Rumorpile: GM Considers Dropping Six Passenger Vehicles (UPDATED)

Been saying it since day one, that a Volt Powertrain CUV would do much better than a 4 door car. The rest are pretty much understandable.

Sonic, Impala, Lacrosse, and CT6 would all be a damn shame to lose. I hate crossover culture. This is how the second renaissance of performance will die.

The most painful loss is the CT6 because of the massive investment in the Omega platform and the sheer missed potential of a more dramatically styled sedan flagship. I'm still hoping a refreshed CT6 can help it shine. The Impala and Lacrosse are simply the finest big sedans for the money. They get 30+ mpg highway with great V6 engines and sit 4 people plus abundant luggage very comfortably. Totally underappreciated cars in favor of less efficient, bulky crossovers with crap dynamics.

I'm actually surprised the Sonic is already out the door. The model was a major success long after it was introduced, and owes at least some of the dwindling sales to its age losing competitiveness. A second generation could have been a truly outstanding car, especially if we saw a genuine performance model.

The Volt can easily be transitioned into a compact crossover. It's silly that a electric/hybrid car that good is a losing proposition for GM when an inferior car like the Prius rakes in endless sales volume.

If gas prices shot up maybe the Sonic would get a reprieve, but subcompact hatches just aren't selling right now....  sadly, neither are full size cars. 

35 minutes ago, cp-the-nerd said:

Sonic, Impala, Lacrosse, and CT6 would all be a damn shame to lose. I hate crossover culture. This is how the second renaissance of performance will die.

The most painful loss is the CT6 because of the massive investment in the Omega platform and the sheer missed potential of a more dramatically styled sedan flagship. I'm still hoping a refreshed CT6 can help it shine. The Impala and Lacrosse are simply the finest big sedans for the money. They get 30+ mpg highway with great V6 engines and sit 4 people plus abundant luggage very comfortably. Totally underappreciated cars in favor of less efficient, bulky crossovers with crap dynamics.

I'm actually surprised the Sonic is already out the door. The model was a major success long after it was introduced, and owes at least some of the dwindling sales to its age losing competitiveness. A second generation could have been a truly outstanding car, especially if we saw a genuine performance model.

The Volt can easily be transitioned into a compact crossover. It's silly that a electric/hybrid car that good is a losing proposition for GM when an inferior car like the Prius rakes in endless sales volume.

Quoted in its entirety for truth...especially the big Buick!

The Sonic is a lame duck, the Malibu is better than the Impala, the Lacrosse is redundant, the XTS is even more redundant, the Volt is the right powertrain in the wrong car, and the CT6 is what the CTS should have been.

Nothing surprising here. I would argue nothing of real value, either.

actually it would make more sense to replace the Sonic with a made in Korea piece and get rid of the Spark.

I still don't get the anti-Impala ness.  It sells very well here and many folks want a v6 sedan.  I get that sedans are decreasing but i would actually enlarge the Impala and make it v6 unique.  Believe me, I drive a Malibu and there is still room for a plush, more solid larger sedan like the Impala.

As long as Buick has the chinese Lacrosse there is no point to not offer it here.  the problem is they screwed the pooch on the design.

The opportunity here is for the next Impala and 'Avenir' to be on a better platform.

I don't think they will get rid of the CT6 but i think they may repackage it and rename it.  Cadillac still badly needs a king size car.  They are dragging out the XTS because its cheaper to build, but there will be some point where it does become obsolete.

What's at work here is 3 things.  one is stupid unbearable govt and its noose tightening CAFE keeps putting pressure on weeding out large vehicles with bigger engines.  Two, for plant manufacturing planning, and to make anything here, the costs keep going up and they have to find vehicle configs and pricing that allow us to keep making SOME of our vehicles here.  They have to be vehicles that have big margins and not very small production numbers.  Third is I think they are trying to kill off a large sedan platform to save development costs.  But that doesn't wash for me because the LaCrosse is a stretched Regal / malibu now anyways.

If the Volt were packaged like a Crosstrek it would have been a big success.  The Bolt is a little too dorky in proportions IMO.

Volt should have become Malibu sized.  They can do that by changing the Malibu hybrid to plug in and problem solved.  Maybe make it a Malibu hatch with plug in.

These are predictions from "sources", not confirmed.

Obviously the CT6 isn't going anywhere.

Going one by one here:

The Impala/LaCrosse/XTS trio are dropping now, that market isn't coming back, by 2019 sales will be so small on that trio there will be no reason to continue with any of them.  And they are all related, so they all die together.

The Sonic is another hurting car in a hurting segment.  With the Spark at the bottom, they can import from Korea for the few that they sell.  Cruze and Malibu can eat the volume just as Honda gets by with Civic and Accord.  

The Volt they can drop, because post 2020, many cars will be a hybrid or plug-in hybrid.  So the technology stays, but they can put that tech in a Malibu, Equinox, Traverse, etc.

CT6 could be dropped, but I'd be surprised to see them drop the Omega platform.   Unless Omega can't support a crossover, then even with CTS moving to it and CT6, that isn't enough volume to make the platform viable, and they can just keep building the CTS off the Alpha chassis with Camaro and ATS.

I can't see a business case for a $13K Spark AND a $15K Sonic.
But the Spark is hideous in & out, I would dump it for the Sonic anyday (I've driven a Spark, but not a Sonic).
There's serious overlap there.

Personally, I suspect that the CT6 will survive.  Until further notice, the Escalade is NOT the flagship for Cadillac.  Few would ever accept that as a possibility.

The underlying technology of the Volt will survive and spread, even if the Volt does not.  Why there is no Volt crossover puzzles me.

As for Epsilon 2XXX (i.e. the Impala, Lacrosse and the XTS), one will certainly go and probably two.  The XTS is a little too backwards looking and not quite Cadillac enough anymore.  The Impala for some reason is being rejected for Traverses and Equinoxes.  And the Lacrosse may end up suffering the same fate as the Lucerne did in 2011.  No more large sedans is in my view rather sad, but time marches on.  It wasn't that long ago wagons were everywhere, only to be supplanted by minivans in the '90s.

As for the Sonic, I have no idea why Chevy has a Spark AND a Sonic.  One of them will go soon.

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

I can't see a business case for a $13K Spark AND a $15K Sonic.
But the Spark is hideous in & out, I would dump it for the Sonic anyday (I've driven a Spark, but not a Sonic).
There's serious overlap there.

Could merge into one product, but they need a cheap entry level car to compete with Versa, Accent, Fiesta, whatever Mitsubishi there is.  The Versa starts at like $11,800.  So they keep the cheap Spark, it is made in South Korea with cheaper labor.  Then the Cruze becomes the middle, Malibu the top.  3 Sedan/Hatch type cars is enough, because they have the Camaro too.

Wow...got this one on the nose!

As much as it breaks my heart to say that-GM doesn't need any of these models anymore....(good bye, Impy. )

With cars now on the forever slide, better keep the most popular ones now. Though they could bring them back if they needed to (like the colorado)

I'm going to miss the days of all the choices we had, but with the market on the downward trend- they are trying to keep their best choices around....

Maybe I'll look into GM's last american made compact before it heads to mexico....

Though I say after looking at the hatch, quality won't suffer though....

Also figure this will only be the first round of model cuts.....

6 hours ago, balthazar said:

I can't see a business case for a $13K Spark AND a $15K Sonic.
But the Spark is hideous in & out, I would dump it for the Sonic anyday (I've driven a Spark, but not a Sonic).
There's serious overlap there.

Eh, they're both toast at some point.

In the near future, I really think we are looking at 30k as the new entry level.......

Quite honestly, the XTS should have died 3 years ago.  So that is not a big loss. Its a NECESSITY actually to finally break free of a certain era that Cadillac itself is struggling with itself to shed.  

Yes. No.

Either go full on performance luxury or go full on quiet luxury. DO NOT do both. Its confusing for the would be customer.  The CT6 is in the middle of this mess.

Clowns to the left of it (CTS), jokers to the right (XTS)...here it is stuck in the middle with you!

The CTS should have been STS which should have been the CT6. Or should the XTS be reincarnated as the CT6?

Is the CT6 a quiet luxury car like the ΧΤS or is the CT6 a performance luxury car like the CTS?

Is the CTS the CT6? The so called name sounds the same...

Is the CT8 Omega based? Is it still on?

Is the CT5 Alpha based? Its not as if the CTS is setting world records for sales either!!!

The ATS morphing into the CT3....and Cadillac wants to go smaller???!!

Crossovers are selling....yeah....I see several Cadillac sedans getting the axe here not only the CT6 and the XTS....

But in all honesty, I think the CT5 will never make off the ground. I think the CT6 will get better marketing and therefore stay. After all, a TTV8 is scheduled for it .

The Escala will be the CT8.

The CT3 will never get off the ground either methinks.

The CT3 and the CT5 will get axed in favour of CUVs. The XT5 is here already and doing well.

The XTS V powertrain should have made it unto the Lacrosse to distance itself away from the Impala AND the Regal because in 2018, even the Regal is too close to the Lacrosse. 

The Impala never really took off like it should have. The 2nd generation Equinox should have been a bloody clue that big sedans were dead men walking as the Equinox exploded in sales year after year and its highest being 5 years AFTER its introduction almost doubling its first year sales while the Impala had a fraction of those sales...

Ditto for the Lamba SUVs. Those just continued on selling and those were as old as the 1st generation Theta SUVs.

The Malibu grew bigger on the inside to almost Impala levels of interior space, designed to look like the Impala all for a cheaper price than the Impala.

All that is sealing the Impala's fate. Ditto for the Lacrosse because all that applies to the Lacrosse. The Lacrosse also has its own Malibu scenario in the Regal. Not too mention that the Impala and the Lacrosse are cannibalizing each other with the little sales that are left for each other.

The Volt....

I dont think it will get the axe. At the very least, the Volt's tech will find its way into a SUV type body. The name Volt does not necessarily mean it has to go away either....

The Chevy Trax takes care of the Sonic. No big loss there!

If cheap entry level car is needed. The Trax could be decontented to be sold on the cheap. It has the the Buick version selling like hot cakes to balance out the profit margins.

Heck, give a version to Cadillac (obviously NOT as a badge engineered model!) to sell at a higher still price and voila!

>>...a quiet luxury car... or a performance luxury car?<<

EVERY luxury brand does degrees of both. Some folk seem to want to hold Cadillac to a one-dimensional point in space AFA 'definition' goes, whereas the competition generally has a far wider range of product by 'definition' than Cadillac.

>>.DO NOT do both. Its confusing for the would be customer.<<
Absolutely do both. It's NOT confusing. Tastes & trends ebb & flow, diversity is key to anticipating that. With lambo/ferrari/porsche becoming truck manufacturers, there is no one dimensionality in the auto industry... not if you want to survive.

CT6 is the spearhead going into the future. It's EASY to use another supplier and upgrade -say- your leather upholstery. Nailing class-leading chassis dynamics/technology AND weight in one move is what's hard. That's the foundation for a vehicle's success right there- everything else beyond that & powertrain is icing.

The Omega chassis doesn't have enough global volume.  The profit margins probably aren't so high on the CT6 when other big sedans sell for $30,000 more.  So if there isn't a change in the formula the CT6 and that chassis are dead.

They need an Omega based crossover to get the volume.  But when Cadillac can rebadge and Enclave and sell it for $60k and they have the Escalade, will product planners want to spend money on an Omega crossover?

Chevy and GMC could each take on 2 more crossovers, that is 4 products that they could build in Hamtramck.  But you also have to wonder if you even need more styles of crossovers?  Crossovers are so homogeneous between brands and buyers don't care, car companies can limit choices and the people will still buy them.

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

>>...a quiet luxury car... or a performance luxury car?<<

EVERY luxury brand does degrees of both. Some folk seem to want to hold Cadillac to a one-dimensional point in space AFA 'definition' goes, whereas the competition generally has a far wider range of product by 'definition' than Cadillac.

>>.DO NOT do both. Its confusing for the would be customer.<<
Absolutely do both. It's NOT confusing. Tastes & trends ebb & flow, diversity is key to anticipating that. With lambo/ferrari/porsche becoming truck manufacturers, there is no one dimensionality in the auto industry... not if you want to survive.

CT6 is the spearhead going into the future. It's EASY to use another supplier and upgrade -say- your leather upholstery. Nailing class-leading chassis dynamics/technology AND weight in one move is what's hard. That's the foundation for a vehicle's success right there- everything else beyond that & powertrain is icing.

Yeah...that is why Cadillac sedans sales are through the roof...

What little sales gains they have...are of the SUV  variety....and in China...

So yeah...do both...for China....

In the USA....well...a tad more FOCUSED strategy is in order....

Its fine if we both dont agree on this....

But....take a look at US sales...on this path...Cadillac will just be a crossover seller...

PS: Please dont tell me with a straight face that  what Cadillac is doing is anything but confusing...

If it wasnt confusing...then month by  month sales of ALL its sedans would NOT be down in the USA...

If it wasnt confusing....then the CT6 would have had SUBSTANTIAL sales gains...like the ΧT5...

PSS: Cadillac is selling a ton of vehicles in...CHINA.

For the first time in history....Cadillac sells  more outside its home base.

I think we are letting that bit of good news clout our judgement about what really is going on in the USA...

Well oldshurst, it is not that we do not care what GM is doing in China.  It is that most of us care about what is sold here. 

Sure, Cadillac could use some clarity here.  They ultimately need to decide whether the standard is defeating BMW or Lexus.  The XTS is a dead car walking at this point.  An Omega crossover would work wonders for Cadillac and keep the CT6 on dealer lots and make the platform $$$ case better.  Cadillac does NOT need an Enclave clone; it needs an upgraded CUV to take care of the large luxury CUV segment.  The XT5 is doing well in its midsize luxury CUV segment, especially against the Lexus RX.  The ATS seems to be doing OK but can do better.  Historically, Cadillac has been the smooth ride luxury leader for decades, but the market switched to the Germans back in the '80s and especially after Lexus debuted in 1990.  I wish I had an answer for Cadillac's situation. 

9 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

Well oldshurst, it is not that we do not care what GM is doing in China.  It is that most of us care about what is sold here. 

Sure, Cadillac could use some clarity here.  They ultimately need to decide whether the standard is defeating BMW or Lexus.  The XTS is a dead car walking at this point.  An Omega crossover would work wonders for Cadillac and keep the CT6 on dealer lots and make the platform $$$ case better.  Cadillac does NOT need an Enclave clone; it needs an upgraded CUV to take care of the large luxury CUV segment.  The XT5 is doing well in its midsize luxury CUV segment, especially against the Lexus RX.  The ATS seems to be doing OK but can do better.  Historically, Cadillac has been the smooth ride luxury leader for decades, but the market switched to the Germans back in the '80s and especially after Lexus debuted in 1990.  I wish I had an answer for Cadillac's situation. 

9 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

Well oldshurst, it is not that we do not care what GM is doing in China.  It is that most of us care about what is sold here. 

Well...yes!

What Cadillac is doing here!

And what is that?

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/cadillac/

The ATS is in free fall...

Month to month in 2017 does not seem promising

The CTS also in decline...a joke is more like it!!!

In 2017...its presence is ghost like....

The CT6...for a brand new model is pathetic...

But at least its sales are on the up....

So....please dont tell me the marketing in the US is NOT confusing....

17 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

The XTS is a dead car walking at this point.  An Omega crossover would work wonders for Cadillac and keep the CT6

Sure....but like I said....Cadillac is heading to be EXACTLY just that in the USA....a crossover seller.

18 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

Cadillac does NOT need an Enclave clone; it needs an upgraded CUV to take care of the large luxury CUV segment.  The XT5 is doing well in its midsize luxury CUV segment, especially against the Lexus RX. 

You better believe it needs an Enclave clone in the USA.

Yes....just like the SRX before it...the XT5 is doing awesome. And THAT is why Cadillac needs an Enclave lone as its sedans are non-existent States side...

20 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

The ATS seems to be doing OK but can do better.

My link suggests otherwise....

21 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

Historically, Cadillac has been the smooth ride luxury leader for decades, but the market switched to the Germans back in the '80s and especially after Lexus debuted in 1990.  I wish I had an answer for Cadillac's situation. 

Yes....but that all changed in the early 1990s when they realized what was up with the Germans with the FWD STS Northstar . Its just that Cadillac half assed that strategy. It continued to half-ass that strategy with the Cadillac that was suppose to Zig and Zag with the Opel Omega based Catera thing. 1st generation and 2nd generation CTS was a good direction but 3rd gen RWD STS was a strategy that was half-assed again...

1st generation ATS and 3rd generation CTS along with the name change with the CT6 just confused the shyte out of potential buyers...

27 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

I wish I had an answer for Cadillac's situation. 

I do too,, buddy!

I do too!

But I am NOT afraid to call a spade a spade.

Some of us are though!!!

>>Yeah...that is why Cadillac sedans sales are through the roof...
Please dont tell me with a straight face that  what Cadillac is doing is anything but confusing...
If it wasnt confusing...then month by  month sales of ALL its sedans would NOT be down in the USA...<<

"Confusion" is not the causation behind sales. If you disagree, please post your data.
I'm not remotely confused by Cadillac's catalog (and I've never owned one).
Or perhaps you are right and 'confusion' is more widespread than you think :

AUDI ~
A3 : down 29% (1904 units/June)
A6 : down 4% (1425 units)
A7 : down 25% (224 units)
A8 : down 18% (301 units)
Only the 'non-confusing' A4 & A5 are up.

Look up the other segment sedans- are they also 'confusing'?

>>PSS: Cadillac is selling a ton of vehicles in...CHINA.<<
They use the same names there- why aren't the Chinese 'confused'?

>>For the first time in history....Cadillac sells  more outside its home base.<<
That's actually a very GOOD track record - the Germans crossed that line DECADES ago.
Haven't many people lamented Cadillac is a 'U.S. market only' vehicle, to it's detriment?

46 minutes ago, balthazar said:

>>Yeah...that is why Cadillac sedans sales are through the roof...
Please dont tell me with a straight face that  what Cadillac is doing is anything but confusing...
If it wasnt confusing...then month by  month sales of ALL its sedans would NOT be down in the USA...<<

"Confusion" is not the causation behind sales. If you disagree, please post your data.
I'm not remotely confused by Cadillac's catalog (and I've never owned one).
Or perhaps you are right and 'confusion' is more widespread than you think :

AUDI ~
A3 : down 29% (1904 units/June)
A6 : down 4% (1425 units)
A7 : down 25% (224 units)
A8 : down 18% (301 units)
Only the 'non-confusing' A4 & A5 are up.

Look up the other segment sedans- are they also 'confusing'?

>>PSS: Cadillac is selling a ton of vehicles in...CHINA.<<
They use the same names there- why aren't the Chinese 'confused'?

>>For the first time in history....Cadillac sells  more outside its home base.<<
That's actually a very GOOD track record - the Germans crossed that line DECADES ago.
Haven't many people lamented Cadillac is a 'U.S. market only' vehicle, to it's detriment?

46 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I'm not remotely confused by Cadillac's catalog (and I've never owned one).
Or perhaps you are right and 'confusion' is more widespread than you think :

AUDI ~
A3 : down 29% (1904 units/June)
A6 : down 4% (1425 units)
A7 : down 25% (224 units)
A8 : down 18% (301 units)
Only the 'non-confusing' A4 & A5 are up.

Look up the other segment sedans- are they also 'confusing'?

The average Joe is confused....put blinders on. I dont care.

But Ill show you how Audi and BMW wipe the floor with Cadillac...confusion or not...it dont matter.  Cadillac sedan sales are in the dumpster.

Is it confusion? It dont matter. You could use semantics to try to dismiss Cadillac sales mediocrity...

The ATS MAIN competition

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/bmw/bmw-3-series-4-series/

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/audi/audi-a4/

Im not even gonna try to prove how  crappy the  CTS sales are  compared to the Audi A6 and the BMW 5 Series....you know...the  CTS' MAIN competition.

Arent you a main believer of who cares what is happening OUTSIDE the US?

Well...maybe its the semantics argument that you care about mostly...

What is bugging you the most is the confusion argument...

Hey...

You may be right
I may be crazy
But it just may be a lunatic you're looking for
Turn out the light
Don't try to save me
You may be wrong for all I know
Im probably right!!!

Just updated with some comments made by Cadillac President on the CT6 - a model which to my mind doesn't make any sense to kill off so soon.

Yes, the #1 seller in the segment makes ALL OTHER competitor sales numbers look 'bad'. Thanks for the heavy lifting.

You're falling into the same 'metric hole' that smk does- sales mean everything and anyone who's not #1 is 'dying' or needs to be killed off.
All the negative press centered around Cadillac sales numbers when -in the U.S. market- audi is in the same volume boat. Where is the hand-wringing over audi pulling out of the U.S. market? When Cadillac annual sales dropped 8% 2 years ago, it was all 'tailspin' and 'slumping', but when BMW shows the same degree of drop; nary a whisper.

Cadillac is not a full-line, high volume, mass-market brand, I don't know what's so frickin hard to understand about that. They just aren't and they're not angling to be.

Corvette is "wiping the floor" vs. 911 in U.S. sales, 13707 vs. 4395 thru June. Should Porsche change up it's "confusing" catalog? Should they consider dropping the 911? Consolidate the Boxster/Cayman/911 into one car (total sales 6869 thru June)? Those are 'crappy sales numbers' vs. it's MAIN competition (I'm aware the 911 starts @ $89K- all hi-po sports car purchases are disposable income- the price tier thing is far less relevant that in other segments) Guess what- no one gives a shit how few 911's sell relative to other hi-po sports cars (except Porsche accountants, perhaps). Everybody is just happy a competitive, cool sports coupe exists to buy.

Tho Cadillac has not shown me their books, I am confident they are highly profitable overall, and with limited production capacity- they may want to grow slowly if at all. Perhaps... JUST perhaps; the brand is more concerned with PROFIT over volume. None of us here can make any calls on that issue; no data.

- - - - -

BMW 3/4 series : 48,058 thru June.
Audi A-4 : 17,269 thru June.
Cadillac ATS : 7,209 thru June.

Numbers-wise, the 3/4-Series is wiping the floor with the A-4. Yes, and there's a considerable volume margin between the A-4 & ATS, also.

I DON'T CARE. I would NEVER buy a car based on how many OTHER people buy that car- that's immaterial. Where would Tesla be if people approached their early product with the same mindset?
Is the ATS, physically, competitive in it's segment? Obviously; it is. Is it profitable for it's maker? That is an unknown, but gets back to the business case of whether or not it's 'healthy' for the brand. Beyond that, and any question of reliability/longevity... if the car appeals to ME and I'm agreeable to the price, I'll buy it.

The sales charts tell the story.  The 3-series has grown sales.  The C-class and E-class both sell more than they did 10 years ago and they didn't even have a GLK/GLC back then.  So they survived the move to crossover without losing sedan business.  

As far as Porsche 911 goes, that car alone might make more profit than the whole Cadillac line, or Acura or Lincoln line.  They make over $20,000 per car profit on the 911.  

CTS and ATS sales are so far down, they could kill both and bring out a new crossover and no one would care, they'd make more money.

35 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The sales charts tell the story.

Consumers DON'T CARE. I don't, either.
Frankly, I wish my Buick was far rarer than it is (11,451 units). Were it the same year Eldorado hardtop, it'd be 1 of 975 hardtops. HEY! Cadillac should have dropped the Eldorado for '60 and not bothered with future years where the car was selling 40K units a year (1972). I mean; "free fall", right?

>>As far as Porsche 911 goes, that car alone might make more profit than the whole Cadillac line, or Acura or Lincoln line.<<
Yeah; no. The entire reason Porsche went into making CUVs was to stay afloat (per company talking heads).

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

Consumers DON'T CARE. I don't, either.
Frankly, I wish my Buick was far rarer than it is (11,451 units). Were it the same year Eldorado hardtop, it'd be 1 of 975 hardtops. HEY! Cadillac should have dropped the Eldorado for '60 and not bothered with future years where the car was selling 40K units a year (1972). I mean; "free fall", right?

>>As far as Porsche 911 goes, that car alone might make more profit than the whole Cadillac line, or Acura or Lincoln line.<<
Yeah; no. The entire reason Porsche went into making CUVs was to stay afloat (per company talking heads).

Yes, Porsche is so poor, they bought 52% of Volkswagen.  The world's largest car manufacturer.  

16 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Yes, Porsche is so poor, they bought 52% of Volkswagen.  The world's largest car manufacturer.  

WRONG WRONG WRONG, WOW, do you not know your history. Porsche owned less than 20% of VW, ran up debt to have what would have been 75% of VW and the bank market crashed and called their loans. Yet VW stepped up and bought the remaining 50.1% of outstanding stock to own Porsche backed by germany, Emir from Qatar and select other private financing to become VW 10th brand.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/jul/05/volkswagen-buys-porsche

Want to see the time line, then see this great write up covering how Porsche attempted to buy VW and VW gobbled them up.

http://www.automobilemag.com/news/porsche-and-volkswagen-what-happened/

Plenty of more news stories that cover the truth!

I am glad that the CT6 is not on the chopping block.  As for why the ATS and CTS are not selling, especially compared to MB and BMW and Audi, I don't know what to do about that.

The fact that the XT5 is doing gangbusters does necessitate a larger and smaller crossover for Cadillac.  But an Enclave clone may seem like badge engineering if Cadillac is not careful.  That is WHY I advocated an Omega crossover to distinguish the Cadillac from the Lambda CUVs.  Cadillac needs competitive and unique vehicles people will flock to dealerships to buy off the lots period, regardless of which side of the Pacific Ocean we are talking about.  A better question is: where the hell is the luxury compact CUV?  Buick has its Encore; Cadillac needs a better version of one too --- right now.

Cadillac can survive (and probably thrive) with two cars and the rest are CUVs and SUVs.  The CT6 is mandatory; an upgraded ATS or CTS should be the other since sales of both look problematic.

HA!

Sales dont matter???!!!

Tell that to:

• Plymouth
• Mercury
• Pontiac
• Oldsmobile
• AMC
• Duesenberg
• Auburn
• Cord
• Checker
• Hudson
• Should we include Saturn?
• GM as a whole almost did not make it
• Chrsyco as whole is STILL on the brink...

Because as we all know...sales is just numbers that mean nothing...sure the ATS and the CTS have buyers...

And sure Pontiac also had buyers and Oldsmobile too had buyers and so did Duesenberg and Hudson...

Blockbuster also had customers and Sears STILL has some customers...but yeah, Im falling into the 'sales trap' because sales are just numbers and as long as there are customers to keep the lights on....

Yeah....Im falling into the "sales trap"...

I dont know why the ATS and the  CTS arent selling either...the term confusion just angers some of us...

But yeah....1000 units per month for the ATS and 800-900 units for the CTS should be enough to keep the lights on at GM...

That is why GM did NOT axe the Firebird and Camaro.

Nor the STS.

Nor the Fiero.

Nor the Allante.

Nor the LeSabre.

Nor the Park Ave.

Nor the Fleetwood.

Nor the Toronado.

Nor the Caprice.

Nor the Bel Air.

Nor the Riviera....

Because sales figures are just numbers and dont mean a damned thing...because there are  customers that dont care what sales each model and brand do month to month....as long as the lights are still open for business...

• Plymouth
• Mercury
• Pontiac
• Oldsmobile
• AMC
• Duesenberg
• Auburn
• Cord
• Checker
• Hudson

Id like to buy a brand new 2018 Oldsmobile Alero...because as you know...I dont care about sales figures and I buy what nobody else buys and I want my brand new 2018 Olds Intrigue NOW!!!

Not a Buick or a Chevy.

An Olds Intrigue new for 2018 .....

Because as we all know...sales dont mean a damned thing!!!

• Pontiac sold 462,583 vehicles in calendar year 2007, but in December of 2008 GM announced it was considering shuttering the storied brand.

• Oldsmobile sold 289K vehicles in 2000, yet in December of that year GM announced the phase out of Olds.

• Guess who's sold a mere 507 cars in the U.S. year to date? Lamborghini.

Sales are incidental; PROFIT matters.

28 minutes ago, balthazar said:

• Pontiac sold 462,583 vehicles in calendar year 2007, but in December of 2008 GM announced it was considering shuttering the storied brand.

• Oldsmobile sold 289K vehicles in 2000, yet in December of that year GM announced the phase out of Olds.

• Guess who's sold a mere 507 cars in the U.S. year to date? Lamborghini.

Sales are incidental; PROFIT matters.

Without sales....there are NO profits...

You need the sales, to make the profits....

Keeping the lights on is NOT enough...profits need to be worth while for the lights to remain on.

Working for a little something at the end of the day may not be worth while to continue to keep the lights on...

That part right there:

Quote

Working for a little something at the end of the day may not be worth while to continue to keep the lights on

...we are saying the same thing....hence your Olds and Pontiac sales figures...

The thing YOU have backwards is that it takes sales to actually make a profit.

One could minimize all expenses and costs...it takes sales to produce a profit.

It takes mucho sales to produce a worth while profit.

Depending at what price point you are selling your product.

High price usually goes with high desirability in order to not sell as much as your neighbor. But you gotta convince the people that are gonna buy your high priced object that your product shall be a desirable product.

The ATS and CTS are CLEARLY NOT as desirable as their neighbors products...

Pontiac and Oldsmobile got their clocks cleaned out by their competition.

Its safe to say that while there are sales....not enough sales to produce a worth while profit exists.

Increase ATS and CTS sales...increase profits to make it worth while.

One could further cut ATS and CTS costs to possibly increase profits that way and try price them HIGHER than what they sell for now...but I doubt the desired SALES effect will be achieved...I think it further a downward spiral of sales....

Profits are incidental...NOT the other way around.

8 hours ago, William Maley said:

Just updated with some comments made by Cadillac President on the CT6 - a model which to my mind doesn't make any sense to kill off so soon.

It's just tough because of where cars sales might go. It's tough as I agree-it would be a waste to kill it now. But if car sales decline at a bigger rate than expected-there may not be much of a choice.....

>>Without sales....there are NO profits... <<
Right, but Cadillac HAS SALES.

>>You need the sales, to make the profits.... <<
Right; Cadillac sales; the sales they have. We got that established.
7200 ATSs sold in 6 months. Lot of vehicles. I have no concern or problem with that number, because BY ITSELF, it's meaningless. Bentley sold 1100 cars in the same period- the number by itself is meaningless. How much profit was made? Not about 'keeping the lights on'- how much literal profit are these vehicles making? Do you know the profit margin on the ATS? DO you know the profit threshold where GM starts stroking it's chin whiskers and thinking about the axe? Because I'd like to know these teeny, enormously significant facts, wouldn't you?

Tesla sold like 60K vehicles last year (don't quote me- shooting from the hip). Profit was $0 per car. If they had instead sold 200K vehicles, or 500K... is turning a profit assumed?? I'll answer- it is not.

>>...we are saying the same thing....hence your Olds and Pontiac sales figures... <<
We're saying the opposite from where I sit. Pontiac had HUGE sales (& economies of scale in many instances), but it didn't mean the Division was going to continue. Because it wasn't about 482,xxx sales. Which is why the ATS @ 14K sales and Lamborghini at 500 sales doesn't tell us anything.

>>Its safe to say that while there are sales....not enough sales to produce a worth while profit exists.<<
Are you talking about heritage brands here, or Cadillac today?

>>Increase ATS and CTS sales...increase profits to make it worth while.<<
Again I ask- what is the profit margin on the ATS; you seem to have some inside information. How do you know 14K annual "isn't worth while"?

Interesting that Johan says no plan to cancel the CT6, he didn't defend any of those other cars which I think sort of confirms they are history at the end of their life cycles.   I hear team owners say the head coach is safe and they have full confidence in him and a week later the coach is fired too.  

I suspect  Cadillac will go to 2 sedans.  I have said for years they need rear drive Alpha and Omega based crossovers.  

Oldshurst has made great points.  Here is why sales matter.  These sedan segments are shrinking.  Just like minivans shrank and if you weren't top 3 or 4 it was hard to survive.  GM, Ford and Hyundai got out of minivans because sales fell.  Chevy and Ford look like they'll get out of full size sedans, Cadillac may get out of mid size sedans.  These segments just can't support 8 or 9 players, the strong survive the weak give up and focus somewhere else.

econ 101

I suggest Balthy, you go back to school!!!

As far as the last you you asked me...

Balthy....

.Im just commenting on this thread.....I am NOT the source...this thread is suggesting the outcome you so wanna deny.

I added the ATS and the CTS as that is what I thought would actually get the axe. I doubted the CT6 would get axed, as did you.

I used several dead GM models, models that sold MORE than the ATS and CTS and they got canceled as comparisons...

The Camaro got 40 000 sales in 2002...its last year. From 1996 to 2002, it hit 55 000 and 60 000 twice and regurarly got 40 000. It even had 100 000 plus sales at its 4rth gen intro.  Not to mention Firebird sales. Which was a fraction of Camaro sales...

So....

CTS used to sell 50-60,000 per year, now it is under 10,000 a year.  GM is a volume car maker, they look for big numbers not niche players in a mid size sedan segment.  I could see it getting the axe and CT6 staying ATS growing in size but not price and becoming CT4.  

19 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

GM is a volume car maker, they look for big numbers not niche players

Even the Corvette is a volume car...

GM sells at volume.

Pontiac and Oldsmobile did not sell enough to generate enough profits to stay alive,

There was so  much cost cutting and badge engineering and selling to rental agencies to try to maximize profits that even that was not enough volume....ie SALES....to avoid bankruptcy...

Balthy wants to pretend that GM is a boutique car maker like Lambo and Porsche yet both Lambo and Porsche operate under a bigger corporation to minimize costs, yet that aint enough so both now are offering volume SUVs to boost SALES to boost profits...

GM...its all about the sales...

The Vette nearly got canned SEVERAL times in its history because it did not generate enough profit? No! Not enough SALES to generate enough PROFIT!

(if GM decided that the Vette would be the only model to be a loss leader somewhere in its existence....so be it)

(I aint saying its a loss leader now,  its reported to be making ACCEPTABLE profits with the sales they get from it, but there was a time not too long ago that GM was not exactly on board with a next gen C8 even...and it sold OK....just not enough)

The same is happening with the ATS and CTS...and like you said

54 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Here is why sales matter.  These sedan segments are shrinking.  Just like minivans shrank and if you weren't top 3 or 4 it was hard to survive.  GM, Ford and Hyundai got out of minivans because sales fell.  Chevy and Ford look like they'll get out of full size sedans, Cadillac may get out of mid size sedans.  These segments just can't support 8 or 9 players, the strong survive the weak give up and focus somewhere else.

26% of GM sales are cars, 74% is truck/van/crossover.  GM has too many sedans, and the sedans they have aren't good enough to fight off the competition.  

As beautiful as the LaCrosse is, I recently test-drove one, and my 17-year-old Aurora has better ride and handling characteristics.  LaCrosse is too soft, and quite frankly it's a bit too expensive for what you get.  There's some weird nickel-and-diming with option packages/trim levels, too, which I found off-putting.  For example, each trim level gets a different rear seat armrest.  One is just an armrest, one has molded cupholders, and then one has molded cupholders AND a rather useless, shallow storage area.  WHY??  Seems to me it would have been a hell of a lot cheaper to design and assemble ONE design and put it in every trim level.  I also looked at the Impala...and it's really no cheaper than the LaCrosse at comparable feature levels despite a decidedly downmarket interior.  No surprise these two aren't really selling.

Waiting to test-drive the Regal Sportback later this fall.

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

Balthy wants to pretend that GM is a boutique car maker like Lambo and Porsche yet both Lambo and Porsche operate under a bigger corporation to minimize costs...

Re-read my posts in this thread- I NEVER claimed the parent corporation as 'boutique' and I never addressed those other models mentioned in the O/P - ONLY Cadillac / the CT6.

GM has plenty of room to develop profit across it's corporate catalog ($9.4B last year) AND retain some 'boutique' models in the Cadillac line (even some that don't turn a profit, potentially).

5 hours ago, balthazar said:

Re-read my posts in this thread- I NEVER claimed the parent corporation as 'boutique' and I never addressed those other models mentioned in the O/P - ONLY Cadillac / the CT6.

GM has plenty of room to develop profit across it's corporate catalog ($9.4B last year) AND retain some 'boutique' models in the Cadillac line (even some that don't turn a profit, potentially).

Yeah.

But you did tell me about a boutique manufacturer Lamborghini selling 500 units of one model versus a volume seller Cadillac, albeit low volume, but not as low as we might hope as your example of the ATS selling 14 000 units also has platform brothers in a Chevy Camaro and a bigger brother Cadillac CTS to help minimize costs to maximize profits. (both operate under a bigger umbrella corporation to help with the expenses and costs)

500 units sold at 200 000-300 000 dollars

14 000 units sold at  approx. 40 000 dollars

A Lamborghini is a high dollar, highly desirable boutique product that is marketed that way.

A ATS is an "entry level luxury" car that may be coveted by some, but its still should sell in high enough volumes to stick around.

The Camaro and CTS platform mates all help each other maximize profits by  minimizing costs.

This is the crutch of our discussion:

Even if we manage to get zero expenses and zero costs somehow to get the highest possible profit, which in this case is 100%....if we dont sell a single unit, there is no profit!

Depending what we want to sell and how we want to sell it, low volume/high price, or high volume /low price, or best scenario high volume/high price, we have to convince buyers to buy.

In this zero cost/zero expense scenario, if we sell, but we dont sell enough worthy of our time and effort despite 100% profits, because that cost and expense is always a factor too, then this operation is soon to be toast.

GM throughout the years, has NO difficulty shutting down not only models, but entire brands because enough sales are not there!

The Vette only recently may have achieved special status to allow it to be more boutique.

It may not be the case though as the C8 barely made it through...

The mention of Lambo was to illustrate that sales VOLUME is immaterial; you can have ANY volume and survive as a business if you have profit (or, in the case of Tesla; investors & a billionaire CEO putting his own money in).
This is why I will not and cannot comment on ATS or CT6 volume as it relates to profit, because none of us know the profit level on these individual models.

Of course there are ALWAYS a number of other factors involved in an individual model living or dying, you mention CTS/Camaro amortizing costs- very true. Hypothetically and for example, the Camaro might be 'covering' for the CTS so overall the 3 models en total are profitable. The bottom line would incorporate all these monetary factors- they need to fold into the cost per car, accounting-wise, to make a determination.

Pontiac ALSO had considerable political weight on it's shoulders; GM sacrificed the brand (along with others) as a condition of securing BK funding. Horribly unfortunately and unusual an influencing factor.

It's difficult to talk about business case absolutes in an industry as hugely complex as the auto industry.

8 hours ago, Croc said:

As beautiful as the LaCrosse is, I recently test-drove one, and my 17-year-old Aurora has better ride and handling characteristics.  LaCrosse is too soft, and quite frankly it's a bit too expensive for what you get.  There's some weird nickel-and-diming with option packages/trim levels, too, which I found off-putting.  For example, each trim level gets a different rear seat armrest.  One is just an armrest, one has molded cupholders, and then one has molded cupholders AND a rather useless, shallow storage area.  WHY??  Seems to me it would have been a hell of a lot cheaper to design and assemble ONE design and put it in every trim level.  I also looked at the Impala...and it's really no cheaper than the LaCrosse at comparable feature levels despite a decidedly downmarket interior.  No surprise these two aren't really selling.

 

Waiting to test-drive the Regal Sportback later this fall.

Because the 2nd Gen Aurora was a great car.

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

It's difficult to talk about business case absolutes in an industry as hugely complex as the auto industry.

I absolutely agree 100% to this!!!

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

Pontiac ALSO had considerable political weight on it's shoulders; GM sacrificed the brand (along with others) as a condition of securing BK funding. Horribly unfortunately and unusual an influencing factor.

Yes. That is true also.

In case of Oldsmobile...GM realized that there were too many brands under the GM umbrella to run efficiently so one brand had to go. Saab was just acquired that cost GM millions if not billions so Saab was out of the question to get axed so soon. Saturn was a more or less a new brand that cost GM billions to start up barely a decade before that GM continued to poor millions into that Saturn was out of the question to axe. That left Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick.

Chevy is the bread and butter brand and Buick was GM's ace in the hole because of China regardless if Buick struggled  more than Pontiac and Oldsmobile States side so that just leaves Pontiac and Oldsmobile.

Cadillac is the opposite of Chevy as Cadillac is the flag ship brand so Cadillac was never to die. Especially when billions were spent trying to spark up Cadillac because Cadillac is the flag ship brand. Olds or Buick could never replace Cadillac!

So I understand the decision making up to this point.

Honestly, I dont know why Oldsmobile was chosen over Pontiac to get axed.

But I understand the reasons why 1 brand had to go in the early 2000s.

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Because the 2nd Gen Aurora was a great car.

One of GM's best!

22 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Interesting that Johan says no plan to cancel the CT6, he didn't defend any of those other cars which I think sort of confirms they are history at the end of their life cycles.   I hear team owners say the head coach is safe and they have full confidence in him and a week later the coach is fired too.  

I suspect  Cadillac will go to 2 sedans.  I have said for years they need rear drive Alpha and Omega based crossovers.  

Oldshurst has made great points.  Here is why sales matter.  These sedan segments are shrinking.  Just like minivans shrank and if you weren't top 3 or 4 it was hard to survive.  GM, Ford and Hyundai got out of minivans because sales fell.  Chevy and Ford look like they'll get out of full size sedans, Cadillac may get out of mid size sedans.  These segments just can't support 8 or 9 players, the strong survive the weak give up and focus somewhere else.

This here, is the money shot. There's no way in hell Caddy can continue with all the sedans it has now.....unless they have some really great plan to go against BMW/Benz sedans head to head, the story is over and they have lost. It's not a fight worth continuing, as money is needed elsewhere (CUV/SUV) to keep profit going within the division. Sales don't lie, and rebates are not going to help.....

Another big player ignored here is the economy. With all the drama going on, I can't blame folks for second guessing their purchases. Heck, it has me rethinking mine. This, along with all the lease returns, is causing the sales slide. And I expect it to get worse. So if grandpa or Aunt josie decide to not to get that Impy or buick or even malibu, it's going to really make automakers really look just what they want to keep now- and these 6 can easily grow a larger list......

Every other car in the 3-series segment just announced it's going to discontinue itself because 'they've lost'.