lots of C Class and A class cars and YOU try pass  those as 1%er vehicles... 

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

And how many did GM sell?  Mercedes as a whole is not analogous to just a single GM brand. 

The REAL question is how many 60 000 dollar priced vehicles (and over..but not less than 60 000)does Mercedes Benz really sell.  (Not city buses and Freightliner 18 wheelers) But honest to goodness 60 000 dollar REAL luxury cars and SUVs.

Because we DO know that Cadillac is at the 400 000 unit level.  OK...minus a few ATS cars...Cadillac at 350 000.

Not that real luxury cars should be measured by how many units sold...but since our resident M-B fan likes to hear his own voice on this, Im curious...

14 hours ago, daves87rs said:

But not everybody is in the same boat as you and I, or even care about cars like us. That is also saying if they are using common sense too.... ? 

I will assume they care about money though.
In my example above, I could make the same trip 6 or more times a day for the same initial price of $7, whereas Uber would cost over $400.  

It's the same thing WRT almost all EVs- do I care about 'saving' $150/mn in fuel costs when I have to spend $30,000 more to do so? That's 200 months, or 17 years to break even. I've been Jonesing to get into a new truck for a year now, and I've got 13 years behind it's wheel this summer.

2 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I will assume they care about money though.
In my example above, I could make the same trip 6 or more times a day for the same initial price of $7, whereas Uber would cost over $400.  

It's the same thing WRT almost all EVs- do I care about 'saving' $150/mn in fuel costs when I have to spend $30,000 more to do so? That's 200 months, or 17 years to break even. I've been Jonesing to get into a new truck for a year now, and I've got 13 years behind it's wheel this summer.

But no one makes 6 trips to the grocery store in a single day, and if they do, they have other problems to worry about besides money.  It's the people who live closer to the city or public transit who are the likely candidates for what @daves87rs is talking about.  I say that because 27 miles round trip to the grocery store is not typical for anyone outside of very rural areas.  I have 2 grocery stores within a mile of my house and another 4 within 5 miles.