Cadillac CT6 Reveals Itself In New Commerical

But the truth is a great car makes itself know no matter the name or number. The product sells the car not the name.

I do agree with this, but note you have stood against a name from the past more than once. If it does not matter, why oppose?

I still advocate for a heritage name here. As soon as you have semi-widespread debate over a 'name' such as 'CT6', it's time to pick another. Don't give the crowd 'over the fence' anything to distract with, Cadillac needs as much traction as possible out of the gate. A very well executed CT6 will still do well in the market branded 'Fleetwood' or some other cue from the brand's past. If you cannot bring cues from the past into the future, who are you?

Ellinghaus & Co. may believe they are 'organizing' the naming scheme 2 Cadillac, but I guarantee you it will be revisited within the decade.

If names do not matter then "Escalade" should be changed to XT7 to fit the rest of the naming scheme. If product is all that matters, that would be a logical move so they have XT3-5-7-8, etc. But we know Cadillac will not drop "Escalade" because the name means something.

Escalade = World Class Full Size SUV for the people. I do not hear that about any other luxury SUV even the Military ancient G that MB still makes.

But Denysschen says alpha numerics are better than names and the new XT3, XT4, XT5 naming system is best for business.   I disagree with him and think names are better for Cadillac because that is what they were for 50 years.  But you can't have it both ways and say word names are bad, then use a word name on your #1 product.

If names do not matter then "Escalade" should be changed to XT7 to fit the rest of the naming scheme. If product is all that matters, that would be a logical move so they have XT3-5-7-8, etc. But we know Cadillac will not drop "Escalade" because the name means something.

You are missing what is at hand. The Escalade has built up equity at this point on an established model. No real need to change it on an established model at this point. In the future I do see it going away as the model as it is today will go away in the future.

Now to take a old name and slap it on a new car really holds no equity it only holds name recognition of a model from the past. Now that name recognition hold some positive for some customers and holds memories of some pretty shoddy cars. Take a 67 Eldorado vs. 89 Eldorado. If you are old enough to remember the 67 you may have some good memories some even better than they really were. But for those of us who lived through 89 it really just does not have the same luster.

To rebuild a reputation you really have to leave much of the past behind and work from a new foundation. Your old customers are not going to come back as most that had a good image in their head are dead and the ones who lived the past 30 years of your product are not coming back because of a name.

It is time to build new cars with new names and new images. Johann will stand by his system as it was his choice not someone else's and his ass is on the line here. The fact is that this is all about the product not the name. The reality is none of the present Cadillac's have much name equity other than the Escalade. To be honest the Escalade sells more because of the image it has in different circles. You see everyone from CEO's to Actors and sports figure drive these. It is seen in the hands of many people in the music business. The people of image and means hold these cars and that is what many buyers of these vehicles want to hold over them too.

Are names important. Yes but only after the product is established and holds a image or reputation that defines it. It comes down to this on all newer or non established products. Does the name make the product or does the product establish the name equity. In nearly all cases it is the latter.

Escalade = World Class Full Size SUV for the people. I do not hear that about any other luxury SUV even the Military ancient G that MB still makes.

The Escalade is really only an American Icon just as the G wagon is more a Euro Icon. Both are no where near as popular in each others market.

The only other market the Escalade is really popular in is the Middle East as the Suburban for decades has been a vehicle of choice there. It is popular as it provides the luxury and the ability to transport  a number of people at one time unlike most luxury cars. Also there size and gas prices matter little.

One factor over looked too is the larger Suburban's, Yukon's and Escalades play a big part in the travels to Mecca. these are some of the most popular forms of travel for their pilgrimage.

The GL competes with the Escalade, the G-wagon is priced a class above, which is basically a 1 vehicle segment.

Regardless, I still support heritage names, or even a mix could work.  The made up "Escalade"  they could use "Elmirage" or some new names mixed with names from the past like Eldorado and Fleetwood.  They could even use Aurora, Cadillac had a concept car called Aurora, before that was reworked and sent to Oldsmobile.  Rolls and Bentley pull names from the past all the time, Phantom, Ghost, Mulsanne, etc.   What doesn't make sense is mixing 2 naming schemes.

IMO, only children need a scheme that 'makes sense'. When Cadillac was leading the segment, didn't they use 'Series 62' and 'Series 75' alongside 'Eldorado' and 'deVille'?
Names will fall into place and a brand that follows inspiration doesn't need to name their entire lineup after numbers (looking at you BMW & audi).

If I were asked to approve either 'CT6 and Escalade' OR 'CT6 and XT7' is sure as hell would not be the latter.

The way I see it no matter if you side with names or numbers neither really matter. I do agree even mixed it does not matter. What it comes down to is what the car looks like, Drives, Rides and what it has to offer in technology in this segment.

The bottom line is if you build a car right people will buy It regardless of what you call it.

Hell Ferrari called their new car the La Ferrari. That has to be one of the worst names in the world for this car but yet it will be on posters and production will sell out even at a Million plus per unit.

So why are we arguing names as we should turn our attention to the things that really matter.

Was in a ATS coupe today. Lovely car but the back seat is more useless than the 04 GTO. The CTS V has presence. It is dark and sinister looking.  

I also noted the Cadillac interiors are about as good as MB. I do like the satin nickel trim in the Benz better but their muted wood looks like someone sanded it.

^ Would be interested to hear your take on there CLA back seat. That car is the exact same length as the ATS but has 9" less total legroom. Haven't yet found a whisper about this in any forum chatter or publication...

I would be interested in hearing how SMK justifies this lack of leg room on the CLA in comparison to the ATS. You just cannot keep moving the field goal posts to say MB is the best when they clearly are starting to cut corners. The CLA is terrible in comparison to what Cadillac makes.

The CLA is a small car, only an inch shorter than an ATS but 3 inch shorter wheelbase.  Rear drive cars have better packaging and can stretch the wheelbase out so they can give more interior room. The CLA has a tiny back seat, but probably most CLA buyers aren't using it anyway.  CLA sales aren't hurting, the car seems to be performing the way Mercedes wanted it to.  The CLA gets 38 mpg highway though, better than any Cadillac, so if you were shopping gas mileage, not back seat, the CLA looks good.

Personally, I'd never buy a CLA, it is front drive.  Luckily Mercedes makes the C-class with a whopping 111.8 inch wheelbase, which is longer than the 3-series, the ATS, even the XTS.  So there are no legroom issues on the C-class which has the best interior in the segment, the most powerful V6 in the segment and the only car in the segment with 500 hp.

Hopefully the CT6 has more than 43 inches of rear legroom since that is what the S-class has and apperently rear leg room matters a lot.  Some car rags might knock the ATS rear seat as to why it doesn't sell, I just think it isn't as good a car as the German 3.  The Lexus IS is a design disaster, yet it sells fairly well somehow, so that is a mystery to me.  If I were Cadillac, I'd be concerned that we couldn't outsell the IS which has engines from 2007 under the hood.

Hopefully the CT6 has more than 43 inches of rear legroom since that is what the S-class has and apperently rear leg room matters a lot.  Some car rags might knock the ATS rear seat as to why it doesn't sell, I just think it isn't as good a car as the German 3.  The Lexus IS is a design disaster, yet it sells fairly well somehow, so that is a mystery to me.  If I were Cadillac, I'd be concerned that we couldn't outsell the IS which has engines from 2007 under the hood.

Yet your beloved German 3 have less rear leg room than the ATS that we agree on. Stop just out what the mags have stated which is pure BS. State real facts as to why you think the germans are better as currently your like a butterfly flying all over with 60,000 foot statements.

ATS rear Seat leg room versus German MB, BMW and Audi. Who wins?

Subjective but who builds the better seat and what type of materials.

Dash, plastic hard, plastic soft touch, etc. Be detailed and descriptive. 

To state you think it isn't as good is not sufficient, defend and describe specific points of why you believe this. Point out where Cadillac is falling down.

Reality, based on my own review, Cadillac beats all 3 German brands in quality of auto segment to segment comparison.

Cadillac Failure - Marketing. I see far more advertisements for the German 3 in comparison to Cadillac. Their marketing sucks and I believe this is why their sales are down on top of the lack of model choices. 

Cadillac biggest win could be a Marketing blitz that if 3 prong focused by age group

18 to 30

31 to 50

51 to retirement.

Focus on showing why their auto's beat the competition and then challenge the public to come in and find out for themselves with some sort of incentive.

The web site option to compare a ATS or CTS to any of the German 3 equivalent is just not going to cut it.

Have on site at the dealership for a comparison the actual auto's. Cadillac needs to step up the luxury and experience.

The US dealerships need to look like what they are requiring in Bejing.

I would be interested in hearing how SMK justifies this lack of leg room on the CLA in comparison to the ATS. You just cannot keep moving the field goal posts to say MB is the best when they clearly are starting to cut corners. The CLA is terrible in comparison to what Cadillac makes.

The CLA doesn't compete with anything Cadillac makes, so that's a pointless comment.

Honestly, SMK brings up some valid points regarding the ATS. Beyond the biggest issue of Cadillac lacking a decent marketing campaign, the ATS is a flawed car. Before I dive into my reasoning for thinking such, let's get the positives out of the way. The ATS has what is probably the best chassis in its class and its only received rave reviews from everyone who's driven it in that regard. Also, the interior marked the first time Cadillac could say it had competitive appointments inside. And, for the most part, it's rear legroom is on par for the segment.

Now, with all the ooey-gooey stuff out of the way, how do I justify my statement? Well...

I don't think I've ever mentioned this, but I personally feel Cadillac dropped the ball styling-wise. It's not a failure, that's definitely not what I'm trying to say. It's just... too placid. It reminds me the most of the last STS in that sort of watered-down A&S kind of way. The best way I can explain this is to point you to the CTS, which the ATS effectively replaced in the line-up price-wise. The first gen was Cadillac's first foray into the A&S design principles and it was by-far the most unique car in its segment. Fast forward to the second gen and past the failed STS and you see Cadillac truly perfect A&S. That car had the right amount of boldness, its curves and creases perfectly complimenting each other. It was stunning. This brings me to the ATS that followed. It was, in essence, a watered-down, flattened, miniature CTS with its lights swept and grill halved. Again, it's not the failure that the STS was, it just doesn't invoke enough passion. With the refresh and its new schnoz, I feel like it's lost even more of that edge that once made Cadillac design's great (and still great with the current CTS). The ATS-V sort of remedies that, but its not the model that's going to drive sales.

Compare the ATS to its competitors, which are vastly more interesting to look at (for better or worse) with one exception (Audi) and it becomes pretty obvious to me. The C-Class cribs all the right cues from the S-Class and is by far the most stunning in the class. The 3-Series has finally ditched the Bangle'd looks for what is perhaps its best look in ages. The A4 is, well, in the same boat as Cadillac with its look continuously being water-down. The IS... atleast has a look of its own; It certainly isn't boring. Now, I want to reiterate that the ATS looks fine in most ways. It just comes down to a look that doesn't sizzle as much as its competitors or its own bigger brother. 

My second point is regarding the power-train. Along the same lines as the styling, nothing is really that out of place besides the base 2.5L. On their own, each engine is competent enough for GM's brands that occupy a lower rung on the ladder. For a Cadillac that is competing to be the standard of the world? They're not enough. Sure, you could look at BMW, Mercedes, and Audi to see that all three offer 2.0L turbocharged I4's, but they all manage to make a better one. To put things into perspective, the quickest ATS with the 3.6 only manages to match the performance numbers of its competitors 4-bangers, while Cadillac's own 4-banger falls behind. Nevermind that Cadillac doesn't equip the ATS with an engine on-par with its competitors top-of-the-range engines (sans the performance variants the ATS-V will compete with). It's also worth noting Cadillac doesn't stand out in fuel-efficiency or choice of transmissions, either. It all just manages to be slightly less than what Cadillac really needs. 

Again, its not that any of it is bad, it's just not good enough. As for something that is truly bad, my third and final comment will be regarding technology. I'm not going to sugar coat this, either. 

While I feel Cadillac deserves some slack for its first total multimedia experience, CUE is awful. It is one of the most frustrating systems to use, not because its difficult to learn, but because it simply doesn't work. I would bet anything that 50% of people who walk out of a Cadillac showroom and choose to buy one of its competitors did so because of CUE. It's slow, buggy, and takes multiple taps for touches to register. A car with such a rewarding chassis should not have this distracting of an interface. It's absolutely horrid. The best compliment I can give it is, well, atleast its not MFT. Consider this: A little company by the name of Mazda built a better driver-oriented multimedia suite than Cadillac and the majority of the major automakers. Why couldn't Cadillac? This is, above all else, the ATS's biggest deterrent to buyers in my opinion. Forget the uninspired looks, the unwilling engines, or the nonexistent marketing; the problem is CUE. 

Black Viper hit most of the points.  ATS may have a good chassis, but it is saddled with a 6-speed when the others have 7 or 8 and have had them for years.  The 3.6 V6 in the ATS has 273 lb-ft, the C400 has 354 lb-ft, big difference.  The ATS doesn't have world beater engines, it has engines GM was using in 2011 Buicks.  Give the ATS all new engines and transmission to go with that chassis and maybe they will be half way there.  Still have to fix CUE, and the boring front end styling.  Then at least they'd have a capable product, whether or not the marketing department can sell it would be the question.

The CLA doesn't compete with anything Cadillac makes, so that's a pointless comment.

Most consumers shop via price classes, and most have no earthly idea which wheels are driving. CLA and ATS start within $1700 of each other, and both are entry-level models from luxury brands. Strict brand partisans aside, I can't see how you think they AREN'T frequently cross-shopped.

 

The CLA doesn't compete with anything Cadillac makes, so that's a pointless comment.

Most consumers shop via price classes, and most have no earthly idea which wheels are driving. CLA and ATS start within $1700 of each other, and both are entry-level models from luxury brands. Strict brand partisans aside, I can't see how you think they AREN'T frequently cross-shopped.

 

If they are, that's not exactly a compliment for the ATS. You don't want those cars to be cross-shopped. That says to me that consumers think the ATS is only on par with what is basically a tarted up, squished Jetta with a three-pointed star on the snout... And it's losing even more sales in the process (CLA is easily outselling the ATS). Sales numbers may not worry you, but this route is more troubling than the sales race with its direct competitors. It's not very prestigious, either.  You may want to rethink where you're going with that. 

 

 

The CLA doesn't compete with anything Cadillac makes, so that's a pointless comment.

Most consumers shop via price classes, and most have no earthly idea which wheels are driving. CLA and ATS start within $1700 of each other, and both are entry-level models from luxury brands. Strict brand partisans aside, I can't see how you think they AREN'T frequently cross-shopped.

 

 

If they are, that's not exactly a compliment for the ATS. You don't want those cars to be cross-shopped. That says to me that consumers think the ATS is only on par with what is basically a tarted up, squished Jetta with a three-pointed star on the snout... And it's losing even more sales in the process (CLA is easily outselling the ATS). Sales numbers may not worry you, but this route is more troubling than the sales race with its direct competitors. It's not very prestigious, either.  You may want to rethink where you're going with that. 

 

Yeah, it means Cadillac can't get the ATS to C-Class status and pricing where it should be. Also, Cadillac is probably selling the ATS lower trims in order to cater for that price-bracket until a sub-ATS appears...

We all must remember when looking at Cadillac today that it is the path being traveled to the full new destination.

Todays products even the CT6 are cars Cadillac was trying to do the right things without full support of Cadillac. There are some mistakes and things they just could not have now because these cars are stepping stones to the future.

We may lack a 8 speed at this moment but not for much longer. We may not have Cadillac only engines with advanced technology yet but we will.

Note the real all in GM Cadillac's will not arrive till 2020 but in the mean time we have vastly improved models that can compete.  So to argue over things now is kind of pointless and to monitor the advancement of each model and measure the metric of their improvement is what we need to look at.

I was in the new CTS the other night and while not the perfect car it is competitive. Also it is one of best cars in decades the company has made. This is not an over night thing and even once we get to the final destination we still many not be number one in the market but as long as we are competitive and making massive profits from the brand it will be a win.

In this segment a division like Cadillac will not have to dominate the market but can still bring in 50% of the auto segment profits just on 12-15% share of total sales.

This segment is not about volume though it never hurts it is about profits from lower volumes and prestige. 

You have to understand the segment and what is at stake here to really measure the performance of what they are doing. GM has a chance to dominate America if they continue to do the right things but they may never dominate Europe. But if they can compete head to head and make money there that will only help them here in their task.

We are just in the first inning of this game and we have 8 more to go. Baseball was never a high paced fast game and neither is rebuilding Cadillac.

I'm sorry, but in terms of looks versus the other makes I think some are firmly out in left field without a glove. The most unreasonable part was the portion about the C-Class's look being dynamic. The C-Class is absolutely ugly. The A4 is so close in looks to the Passat U'd never kno they were variants of the same car let alone on a different platform... And don't get me started on the ricey looking IS. or the confusing lumpiness of the Q60. In terms of looks... I personally think the ATS is the most handsome of the entry level bunch. 

And to beat a dead horse... the ATS and CTS, as great as they are, they are simply not offering the variants that the 3series/C-Class or 5-6Series/EClass are. It simple is ludicrous for GM to expect that they would sell in the same numbers with one variant of the CTS, and up until October '14, one variant of the ATS. A&S is a hit. Both vehicles are genuine lookers. That is not objective.. its a fact. 

Here is the real problem, and again, UNBELIEVABLE that  GM would manufacturer as many ATS in sedan only form and expect people to simply buy. I can't buy an ATSV or CTS-V yet. I can't buy an ATS wagon.. I can't buy a CTS Wagon.. I can't buy an ATS Convertible.. I can't buy a ATS or CTS diesel.. I can't even if I wanted to.. so instead of building those models for consumption.. GM builds too many Sedans of each with no variants. That doesn't even include the fact that U cannot buy an AWD model across the board. No AWD in VSport or upcoming VSeries. Not a huge thing for me, but U would sell more vehicles in Snowbelt if they had it.
 

Anyone not believing me.. or who can't see what I'm saying.. just LOOK:   

328diesel Sedan
328diesel xDrive Sedan
3series Sedan
3series xDrive Sedan
ActiveHybrid 3
3series xDrive Sports Wagon
3series xDrive Sports Wagon
3series diesel xDrive Gran Turismo
3series xDrive Gran Turismo
M3

vs 
ATS Sedan
ATS-V (Not even here yet)


4Series Coupe
4Series xDrive Coupe
4Series Gran Coupe
4Series xDrive Gran Coupe
4Series Convertible
4Series xDrive Convertible
M4

vs 

ATS Coupe
ATS-V Coupe (Not even here yet)


******************************

5Series Sedan
5Series xDrive Sedan
535diesel Sedan
535diesel xDrive Sedan
ActiveHybrid 5
5Series Gran Turismo
5Series xDrive Gran Turismo
M5

vs 

CTS Sedan
CTS-V (not even here yet) 

and again.. remember that in terms of the CTS, the coupe alone was 30% or sales, yet absent, and the Vseries was about 10%, again absent til summer

 

 

The CLA doesn't compete with anything Cadillac makes, so that's a pointless comment.

Most consumers shop via price classes, and most have no earthly idea which wheels are driving. CLA and ATS start within $1700 of each other, and both are entry-level models from luxury brands. Strict brand partisans aside, I can't see how you think they AREN'T frequently cross-shopped.

 

 

If they are, that's not exactly a compliment for the ATS. You don't want those cars to be cross-shopped. That says to me that consumers think the ATS is only on par with what is basically a tarted up, squished Jetta with a three-pointed star on the snout... And it's losing even more sales in the process (CLA is easily outselling the ATS). Sales numbers may not worry you, but this route is more troubling than the sales race with its direct competitors. It's not very prestigious, either.  You may want to rethink where you're going with that. 

 

Pricing of the 3series ($32,950) and ATS ($33,215) are both within throwing distance of the $30,000 CLA. The C-Class ($38,400)was the one to move up.. and it did so to distance itself from the CLA

 

 

The CLA doesn't compete with anything Cadillac makes, so that's a pointless comment.

Most consumers shop via price classes, and most have no earthly idea which wheels are driving. CLA and ATS start within $1700 of each other, and both are entry-level models from luxury brands. Strict brand partisans aside, I can't see how you think they AREN'T frequently cross-shopped.

 

 

If they are, that's not exactly a compliment for the ATS. You don't want those cars to be cross-shopped. That says to me that consumers think the ATS is only on par with what is basically a tarted up, squished Jetta with a three-pointed star on the snout... And it's losing even more sales in the process (CLA is easily outselling the ATS). Sales numbers may not worry you, but this route is more troubling than the sales race with its direct competitors. It's not very prestigious, either.  You may want to rethink where you're going with that. 

 

Actually, I think that people will buy anything that has a 3-pointed star on it.  It would be the single biggest way that Benz could increase SMART sales.   The CLA and GLA are the cheap, fake Louis Vuitton bags of the luxury car brands.  Yes they still cost a lot more than a plain, non LV branded bag at TJ Maxx, but they are still fake..... .and probably sell in much higher volumes than the real thing.

ATS price range is $33K - $65K; it's covering a wide price range.

Sales are not a concern to me as long as profits are there. If I were spending well above median for a car, I sure would not want to be in a string of the same vehicle during the evening commute.

'Poor sales/ poor pricing' never seems to follow the A6 around (outsold by the CTS last I read, and again; with more variants).

ATS price range is $33K - $65K; it's covering a wide price range.

 

Sales are not a concern to me as long as profits are there. If I were spending well above median for a car, I sure would not want to be in a string of the same vehicle during the evening commute.

 

'Poor sales/ poor pricing' never seems to follow the A6 around (outsold by the CTS last I read, and again; with more variants).

Nor Lexus GS which was outsold by the previous STS for years... and is still a poor seller.

^ Those are OK, see, because they're not General Motors; they're still struggling, boutique brands just starting out… not a huge monstrous evil corporate conglomerate machine that SHOULD be pumping out 60% of all industry sales if they weren't so (chose any 3 items from our ala carte menu of negative attributes).

^ Those are OK, see, because they're not General Motors; they're still struggling, boutique brands just starting out… not a huge monstrous evil corporate conglomerate machine that SHOULD be pumping out 60% of all industry sales if they weren't so (chose any 3 items from our ala carte menu of negative attributes).

Which is the real irony.. considering the parent companies of BOTH.. are currently #1 and #2 or 3... according to who U ask..  in global sales. I won't even get into their evil origins

 

 

 

The CLA doesn't compete with anything Cadillac makes, so that's a pointless comment.

Most consumers shop via price classes, and most have no earthly idea which wheels are driving. CLA and ATS start within $1700 of each other, and both are entry-level models from luxury brands. Strict brand partisans aside, I can't see how you think they AREN'T frequently cross-shopped.

 

 

If they are, that's not exactly a compliment for the ATS. You don't want those cars to be cross-shopped. That says to me that consumers think the ATS is only on par with what is basically a tarted up, squished Jetta with a three-pointed star on the snout... And it's losing even more sales in the process (CLA is easily outselling the ATS). Sales numbers may not worry you, but this route is more troubling than the sales race with its direct competitors. It's not very prestigious, either.  You may want to rethink where you're going with that. 

 

 

 

Pricing of the 3series ($32,950) and ATS ($33,215) are both within throwing distance of the $30,000 CLA. The C-Class ($38,400)was the one to move up.. and it did so to distance itself from the CLA

 

Pricing is moot. My point above (for Balthazar) is that I highly doubt these cars are being cross-shopped regardless of price. An Avalon is an 'entry-level' luxury sedan from Toyota that costs about the same, thus using the logic above, we must compare the rear seat legroom! It's an utterly ridiculous notion. Most importantly, if we're still foggy here... My second point is that, by lumping these cars into this cross-shopping propaganda, there are no possible positives to be made. The crappier faux-luxury Mercedes is winning the cross-shopping, if the cross-shopping is being done. Like I said, think about it... No, really... Think about it. Damn near same starting price and which car do people choose in that situation? The CLA. Do you really, truly, think that's happening? Didn't think so. 

^ Those are OK, see, because they're not General Motors; they're still struggling, boutique brands just starting out… not a huge monstrous evil corporate conglomerate machine that SHOULD be pumping out 60% of all industry sales if they weren't so (chose any 3 items from our ala carte menu of negative attributes).

First, see above. That's mostly for you. 

Now, we aren't talking about a Lexus GS or an Audi A6. Neither of those are worth the effort, and frankly, they're not better than their competition. Nor do I (or likely any of you) really care whether they sell well. Why don't I care? I'm not an Audi or Lexus enthusiast. I don't spend my time talking about them on a messaging board over at Audihumpers.com or Lexusphiles.com. I'm sure you get my point.

We are here because we have a passion for the cars we talk about day in and day out. We want Cadillac and all of GM to succeed. We want the absolute best for our favorite vehicles. This is why I care about the sales numbers. You can sugar-coat it all you want with your justifications for abysmal sales, but the truth is, it's not good for anyone. GM, as a large company, can offset any losses with its massive girth. Do you or I really know that the CTS and ATS aren't hemorrhaging money? No, because GM doesn't release model by model earnings each quarter; they release company-wide earnings. Those Silverados and Cruzes are likely paying for Cadillac's learning curve right now. Cadillac may be earning more per unit with higher transaction prices, but that doesn't guarantee earnings when sales are down.

For Cadillac's sake, we should care when sales have been free-falling for months on end. Not only that, we should care about what's keeping them from stopping this sales slump. What kind of armchair enthusiast sits there, making excuses, perfectly content to let the brand they're rooting for suffer?! "Sales are down, no worries, its those higher transaction prices. Niche status is the way to go, don't want to see too many of the same car on the road." I've never such silliness from a so-called group of enthusiasts. Where is the passion? 

Cadillac lacks models, and this rebuilding program has been going on since 2003 and isn't working.  It isn't hard to know you need either hybrid or diesel, and perhaps even both.  Cadillac doesn't have either.  Cadillac doesn't sell a convertible.  So obviously if someone wants a luxury convertible they are going to get a German car, or a Jaguar F-type.  I don't think Cadillac has what it takes to keep the products rolling out as fast as the other luxury brands do.

When the CT6 comes, it will just be another big sedan and it sort of looks like other Cadillacs, so people might see it as a $70,000 CTS/XTS type car.  It could get lost in the market with how weak of a job Cadillac does marketing new products.

Just to understand your point BV, what is your assumption behind CLA not cross shopped among higher trim Camry/Accord or Lower trim 3er/ATS?

I'd imagine the CLA is cross shopped with A3, top end Jettas, Passat CC even though it is larger, it is similar shape and German, Volvo S40/S60.

I understand what you're trying to say, that the CLA isn't being cross shopped and if it is, then that reflects badly on the ATS.   But what you're doing is projecting your good sense onto the shopping public as a whole.  You're assuming that shopper that cross shop a CLA and ATS will naturally gravitate to the better vehicle.  You simply cannot make that assumption.

The CLA is not a better vehicle than the ATS in most measurable ways.... in the very base trims, the CLA has more power than the ATS 2.5, but as soon as you option up the ATS with the 2.0T, the ATS walks away from the Benz.  CUE is the only sore spot on the Cadillac that I see.

The only way CLA is decidedly better than the ATS is in that all too critical  "I've always wanted to be able to say I drive a Mercedes-Benz" factor... and there is simply nothing Cadillac can do to combat that.  Cadillac could offer the CTS at the CLA price and it would still not overcome the "I want to say I drive a Benz" factor.   It also doesn't hurt that Benz is offering very subsidized leasing on the CLA.

Now, we aren't talking about a Lexus GS or an Audi A6. Neither of those are worth the effort, and frankly, they're not better than their competition. Nor do I (or likely any of you) really care whether they sell well. Why don't I care? I'm not an Audi or Lexus enthusiast. I don't spend my time talking about them on a messaging board over at Audihumpers.com or Lexusphiles.com. I'm sure you get my point.

 

We are here because we have a passion for the cars we talk about day in and day out. We want Cadillac and all of GM to succeed. We want the absolute best for our favorite vehicles. This is why I care about the sales numbers. You can sugar-coat it all you want with your justifications for abysmal sales, but the truth is, it's not good for anyone. GM, as a large company, can offset any losses with its massive girth. Do you or I really know that the CTS and ATS aren't hemorrhaging money? No, because GM doesn't release model by model earnings each quarter; they release company-wide earnings. Those Silverados and Cruzes are likely paying for Cadillac's learning curve right now. Cadillac may be earning more per unit with higher transaction prices, but that doesn't guarantee earnings when sales are down.

 

For Cadillac's sake, we should care when sales have been free-falling for months on end. Not only that, we should care about what's keeping them from stopping this sales slump. What kind of armchair enthusiast sits there, making excuses, perfectly content to let the brand they're rooting for suffer?! "Sales are down, no worries, its those higher transaction prices. Niche status is the way to go, don't want to see too many of the same car on the road." I've never such silliness from a so-called group of enthusiasts. Where is the passion?

 

The passion is holding GM Car X's criticism up to it's competition, because if when that is done and it's DISMISSED, that criticism becomes suspiciously about bashing rather than a legitimate concern, IMO. It's not about 'liking Lexus' as much as it's sifting thru layers of negativity in search of hard fact. Besides, using the singular metric of sales is only the passion of corporate accountants, not enthusiasts.

- - - - -

Month-to-month sales rates do not concern me: every brand sees fluctuations. I pay attention to annual, that's about it.

Cadillac U.S. sales since the recession/bankruptcy:

2009 : 109,092

2010 : 146,925

2011 : 152,389

2012 : 149,782

2013 : 182,543

2014 : 170,750

175K-200K is right where I'd like to see Cadillac. I would NOT like them to be 250K-350K in the U.S., that's an erosion of exclusivity. I believe it would be a fair guess that I have been a longer & stronger Cadillac enthusiast than most on this board.

- - - - - 

How can price NOT be a factor in consumer shopping??? Why do Cadillac MSRPs get knocked for appealing to the 'value shopper', but Cadillac's lease rates get knocked for NOT doing so? If numbers are a very minor factor, why do we harp on them so?

RE the CLA… MBUSA has reported that 75% of CLA buyers are NEW to a luxury brand. I don't believe these people are so much deciding for a CLA over an ATS as they are ponying up a few more payment bucks, bypassing their cam/cord choice and -like Drew says- claiming they 'got their MB'. But all these cars hover around the median new car MSRP of 34K. Like I said before; if John Q Consumer is going car shopping and has $40K to spend, he is (objectively) looking at a large swath of cars, including higher trim family sedans and entry-level luxury sedans.

If I were in that scenario (and I had the time), I would test drive everything in my segment of interest. I DON'T KNOW how many consumers are comparing the CLA & ATS directly, but it's only logical that at least some are because if you could afford one, you could afford the other. Who doesn't like choice?

Vipes, I acknowledge some of your basic points. I'm not denying that GM would like to see Cadillac sales higher, everyone connected with the Co. & the dealers would. That's just not MY desire, therefore I call it as I see it. But 'CTS sales slid last month, whaaaa!' when it outsells some of it's competition just isn't an issue for me. If the product is strong (which the CTS obviously is) and it makes a profit, I'm down.

Sales charts are for the accountants. Burning rubber/200 MPH is for enthusiasts.

Balth is correct as Cadillac is not longer a high volume car line and is not expected to be a high volume brand any longer.

Porsche in the 80's went high volume with lower value cars like the 924-944 and paid a big price as these cars were being crossed shopped with a Z/28 and while good for Chevy it lowered the image of Porsche. They went back to higher priced models with lower volumes and took about 10 years and regained their image back. If you look back now the only car of value in the 80's from Porsche with collectors and fans are the 911. The 944 if you can find a decent one sells for about the price of a good Fiero.

The CLA has two jobs. One it was to expand the MB market here in NA and also to pioneer the FWD concept for MB who cursed it for years and now realize they will need a few into the future in some markets. The fact is many Accord and Camry owners are now getting older and the kids are gone. While they may not be able to afford the higher series cars they can step up to a CLA. The other factor is most od these owners never owned let alone drove a RWD car. They hold all sorts of fear of death and destruction with RWD in the winter because they have no clue. They also like the fact they can say they have a MB.

Now MB may make more money now but will these cars fair as have the cheaper Porsche's in the future. Will the image of owning a CLA become one that being seen in one means you could not afford the good car as we saw at Porsche.

GM needs to stick to their game as their marketing is going to be different and targeting of models will be selective. Though into the future they will have to produce some smaller cars to meet the demands of some markets as that is where it is going.

As for sales now even in month to month drops even a 16% drop is a couple hundred cars not thousands. This is not a time of panic and with only better cars an Much Better Marketing we should see improvement.

Right now we have gotten the best marketing plan they have had in years so far. I am waiting to see where this goes and if it continues. No more dancing robots and no more where waldo in the ATS ad. This is the first dignified marketing and I hope that it can make a change. I just hope they feature much more product and features moving forward as MB does. MB can in one min sell technology, sex, image, safety and luxury. They are very effective with one min. 

If we're going to call things as they are. The CLA is Benz's Cimmaron.  It has absolutely been executed better than the Cimmaron was, but the intent and purpose is exactly the same; getting lower end customers to pay more for a luxury branded car with family car specifications. 

I understand many of the points made here but find most of them are still very subjective from a personal stand point.

An example is how they knock the ATS front end. So as a Comparison, here is the 2014 front ends of the German 3 plus Cadillac ATS. All nice in their own way and yet I see nothing wrong with the chiseled look of the ATS compared to the Feminine curvy look of the BMW, partial curvy female look of MB. The closest in a pure chiseled look is the rather bland Audio to me.

SMK and BlackViper bring up some interesting points about Cadillac especially the ATS. As such I thought I would go out to grab a comparison and of course Cadillac has a nice compare tool. So you can ding me if you think I am wrong but I do not see the engine issue, style issue, etc. of the points they bring up.

I will give BV Kudo's for pointing out and defending his take on those issues. SMK, I love that you want to defend MB and push what you believe, but I would love to see you state your reasoning more rather than 60,000 mile high generalization.

Here is what Cadillac has on their comparison. You tell me, how does ATS Fail against these two and this is truly 2015 models only.

I understand many of the points made here but find most of them are still very subjective from a personal stand point.

 

An example is how they knock the ATS front end. So as a Comparison, here is the 2014 front ends of the German 3 plus Cadillac ATS. All nice in their own way and yet I see nothing wrong with the chiseled look of the ATS compared to the Feminine curvy look of the BMW, partial curvy female look of MB. The closest in a pure chiseled look is the rather bland Audio to me.

 

Comparison1.jpg

Comparison2.jpg

Styling is subjective and perceived quality and reputation is just that perceived. These are two points that GM can not design into a car as it is public. Both are things that have to be earned with time and continued good execution.

Lets face it the Benz and BMW styling is pretty much a similar theme that has been refined over and over and over through the years to the point they have tweaked ever Millimeter. Same can be said for the 911 as nothing under the body is the same as the first model but the styling is just a ultra refined styling of many years of the first car. lets face it the German styling is not world class or leading in any artistic way but people see it as being superior just because they are Benz and BMW. If Chevy had used their styling first it would have been panned by the critics.  

The same can be said for the rest of the CTS and ATS. Both are very well built cars and well engineered  cars but they are first gen and new to the market. Cadillac as time goes on will refine these and advance them fast to more than meet and match anything the others have. In time people will catch on.

So in the mean time Cadillac will just need to continue to refine and improve the product. Increase sales a bit and remain profitable. By doing this they will remain strong and a reliable source of income for GM.

Now to increase sales we will not worry about selling 250K CTS but we will see more SUV and CUV models, The larger sedan and coupe and maybe two sports cars in the future. This is what Audi has done to control volumes but to expand sales.

Like I have said before BMW in America took time to build up as well as Audi. Both had some pretty crappy cars in the early 70's and who would have though both to be were they are now. Audi only was slowed to the party with the 60 Min hack job. It cost them ten years but they made it to the party.

GM with their resources and their support from the other brands they have may be able to close ground a little faster but it will still take time.

Having the same options doesn't mean it is the same car.  The ATS has more torque in the 2.0T than the Germans, but the C400 has an 80 lb-ft advantage over the ATS 3.6.  ATS has CUE, the Germans all have something better.  ATS isn't really striking a nerve with buyers, it seems to be stagnant already.  Whether it be lack of body styles, lack of a hybrid, CUE, build quality, styling, etc, for some reason it doesn't sell.

Lack of style is subjective.

Lack of hybrid is irrelevant for 95% of the customers.

Cue is not a bad system just initial user unfriendly. Once you spend a little time with is it works fine. Many long term magazine articles have pointed this out.

Build quality is as good or better than the others. While Cadillac still has room for improvement Benz and BMW are no where near what they used to be.  

Why is it not selling better?

The key points of Cadillac at this time are lack of Image. Image has to be earned and you have to travel the tough road of critic before you can earn it. We are on that road.

Marketing Sucked. The fact is we are just now getting a cohesive marketing plan that will usher in a new sense of style, luxury, technology and safety in the minds of customer. The marketing is what has sold the other brands for the most part It is not what you are but what people think you are. Right now the public has really not gotten their minds wrapped around Cadillac being more than a fancy Chevy.

Finally You have to earn your place with cars refined over years. If you can make a market winner and sell it at a higher price than more people would do it. You have to grow in this segment as you can not design or style your way over night.

The CTS started the Cadillac shift to rear drive and Art and Science 13 years ago.  Has marketing been bad all 13 years?  And who's fault is that if marketing sucks?  That is GM's own fault.  I also don't think the ATS and CTS are a marketing plan away from being hit sellers. 

Image hurts Cadillac for sure, but how do you repair that image?  You need flagship sedans and halo sports cars.  The CT6 I doubt is going to be a 7-series killer, let alone an S-class killer.  If the real flagship is coming in 2020, the competition can do a lot between now and then also.  Where is Cadillac's sport car?  There seems to be some unwritten rule at GM that nothing can out perform the Corvette.  Cadillac should have a Corvette killer, they are Cadillac, the best GM brand should have the best sports car.  Until Cadillac builds some legendary stuff, they are going to be like Acura or Infiniti.

Having the same options doesn't mean it is the same car.  The ATS has more torque in the 2.0T than the Germans, but the C400 has an 80 lb-ft advantage over the ATS 3.6.  ATS has CUE, the Germans all have something better.  ATS isn't really striking a nerve with buyers, it seems to be stagnant already.  Whether it be lack of body styles, lack of a hybrid, CUE, build quality, styling, etc, for some reason it doesn't sell.

Since you are willing to ignor the fair comparison of the cars listed under a 2.0L Turbo and quickly jump on the ATS 3.6 being weaker in Torque than the C400. I will follow your lead in saying you clearly are not able to learn new technology very fast as the CUE works fine once you learn it and I have had no problem with it. This in comparison to what I find to be pathetic systems in both BMW and MB with the stupid Dial, Mouse, Joystick what ever the Germans like to call it. That whole system is not user friendly to me in comparison to touching a screen.

Yes CUE can be slow at times and it will either get better fast or GM will dump it as they incorporate the APPLE / Android interface systems. Since the stories go back for years especially in the initial days of when MB and BMW brought out their joysticky / dial / mouse control for the nav / HVAC system, many complained and still do today about not being user friendly.

Interesting is the amount of people posting nothing but problems with Mercedes-Benze system.

http://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w204/395784-media-interface-plus-installation-problems-so-far.html

http://mbworld.org/forums/m-class-w163/444740-problems-my-media-interface-plus.html

http://www.benzworld.org/forums/w204-c-class/1645632-2012-c250-media-interface-problems.html

http://www.slkworld.com/slk-r171-general-discussion/90513-media-interface-plus-pairing-problems.html

PC Mag did a review of the MB latest non touch interface and stated that their system is a Step backwards in todays Touch World.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2472804,00.asp

Auto Guide has this to say about the 2015 C-Class - some of the added functionality is a little confusing and the interface does take some getting used to......

http://www.autoguide.com/manufacturer/mercedes-benz/2015-mercedes-benz-c-class-review-4053.html

CNET Review of the 2015 had this to say about the system - The Bad Connected infotainment features are crippled by an always-off Internet connection and the head-up display graphic is too large. 

http://www.cnet.com/products/2015-mercedes-benz-c-class/#!

Edmunds had this to say about the 2015 infotainment system - Cons Cool but clumsy touchpad infotainment interface; pricier than most competitors

http://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/c-class/2015/review/

So while yes many news outlets from car mags, to PC mags to news stories all for the most part talk highly about the the MB C-Class car, one thing that does come up over and over again is about the Mercedes-Benz’ COMAND infotainment system. You read and you see references to the outdated Blackberry type system to when will they drop their current system and get with a nice clean touchpad interface like Apple.

So while many do not like the CUE system as they say it is slow and clumsy, I say you need to learn it just as I know if I had to drive a BMW or MB auto with their system, I would have to learn it to make it work.

Right now I bet most people would be happy to have all these systems dropped in favor of your choice of an Apple or Android interface for the Auto Infotainment system.

The CTS started the Cadillac shift to rear drive and Art and Science 13 years ago.  Has marketing been bad all 13 years?  And who's fault is that if marketing sucks?  That is GM's own fault.  I also don't think the ATS and CTS are a marketing plan away from being hit sellers. 

 

Image hurts Cadillac for sure, but how do you repair that image?  You need flagship sedans and halo sports cars.  The CT6 I doubt is going to be a 7-series killer, let alone an S-class killer.  If the real flagship is coming in 2020, the competition can do a lot between now and then also.  Where is Cadillac's sport car?  There seems to be some unwritten rule at GM that nothing can out perform the Corvette.  Cadillac should have a Corvette killer, they are Cadillac, the best GM brand should have the best sports car.  Until Cadillac builds some legendary stuff, they are going to be like Acura or Infiniti.

Has the marketing been bad all 13 years? Well hell yes! And was it GM's Fault? Yes!

What I can see is you have no concept of what has been going on at GM all you want to look at is the cars in the show room.

Lets fill you in on what most of the rest of us know and understand.

GM has had money issues and leadership issues for a long time. You may have at least seen that in the news? The fact is GM for years never could commit to the full plan to make Cadillac right. For years they had people inside GM that wanted to fix them properly and then you had folks who said good was good enough. This left us at first with cars like the STS N Star FWD.

As you can see there are two groups inside GM at that time. As Bob Lutz calls them there are those in GM that are not the problem and there are those who are the problem.  So those who ware not the problems got the car to a Sigma platform to advance the model but yet those who are the problem still made them cheap out in many areas. While a much better car it was still not what it should be.

GM then entered the state where they really did not have the money to even pay attention. We had to roll though those years with what was in hand as they had to wait for the new funding to move ahead In this time what little money that was left was poured into the XTS and Alpha platform. GM wanted something for when they came out of the bail out. The XTS was only a car that was mostly done back in 08 that was shelved so they had something to offer while they retooled. It was better than nothing like Chrysler did for 5 years.

As the CTS and ATS progressed the folks who were not a problem started to fight back agains the evil people who were the problem. They fought for better quality interiors and other things to advance the brand. This left the cars still short of what the people who are not the problem wanted.

Today we have the New CT6 that was also a car those who are not the problem fought to get more with, They fought for everything they could and were even challenged on even the door handles buy the evil folks who are the problem. They could not see the wisdom of paying a couple bucks more for the first thing a customer touches in the car.

Well the battle of those who are not the problem was finally won by them last summer. They finally overcame the issues given to them by those who were the problem and now have full control. They first moved Cadillac away from Detroit to keep those who have been a problem from medaling. They have now funded Cadillac to build the cars they wanted all along. They are going to get the Door Handles they wanted as well as things like their own engines and other parts not shared with a Chevy Truck.

They have just now finally gotten away from the Marketing that has done nothing for decades. New firms new plans and the will try to sell Cadillac as a Cadillac not as just another GM car on rebate.

While these changes are not fully installed we are on the right path.

With that said are todays cars perfect no. Are they at least on part with some of the models from BMW and Benz? Hell Yes as neither of them are perfect either.

The fact is Cadillac is a much improved company but many have no clue as there was no concise message put out by someone fully in charge of the division. Like Johann or not his ass is on the line. When was the last time you heard that one guy was responsible for Cadillac?  This deal either works or it is all on him. I like that at he will make the calls and do what is needed without people looking over his shoulder over riding his plans.

To win at this GM can not just be as good as in many areas they have to be perceived as better all around. While a CTS may drive and ride as well as the other two they need to make it better than the other two in all areas not just most. You have to earn you place in perceived image as you can not design it or engineer it in just one model in just one year. This takes years of work in engineering, investment and marketing.

Right now Cadillac is about where BMW was in the late 70's were the cultist knew of them and others were beginning to discover them. When they became the ultimate driving machine they still had work to do. Note the marketing motto  that was started then carried them up the ladder and even yet today graces their advertising. It tells their story and presents their image. You get it right you do not have to change the plan ever couple years. They never had dancing robots. They put the car out doing artistic donut's in a parking lot to tell their story. Not a word is spoken in the ad and every one gets it.

This is a big picture deal. While you focus on the little things you are missing what is going on in the big picture. This is a division that went from Near Death like Lincoln to full support and backing that will take them to the next level. Today we can see how well they did with programs that were compromised by those who were the problem to now looking at the start of a uncompromised future where GM is not going to quiver over cheaper door handles and if they will use a $50,000 Camaro engine in a $100,000 Cadillac.

I would just recommend sit back and enjoy the ride as this will be fun to watch. The CT6 is not going to be the car to fix the issues as it is still a product of infighting. Will it advance the brand? Yes but the real change will be here once they get the product they have just started on once they were given the keys to the division. I expect the models from 2016-2021 will all show marked changes for the better and buy the release of the product they want in 2020-2021 it will reflect a one vision product not compromised by any insider who is trying to save a buck here or there.

In the mean time they need to get the marketing fixed and sell the products they have as they do have some damn good cars out there now. Good marketing will get the message out and people will discover this is not grandpa's Cadillac anymore or even the short changed product of the 90's.

With out good marketing it is easy to think a ATS as nothing but a new Catera. You have to get the message out on all that is good and great.

The CTS started the Cadillac shift to rear drive and Art and Science 13 years ago.  Has marketing been bad all 13 years? 

yes

IMO, the main defect of Cadillac's (& GM in general) marketing is the scarcity of it. 

He is just trying to run around circles again. He constantly harps about lack of marketing for GM products. Now he wants to prove how bad the products are hence lack of marketing went on back burner.

He is just trying to run around circles again. He constantly harps about lack of marketing for GM products. Now he wants to prove how bad the products are hence lack of marketing went on back burner.

Some folks are sharp enough to understand the whole picture but some can only focus on one part.

Over the years there have been a multitude of issues that have plagued Cadillac and GM. Today things are being sorted out. We have seen Cadillac move from a Morbid Lincoln like brand to a brand that can now be mentioned as a competitor of those considered best in class.

Is Cadillac at the final destination? No but they are well on the way and making better progress with each and every model. Cars like the CTS Coupe I was just in Is a great car other than the rear leg room but hey it is a coupe what do you expect? It is a better car than the sedan as it has seen improvement over that recent models. We will see more improvement with each and every coming model. These things are done in steps..

The fact is that CTS Coupe is great but how did GM Market it? They had some geeky Waldo creature driving around imagining that the super models were looking like him? This commercial just basically called Cadillac customers geeky Waldo's and that the car was cooler than him. While it did provide proof the car could enhance your image it really was given in a poor way. You want the customer to feel good about himself and that the car only makes him look even better.

The message here is buy a CTS coupe and get laid but not in these so many words not that you are some freak and girls will look at you if you get out of your basement and buy this car.

I have hope with the new marketing and I will know if they are on the right path if they continue to build on it and advance it as time rolls on. They appear to be telling a story of change and what it means. They have hinted at the new car and what it stands for. Next I suspect they will reveal  the car and then show us what it means and does.

Just no more dancing robots and commercials on massive rebates as this just kills you when you are rebuilding an image.

Marketing is not going to solve all the problems but it was one of the major damaged areas. If you have something good or great you need to get the message out. Today many a great things is over looked because people just do not know as so much info is tossed at them anymore. In this day and age you have to say what you mean and show what you have.

 

The CTS started the Cadillac shift to rear drive and Art and Science 13 years ago.  Has marketing been bad all 13 years? 

 

yes

 

So what is to say the next 13 years will be any better?  If they sucked at it for this long, why all of a sudden would they have the best marketing in the industry?  Marketing alone isn't going to save Cadillac anyway, the product line is still too thin and I think there is room for improvement in the existing products. 

GM spent $2.15 billion in advertising in the USA in 2013, Ford is the only car company that spent more.  The ads can't be that scarce because GM is spending the money.  So it isn't like they are going to spend more, they need to be more effective with what they do spend.

If this CT6 flops Cadillac is in trouble, because not only will it be a short term financial hit, the bean counters will step in and say no more high budget cars, work with turning Chevys into Cadillacs on a shoe string budget.

The trouble in the CT6 is in the definition.  I do not think nor expect it will be a S-class competitor in size and capacity.  I think it will be more of a CLS, which isn't a bad thing, just a different expectation.  I'm also suspicious because what we saw in the Cadillac CT6 commercial doesn't look large enough to be the same car that we've seen in spy shots.  They may be related, but the spy shot cars seem to be larger.

Let's say the CT6 is high 190s in length, it would be a little bigger than a CLS or 6-series Gran Coupe or about the size of the LS460.   At that size it isn't competing with an S-class or 7-series and it is unlikely the would jump to S-class pricing level.  So we could probably assume this is more of a $65-75,000 car. With that size and price the CLS, A7, and 6-series are competitors, but none of those are big volume cars to begin with, and when the CT6 goes on sale, a new E-class will be on sale at the same time, with a new CLS 1 year after.

This is a lot of speculating, but I still have a hard time seeing what the CT6 matches up against, it is conventional sedan, not a 4-door coupe or fastback type car, and the size is in between medium and large.  Seems like they are between segments.  I believe the E-class will have more of a leap forward than the C-class did, which makes me wonder if the CT6 will be better than the E-class, let alone competing with the CLS, and for get the S-class, the CT6 won't contend with that.